Part Two

Chapter Eight

Introduction to the

New Testament

An ABC Documentary showed the film: Dietrich Bonhoeffer. During Hitler’s regime in Germany, the official protestant church was called 'German Christians'. They went along with Hitler’s anti-semitism, quoting Romans 13:1 “Everyone must obey state authorities” as their justification. Bonhoeffer disagreed, joined the ‘Confessing Church’ and later the resistance and was shot in a concentration camp only days before the end of the war. His death was a great loss to the universal church. Bonhoeffer was an independent thinker. Unfortunately, only few books had been written by him, but from notes and letters to friends a very distinct theology emerged, later developed further by other theologians. His vision for a future church was truly prophetic. It influenced present-day thinking for a theology for the 21st century.

John Macquarrie writes about Bonhoeffer:

"As Bonhoeffer sees it, the world has come of age. In the modern secularized era, we can no longer say that 'God will fix it somehow' It is also useless to look for God in the gaps, for God is not to be found at the boundary of life, but at its centre. ... The Christian faith must be communicated in a non-religious or worldly way; and this would be done primarily by living for others, which again means conforming to Christ. Since the church has usually been concerned to preserve itself, it too must lose itself for others, and learn the cost of discipleship. Christians, as they live in the world and give themselves for the world, will have their secret discipline in which to look beyond the world to the transcendent and the ultimate for the nourishment of this life. (Macquarrie p.332)

I think, Spong has also taken up Bonhoeffer's challenge in his works, a theology for people who 'have come of age', for mature Christians. Paul wrote to the Corinthian church:

"I could not talk to you as I talk to people who have the Spirit; I had to talk to you as though you belonged to this world, as children in the Christian faith. I had to feed you milk, not solid food, because you were not ready for it." (1 Cor.3:1-2)

Were these Corinthians bogged down in their faith by merely seeing things in a literal sense, rather than looking beyond and seeing the spiritual side of life? Why were they immature? And what was the milk Paul fed them with? I believe that Spong offers us a type of solid food, a theology for the 21st century. In his understanding there is no conflict between science and religion, and the latest discovery in whatever discipline can throw new light on the New Testament. I am particularly indebted to his comments on the Synoptic Gospels.

A new approach to Interpreting the N.T.

Bonhoeffer already suggested in 1944 to read the New Testament on the basis of the Old. He wrote:

"The Church stands not where human powers give out, on the borders, but in the centre of the village. That is the way it is in the Old Testament, and in this sense we still read the New Testament far too little on the basis of the Old. The outward aspect of this religionless Christianity, the form it takes, is something to which I am giving much thought." (Letters p.93)

With this in mind, Spong thinks that the old division into two opposites of conservative versus liberal, fundamentalist versus the 'Western scientific world view' is no longer valid or meaningful. Christianity was not born as a Western religion, but as an off-shoot of Judaism. A Western mentality has been imposed on this Middle Eastern understanding or revelation of God. The whole Bible is a Jewish book: "It was written by people who thought as Jews, embraced the world as Jews, and understood reality as Jews." (Lib.p.18)

In the first part we said that the Old Testament Law or Torah formed the basis of all other writings. If this is to become also the basis for the New Testament, we need to see the Law as Paul saw it, when he wrote to the Corinthians: "Where the Spirit of the Lord is present, there is freedom." (2 Cor.3:17)

Chris Budden, the General Secretary of the Uniting Church in Australia, wrote a commentary on this in- “With Love to the World” for 20 February 2004. He said:

"When our obedience to God is shaped by books and codes of law we are unwilling followers, but when the Spirit enters our lives, our deepest desire is to serve God, and it is love alone that binds us and we are free."

I would urge you to approach the New Testament with that freedom that is bound by love only. For far too long we have been influenced by a Western mentality that emphasises an external world view, which can be interpreted in time, space and objectivity (on that which is there and can be measured, too often with a Dollar sign!). It tries to answer: is it true, did it really happen? when in fact the biblical writers tried to express meaning or a spiritual aspect of life. Western mentality can no longer cope with miracles, magic, demons, and angels in the Bible. If we are disturbed by these, we are asking the wrong questions.

If we, however, step out of our Western mentality and try to understand the New Testament with Jewish thinking, we will be asking, ‘what does it mean'? and 'why was this story chosen and what new insight does it convey'? Spong comments:

"When they confronted what they believed was the presence of God in a contemporary moment, they interpreted this moment by applying to it similar moments in their sacred stories of the Old Testament." (Lib.p.19)

"So the Gospels were not descriptions of what happened or what Jesus said or did; they were interpretations of who Jesus was, based on their ancient and sacred heritage." (Lib.p.20)

Spong writes his book Liberating the Gospels from this perspective, convinced that the God met in Jesus is real. It will require that we surrender our religious security system of the past. He offers instead an "exhilarating insecurity of a journey without boundaries or goals" towards a life-giving and real God he found in Jesus of Nazareth. (Lib.p.21) I am presenting this view here without any critique, not because I believe that it is faultless, but as an example of a creative mind to make the gospels come alive for us in the 21^st century. I firmly believe in Gamaliel’s words: “If it is of God, it will survive, if it is not, it will disappear” (Acts 5:38).

