Why are Paul's letters authoritative?

Faith & Science Conversation
41

I think I hear something different than many Christians hear when I read these passages.

“That is how it will be with this wicked generation.” The main thing I hear there is-- “Don’t be wicked. Be righteous. Even though the fad is wickedness, focus on me. Follow my example. The wicked are doomed. They may be in the spotlight right now. But focus on me. Focus on righteousness.”

To me, this verse isn’t even a judgment. This is advice on how to put your soul in order, how it can be difficult, and how many “in this generation” fail at it.

Next.

Matthew 8:10-- “Jesus…said to those following him, 'I tell you the truth, I have not found any one in Israel with such great faith…The subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside into the darkness where there will be weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth…”

If I were a Christian, I’d be QUITE concerned with this one. It seems aimed at those who think they are entitled to salvation… like they are better than others… like they deserve salvation and others don’t. And yet, the one who thinks he is unworthy will be crowned. Meanwhile, those who “got the doctrine right” will be gnashing their teeth, angry to be cast into the darkness. To me, this parable is about non-judgment. People who think “they have the doctrine right and others don’t” ought to pay special attention to this one.

[Jesus to His disciples] "If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words … it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town. " (Matt 10:14)

Again, I think this bit is about NON-judgment. See the next line: “I am sending you out like sheep among wolves." A Christian shouldn’t presume to condemn or judge his enemies because of Matthew 10:14. Rather, he should be careful to avoid doing that because that is wolf-like.

Jesus is saying that God will sort out those who turn away or abuse those who speak Christ’s message of peace. But so many Christians interpret Matthew 10:14 as permission to be wolves themselves and bring God’s judgment on others themselves. But Christ is (perhaps) saying that Christians should never do that. Rather, they should be nonviolent sheep. And God will deal with those who persecute them.

“Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God” – John 3:3.

John just doesn’t speak to me the way Matthew does. The Synoptics seem to contain the real imperatives from Christ. John is about religion. The Synoptics are about righteousness. Don’t get me wrong. I have been moved and inspired by John. But it isn’t like Matthew. At worst, it is sometimes an excuse for Christians to ignore what Christ teaches in Matthew. And that can’t be right, can it?

Here is what I hear in John 3:3: To truly embrace righteousness and escape the wickedness of the world, one must fundamentally change one’s orientation to spiritual/moral things rather than sensual/material things.

But to many Christians it seems to mean, “Start going around identifying yourself as a Christian.” Maybe I’m wrong about that or stereotyping… but you must agree that at least SOME born again Christians interpret the verse in this way. I hope we agree that John 3:3 is not about what religion you profess. It is about a fundamental change, a getting in contact with who you essentially are and starting anew, something like that.

I just want to put a qualifier out here. I am a nonbeliever. But certain holy books speak to me. One example is the Bhagavad Gita. I love that book. I think it contains a lot of truth. But I am in no way shape or form a Hindu. I disagree with a ton of stuff in the Bhagavad Gita. But I’ve also learned a great deal from it.

I also think that the books Matthew and James contain a lot of truth. And I appreciate the truth that I find in those books. I think I’ve learned a great deal from them too. But, like the Gita, I question and disbelieve some of it.

So, unlike Jesus, I don’t speak with authority concerning what these texts say or mean. I can only tell you what I hear in them. And (if I have ears) maybe I can sometimes hear what they are trying to say. Or maybe I have them all wrong.

I feel weird commenting too much on the Bible and am much more enjoying sitting back and reading what Christians have to say about the questions I posed in the OP and the secondary topics that have sprung from it.

