Paul’s Journeys—A Thursday night Bible Study, and Sermon
Series for Church of the Covenant
May—June 2015
Prolegomena and Cautions: Some chonologers of Paul’s missionary journeys try
to integrate the time line of Acts with the letters of Paul, and many of the
events do line up. There’s a question as
to whether or not the author of Luke/Acts had the Pauline letters at his disposal, and
used those manuscripts to construct the time line in Acts. The influences back and forth are not
clear at all, because there are at least a couple dozen time
inconsistencies. There is a “standard-view”
workable time-line, and several minority held views. Lots of websites can give
guidance [Google “Paul’s missionary journeys timeline” for some] but just be aware that
anyone claiming absolute certainty about their version of the timeline of Paul’s
journeys is probably not as credible as others expressing more humility. Even those claiming absolute certainty that
the whole book of Acts is a work of fiction are probably selling something,
probably their own books. If you are one
of those people who needs absolute certainty to make bible study credible, you
are probably going to feel frustrated with my comments. I wish you well in your
journey, but my own faith doesn’t need bolstering with a history-certain
reconstruction of the events narrated in Acts. I think we can do better. The God I worship wants us to us our brains as well as our hearts. So here goes with the first installment of my comments for you. Please leave me any comments below.
Thursday, May 14 (Ascension Day!) we began our survey of
Paul with the first letter to the
Thessalonians. It is one of the undisputed letters of Paul.
Acts 17 gives a version of the events (written many years
after Paul’s visit) in Thessalonica, where it is narrated as part of Paul’s
Second missionary journey.
This is most likely the oldest written book of the New
Testament, written somewhere around the year 50, so about 20 years after the
death and resurrection of Jesus. It
gives us a clue to Paul’s earliest concerns for his community. This Hellenistic style of letter incorporates the
basic characteristics of a first century letter, in the Greek style. Just as a modern letter can be analyzed by is
format, so can an ancient one. The
letter contains:
·
A greeting
·
A thanksgiving for the prior association.
·
a message
·
a closing
A Greek-type letter substitutes for the physical presence of
the writer, as has been expressed in the popular paradox and play on words: apon-paron (absent-present): ‘For
though absent in body I am present in spirit’ (1 Cor 5:3)
As you read Paul’s
short letter, contemplate why he would feel the drive to be physically present
with the Thessalonians--
The Greeting—Can you feel the affection that Paul had for these people? What effect does leadership affection have on leadership style? Do you feel more or less inclined to give credibility to someone in leadership who expresses affection for you? What can you deduce about Paul’s own motivations?
The Thanksgiving--Compare the thanksgiving in the book of Romans—where he has had no prior visit--with the thanksgiving in I Thessalonians. What are the differences? Do they matter?
The Greeting—Can you feel the affection that Paul had for these people? What effect does leadership affection have on leadership style? Do you feel more or less inclined to give credibility to someone in leadership who expresses affection for you? What can you deduce about Paul’s own motivations?
The Thanksgiving--Compare the thanksgiving in the book of Romans—where he has had no prior visit--with the thanksgiving in I Thessalonians. What are the differences? Do they matter?
The Message—What was Paul worried about that he had
to write the letter so he could be present to the church he so obviously
loved in Thessalonica?
If Acts characterizes the events in Thessalonica, there was trouble from the existing community about hearing Paul’s message of the gospel. What was at stake? I Thess. 2:3-8. Existing entrenched power structures, Jewish and otherwise, felt threatened and so, we might deduce from Paul’s response, they accused Paul of impure motives and trickery. He defends himself against these motives with an appeal to how he behaved when he was among them. How do we feel and then how do we behave when someone attacks our credibility with attacks on our integrity? Can you think of a time when this happened among church people? How do we respond? How do you respond when someone attacks your credibility and your integrity in stating the Gospel?