4 Likes
42

Thanks for the response, Vulcan. (It is not “logical” to have been calling you “Vulcano” — Spock was not Italian!!). You did ask for some examples of “judgment” statements by Jesus and so I gave you a very few. A lot more could be said about them, but I am glad to see that you read and thought about them. Not seeing “wicked” as a descriptive adjective in “wicked generation” is an interesting twist. When Jesus said elsewhere, "No one is good except God " —where does that leave the notion of people being righteous? In the Old Testament it also says “There is no one who is does good” and similarly positive (ha! tongue in cheek). The fact that we needed Someone else to pay for our sins is the point of the biblical text (one of many to be sure…)

But you are right about Jesus’ remarks to “the subjects of the kingdom”…people cannot assume that being baptized or born in this ethnic group or country makes them better in God’s eyes. “The just shall live by faith” —as it says — and with no qualifiers on the nationality of the just, only that they live by faith in Jesus as their Savior and Lord…

While the above is, of course, a challenge to those who think themselves entitled to salvation, it also is a challenge to thoee who disbelieve. After all, what were Korazin and others condemned for?

But Ok… I am off to other things. Glad you are enjoying all these various postings. Keep on reading!!

43

You have obviously spent a good deal of time reflecting on the meaning of the Bible. What you say seems right to me but then I haven’t put in that time. Too late for that now. I’ve decided to give up looking for pure distillations of The Truth in books. I prefer to spend my reading time now in pursuit of occasional glimpses of contextualized truth in novels.

1 Like
44

I think you are right in saying that the perspective of John is different from that of Matthew, but it is the same Gospel of Jesus Christ. Matthew is primarily about righteousness. For the Pharisees righteousness was about following the Law or the Torah as they defined it. See His discussion with them on working on the Sabbath.

However, Jesus defines righteousness as right relationship with God and with others. His Law was to love God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength, and love others as you love yourself.

When Jesus says that you might be born again in the Holy Spirit, He is saying that we must make a commitment to love and serve God with all our heart, mind, soul, and strength, and from that commitment comes our love for ourself and all human beings.

Jesus says to the rich, young ruler; “Sell all that you have and Follow Me!” and was very sad when he failed to accept this challenge. This is the commitment to be born again in the Synoptics. Jesus also said the a tree is known by its fruits, so “they will know we are Christians by our love.”

You are right in saying that many “Christians” confuse some of the signs of faith with the substance of the faith. Many “Christian” leaders who should know better have succumbed to the temptation to use their influence for their own benefit, rather than to glorify God.

You are very correct that Jesus traches us what is evil so that we can avoid evil, rather than judge others. Seel Matthew 7:1-5 (NIV2011)
1 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged.
2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?
4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye?
5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

This clear teaching of Jesus makes it distressing to see many “Christians” judging others and applauding the Judger in chief.

Is Jesus Good because He is the Son of God, or is He the Son of God because He is Good? Certainly it is both, but I think that if He failed in His mission, if He some how decided not to die on the Cross (and who could blame Him) He would not be the Messiah, the Son of the Living God.

Some people ask, Is Love right because God says it is right, or is Love right because it is intrinsically right? I would say that Love is right because God is Love and God made humans to love and be loved. God, Jesus tells us to love because that is best for us and best for others and that is how God wants us to live.

This is logical (rational,) and it is also spiritual, and scientific, based on the facts of life…

1 Like
45

We really do not know the exact details, but we can assume that there can a point when the Church decided individually and collectively that the story or stories of Jesus needed to be written down, collected, and put in order. It is good that we have four gospels with similar but unique view points, and not one uniform understanding of Who Jesus is.

2 Likes
46

Dillon,
I think that as far as the development of NT canon is concerned, although Constantine and his cronies can be blamed for a quite a lot that the “church” has never fully recovered from (such as attempting to syncretise political and military power with the gospel), determining or imposing the NT canon according to whims of those “in power” ought not to be credited to them.

Contrary to the claims of a few popular “new-Gnostics”, there is quite a bit of evidence that the authority of the NT including Paul’s letters was being recognized within the early church even at times when they were still the victims of persecution and not really in a position to enforce much of anything.

Regarding evidence for the early development of a core NT Canon including Paul ( In addition to the links posted by Randy near the beginning of this thread) I recommend: The Heresy of Orthodoxy: How Contemporary Culture’s Fascination with Diversity Has Reshaped Our Understanding of Early Christianity, by Andreas J. Köstenberger and Michael J. Kruger, Wheaton: Crossway, 2010. The Heresy of Orthodoxy: How Contemporary Culture's Fascination with Diversity Has Reshaped Our Understanding of Early Christianity by Andreas J. Köstenberger | Goodreads

As far as reconciling apparent differences or contradictions between voices deemed to be authoritative whether Prophets or Apostles (Moses, Jesus, Paul) this has always been the work of teachers (the Rabbis as it was in Jesus time) and continues to be the thirst of devoted spirit filled disciples. Those who really expect God to spiritually guide them through the scriptures don’t mind investing a lot of energy doing this. (Of course so do some who want to use the scriptures to support particular ideologies … to use your phrase “ warped so they fit together”)

How satisfactory the fit or reconciliation seems will depend a lot on numerous other presuppositions made by each person. Presenting apparent contradictions is actually a great teaching technique. It ought to prevent us from settling on a simplistic, reductionist understandings, and help us get on with Jesus command to his followers to love god with both hearts and minds.

Indeed one of the reasons I remain a follower of Jesus is because biblical cosmology and theology include paradoxes that mirror my real life experiences. The conflicts of normal human life and conundrums in understanding great issues like God and the cosmos are all there. I believe there is some shared core of orthodox Christian faith that is unique because not all explanations of the universe can be simultaneously satisfactory (coherent) at the same time. However on the other hand (as the rabbis admit) there is usually always room to moderate or enrich our understanding by observing that “on the other hand ……”!

Thanks for starting a good discussion, may you “Live long and Prosper”

2 Likes
49

I had more to say on this, but I need to look over what I’ve written. One of our horses has died and it is a huge deal… a very, very, huge deal. So I’ll be busy with that until tonight.

1 Like
50

So this was actually a PM I sent to Mark concerning this thread. It is a little bit brash, and I didn’t mean to trivialize anyone’s faith. But this is how atheist to atheist communiques often go. I welcome disagreement. And this post pretty much sums up why I’m an atheist.

I think it’s worthwhile, Mark, to seek out pure distillations of the Truth (as you put it). Novels like the ones you speak of are worthwhile too. But what I don’t like about “those novels” is that they just kind of put that truth out there… like "this is my take on things and I’m going to express it. If you agree, cool. If you disagree, cool. "

Philosophy, on the other hand, says, “This is my take on things. This is the clearest and most coherent expression of Truth I can muster. And if you disagree… WHY?” To me, philosophy invites the reader into the conversation so that he/she may agree or disagree. Novels, while they express some deep stuff, sometimes don’t invite the reader to agree or disagree so much as Plato’s dialogues do. Plato wants you to participate… not nod your head at what he says, as a novelist who has painted his picture upon a canvas.

And don’t get me started with religion… lol… just kidding. But really, not kidding though. The Jesus guy says some pretty on point stuff that survives scrutiny. But the only way to realize how it survives scrutiny is to APPLY scrutiny and see how well it holds up. I think it is to the detriment of religion that it contains dogmas or “truths that should not be questioned.” I despise that about religion.

A great majority of my friends are Christian fundamentalists. They refuse to doubt anything in the Bible.

I compare them to someone who refuses to check the air pressure of the universe because “the Bible says it’s 32 pounds, and so that’s what it is!” Well… (I retort)… if you’re so certain that’s what it is, what’s wrong with checking?

Anyway, Mark, as you point out… I’ve taken some time to study some things in the Bible. That’s because I’ve been asked (by my Christian friends) to check the psi of the Bible to see if it’s 32. And I carefully did just that. As far as I’m concerned, the right front tire of Christianity is so much at 32 pounds, it puts the tire gauge to shame. But the other three tires? Wow! How far from 32 pounds can you get? To me, Christianity is one perfectly inflated tire, and then a tire with 10 pounds, a tire with 50 pounds, and then a tire with hardly any air whatsoever.