What is the issue in Chapter 4? [This chapter has a history, in the past 200 years or so, of being used to proof-text a movement in Christian interpretation sometimes called Millennialism or Post-Millennialism. It is the view that there are definite time periods in God’s history that, along with the Book of Revelation (where we get the reference to ‘1,000 years’ or a millenium) can be used to predict the end of time, and the specific events that will foreshadow the second coming of Jesus, most specifically in the 4th chapter of Thessalonians “the Rapture,” which seems to be described by Paul. It is not so. Current scholarship is frankly embarrassed by this stream of interpretation and a lot of ink has been spilled debunking of this notion, still popular in the ‘Left Behind’ imagination. There is ample evidence that the “rapture” doctrine invented by John Nelson Darby in 1830 has done much damage to the credibility of Christian study and theology. Several websites devoted to John Darby’s published commentary on Thessalonians don’t even publish his commentary on the 4th chapter; they skip from the 3rd to the 5th chapter.]
Paul’s concern is that people are unnecessarily worried about those who have already died. They think that if someone dies before Jesus returns they will miss out on the new life. Not so! Paul encourages them that time doesn’t make a difference to God (5:1-11), and he uses the joyful metaphor about the way in which a returning dignitary visits a town: people run outside of the town to meet the royal and then escort him back into town for his return. Since Jesus will be “coming on the clouds” the picture is that all the people, dead and alive, will rise to meet him “in the clouds” and then escort him back to earth. There is no such thing as a “rapture” away from earth in this picture.
If Acts characterizes the events in Thessalonica, there was trouble from the existing community about hearing Paul’s message of the gospel. What was at stake? I Thess. 2:3-8. Existing entrenched power structures, Jewish and otherwise, felt threatened and so, we might deduce from Paul’s response, they accused Paul of impure motives and trickery. He defends himself against these motives with an appeal to how he behaved when he was among them. How do we feel and then how do we behave when someone attacks our credibility with attacks on our integrity? Can you think of a time when this happened among church people? How do we respond? How do you respond when someone attacks your credibility and your integrity in stating the Gospel?
What is the issue in Chapter 4? [This chapter has a history, in the past 200 years or so, of being used to proof-text a movement in Christian interpretation sometimes called Millennialism or Post-Millennialism. It is the view that there are definite time periods in God’s history that, along with the Book of Revelation (where we get the reference to ‘1,000 years’ or a millenium) can be used to predict the end of time, and the specific events that will foreshadow the second coming of Jesus, most specifically in the 4th chapter of Thessalonians “the Rapture,” which seems to be described by Paul. It is not so. Current scholarship is frankly embarrassed by this stream of interpretation and a lot of ink has been spilled debunking of this notion, still popular in the ‘Left Behind’ imagination. There is ample evidence that the “rapture” doctrine invented by John Nelson Darby in 1830 has done much damage to the credibility of Christian study and theology. Several websites devoted to John Darby’s published commentary on Thessalonians don’t even publish his commentary on the 4th chapter; they skip from the 3rd to the 5th chapter.]
Paul’s concern is that people are unnecessarily worried about those who have already died. They think that if someone dies before Jesus returns they will miss out on the new life. Not so! Paul encourages them that time doesn’t make a difference to God (5:1-11), and he uses the joyful metaphor about the way in which a returning dignitary visits a town: people run outside of the town to meet the royal and then escort him back into town for his return. Since Jesus will be “coming on the clouds” the picture is that all the people, dead and alive, will rise to meet him “in the clouds” and then escort him back to earth. There is no such thing as a “rapture” away from earth in this picture.
In communicating the Gospel, using the bible witness and all
the thoughtfulness and care we can muster, it will still be the case that some
people will not get it. Or perhaps they will get it, and be threatened by it.
Or perhaps they will distort what we say. Paul’s other great gift to the church
is his unflappable confidence in what he was proclaiming—that Jesus own life,
death, and resurrection made all the difference in the world, this world and
the world to come.
No comments:
Post a Comment