That’s why I like atheism/materialism. If I want to adopt materialism as a metaphysical belief, I don’t suddenly find myself attached to three mis-inflated tires just because one is inflated perfectly. Materialism gets all its tires to a nice 31.5 (or better) and admits there may be improvement as far as air pressure goes. With Christianity (especially fundamentalism) it seems like you are supposed to “stick to a doctrine.” And if the tire gauge says the tire is under-inflated, THE GAUGE IS WRONG.

I appreciate Christianity’s right front tire (Christ). And as far as I can tell, it’s properly inflated. And (as an atheist/materialist) I might have no disagreement with my fundamentalist friends if that right front tire were the standard for the other three tires, as Christians like to claim it is.

But that isn’t the case. Paul, the Old Testament, the early RCC, and Martin Luther are all inflating different tires to CRAZY pressures.

I won’t ride in a vehicle with tires like that. I won’t recommend my loved ones ride in a vehicle with tires like that. And if anyone asks me why I have a problem riding with tires like that, I will tell them: all four tires are not inflated to the same pressure. And that’s a dangerous way to drive. I will never ride on a doctrine whose tires are inflated to four different specifications by four different religious leaders from four different periods of history. And that’s what modern Christianity is.

3 Likes
51

I empathize with this discussion, and I appreciate your showing the light on people of good character (Dostoevsky was another you introduced me to). I am not sure I would choose to follow someone (eg Jesus) based on good character, but I think that’s not what you’re saying–more of an emulation sort of thing. --what is the good life well lived, etc?

George Macdonald, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and others all took the Bible as flawed or errant–would be interested in hearing what you think of those points of view.

And I’m not trying to be exclusive here–I think that God knows our hearts, and whether we can or can’t accept something based on background, logic and reasoning, etc–it’s what’s in the heart, not what one can grasp in a creed, that matters (as I think fundamentalists would agree in talking of a 3 year old child; how much more so when one runs into all sorts of very good questions?).

1 Like
52

I think some of the best novels I’ve read (I’ve got Macdonald in mind here) do very much challenge the reader to enter the conversation. They not only state “this is my take on things…” but they invite you to see if the same isn’t your take too, and if not, why not? So I would maintain that I think good novels are packaged philosophy, whereas I imagine most philosophical treatises are the item itself unwrapped in an attempt to just deliver it straight. Why not a delicious coating on the pill? If chocolate helps it go down better … great. The truth that these novels set in front of you isn’t just “put out there” from a vacuum, but is drawing from our common world of experience - inviting you into a sort of shared experiential knowledge, just as science seeks to widely share and solicit unity of appraisal about experiences of nature, so novels seek to share around experiences of life.

For all of our “biblical” sound and fury - our doctrinal tempests and tantrums, perhaps it is only that right front tire that you need. Maybe the other three tires (organized religions including the various Christianities, and all the other -isms) can fall away for now if you have the One? Not that some of the stuff in those other three can’t turn out to be very helpful or even important, but if they prevent you from seeking and learning from the One, then those other three count as nothing more than stubble and stumbling blocks. If I were you I would seriously try some unicycle practice for now!

3 Likes
53

Sorry to hear about your horse. :frowning:

3 Likes
54

Me too, @vulcanlogician. My first thought was “wow, you have horses”. My second thought was “hope you get help taking care of that one that is no more”. I don’t know what sort of attachment one forms with a horse but if it is anything like with dogs I’m very sorry for your loss.

Did you have them for riding? This doesn’t seem the sort of forum for posting pet pictures but I’ve started threads for just such a purpose on two others we’ve both been on - hint, hint.

1 Like
55

I don’t know if I could post pictures (elsewhere) of Cici right now. But I can tell you who she was.

She was a gentle giant. She always came to say “hi” to anyone who came by. Unlike our other horse, she never kicked or got overly spooked. She was always happy. I miss her so much.

Picture%20009

6 Likes
56

I love this picture!

1 Like
57

Sorry I meant to write this as a PM.

58

Putting on my moderators hat:
While we do not want the forum to be a love fest, we do want it to be a caring community and family of sorts, so I think it is perfectly OK to share these type of significant events and share concerns. Horses are certainly as loved as other pets, perhaps more so due their long lives and the interdependent relationship a rider has with his steed.

2 Likes
59

Another passage in the novel currently occupying my attention made me think of you and your recent observations above, Dillon (@vulcanlogician). I’ll quote it below.

I can hardly wonder that so many reject Christianity when they see so many would-be champions of it holding their beliefs at arm’s length–in their bibles, in their theories [doctrines!], in their churches, in their clergymen, in their prayerbooks, in the last devotional page they have read–all things separate from their real selves–rather than in their hearts on their beds in the stillness. God is nearer to me than the air I breathe, nearer to me than the heart of a wife or child, nearer to me than my own consciousness of myself, nearer to me than the words in which I speak to him, nearer than the thought roused in me by the story of his perfect son. The unbelievers might well rejoice in the loss of such a God as many Christians would make of him. But if he be indeed the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, then to all eternity let me say only, “Amen, Lord, your will be done!”

2 Likes
60

Not sure the bitterness you’re referring to. Paul’s letters are the earliest surviving writings of the early Church and Paul played an unprecedented role in turning the Christian movement to its path to global expansion.

Also, Paul himself might not have ever intended to have his letters put on the same level as the teachings of Christ.

He probably didn’t. But he did think he was speaking authoritative theological truths.

Not sure I’ve seen any contradictions between Jesus and Paul.

61

1 Corinthians:
For my part, even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. As one who is present with you in this way, I have already passed judgment in the name of our Lord Jesus on the one who has been doing this.

Matthew 7
“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

I get it that Paul is trying to make a point about how incest is messed up. But Paul used to persecute people simply because they believed in Jesus Christ. Since Paul has judged these folks so harshly, doesn’t Jesus say that Paul will be judged just as harshly as he judges the incest people in Corinthians? If persecuting Christians is wrong, Paul (perhaps) ought not do something like “pass judgment in the name of our Lord Jesus” and instead do something else to help the situation.

But at this point, Paul may as well be above Christ’s law, the way his letters are respected as unblemished truth. Even though Christ says that the measure you mete out to others will be met out to you, it is assumed that Paul is somehow exempt from this law and can judge whomever he pleases without consequence.

Don’t get me wrong. I like Paul. I dig Paul. He was a bit of a homophobe, and very much too prudish. But he was otherwise an alright guy. He was righteous. I think he had good motivations. He wanted to popularize Christianity because he thought that would “save souls” and whatnot. And in order to popularize Christianity, he wanted to make it “presentable.”

Christian slaves, said Paul, ought to obey their masters… even though a few verses before, he admonished these masters for living in a so evil and cruel-hearted city. I think the point here is “it makes the religion look good when you obey.” Maybe I have that wrong.

And what about Kim Jong Un? Did God put him in place as ruler of North Korea? According to Paul he did. And the North Koreans ought to obey him right? Because God put him in charge.

I reject that thesis. Paul got so many things wrong! But (because his letters are in the Bible) people think he can’t be wrong. They think everything he wrote, even stuff that is obviously his opinion, is to be treated as unquestioned truth.

I think the people of North Korea ought to disobey and revolt. I think that slaves ought not obey their masters. They ought to escape their servitude as quickly as possible. DISOBEY is the way. And I never heard Jesus say anything to the contrary.

But Paul sure did. Seems a shame that his words are put on par with Christ’s according to most Christians… or (even worse) maybe some Christians think Paul’s words supercede Christ’s. If Paul says it’s okay to judge, it doesn’t matter what Jesus says on the matter. Even if Jesus says never to judge another under any circumstances, if Paul says it’s okay… none of that stuff Jesus said matters at all.

1 Like