The Foundation of the Christian faith

It is generally agreed that the foundation of the Christian faith goes back to what we know as the resurrection experiences of the early disciples. But what was the resurrection, or what does it mean?

Some doctrines of resurrections can be found in Egyptian and Babylonian mythology, which celebrated each year at spring the return of nature from death to life. We also find an early concept of resurrection in Ezekiel’s valley of dry bones (37:11-14); in Isaiah 26:19 a coming back to life, whereas Daniel (12:2,13) is the first to write about a rising to life at the end of time. In Jesus’ days the Pharisees and most other Jews believed in a resurrection, only the Sadducees did not (see Mark 12:16 a.o.).

As mentioned earlier, the followers of Jesus had an experience after Jesus died, "a mystery so rich that they had to use a variety if images in their attempts to express it." (Charpentier p.33) - a religious experience no word could express fully. The image they borrowed from the Old Testament is resurrection.

When Paul says: "Christ was raised to life three days later, as written in the Scriptures", (1 Cor.15:4) this was "the original invitation to seek the truth of Jesus in symbol and story. We seek it there still today. For it is not the description of the experience of Easter, but the experience itself that beckons us." (Lib.p.309) The symbol is the story of the resurrection, as we find it in the Gospels.

But there are other ways the disciples expressed their experience:

"Jesus is Lord" (Rom.10:9). or:

"God has exalted him" (Phil.2:9);

"Christ the first-born of the dead" (Col.1:18);

"Put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit" (1 Pet.3:18).

All these different ways of describing their experiences prompted the disciples to claim that Jesus is the long-expected Messiah. As long as they stayed in Jerusalem, they went to the temple to worship in the accustomed way. They held on to the teachings of the Torah in all ways. But the claim that Jesus is the Messiah will have made them a special group within Judaism. They will have also met separately for their "breaking of bread" ceremony, or the Lord’s Supper.

But Christianity didn’t remain a small sect within Judaism in Jerusalem. It gradually grew and developed until it became a universal Christian Church which produced the New Testament as we know it today. The reasons for this development can only be assumed, and many theologians have tried to offer some answers. In the next section three theologians will be mentioned with their different approaches.

The Formation of the New Testament

In recent times theologians have come up with several explanations as to how the New Testament was formed, or why it developed or evolved. In theology this is called Christology, the definition of the nature of Jesus or why his followers came to see him as the Christ, the Messiah.

The first is Reginald Fuller. In 1965 he wrote Foundations of N.T. Christology, which offers three distinct environments in which Christology had developed (from (1) to (3):

(1) Palestinian Judaism, mainly in Jerusalem. The early Christians there would have described Jesus as: The Messiah/Christ; Son of God; Son of David; Son of Man (bar nasha) (from Ez.2:1 and Dan.7:13); The Servant of the Lord (Hebrew ebhedh the slave); Rabbi (teacher of Torah) or mari, teacher (in a wider sense, but no divinity implied). All these titles applied to Jesus during his life-time.

(2) Hellenistic Judaism, in places where people worshipped in Synagogues using the Greek version of the Old Testament. They gave Jesus titles like: Christos (in an eschatological [end-time] sense); Son of God (in a Messianic sense); Son of David; Son of Man, who would come “on the clouds of heaven, one like a son of man” (Dan.7:13 [Jerusalem Bible] and in an eschatological sense in Acts 1:9); kyrios or adhonai (Lord, the authority of a superior over an inferior, which was used in the Septuagint for Yahweh, but no divinity intended yet); Son of God; Wisdom (sofia;) Logos; High Priest. These titles applied to the resurrected Jesus who is now reigning as Christ.

(3) Hellenistic Gentile environment, consisting of Gentiles who had converted to Christianity. Here the divine aspect of Jesus was fully developed. The titles from Hellenistic Judaism were given divine honour, in the same way as emperors were addressed as kyrios for instance, which meant that they were divine. These titles were then applied also to Jesus saying that he was a divine being. The concept of his pre-existence (Jn.1:1) was also added, together with the “incarnation” (coming down from heaven, becoming man etc.).

Jewish opposition to Christianity began when some Hellenists (Greek speaking Jews) questioned some of the Jewish practices, like circumcision, food laws and others around the early 70s ce. By that time this sect had already spread to most Jewish Synagogues scattered all over the Roman Empire (the Diaspora), where more and more Gentiles had joined these groups. When this happened, some Jewish Christians were told by the Jewish authorities to either stop this teaching about Jesus being the Messiah or else be thrown out of the Synagogues.

The second theologian is Charpentier, who wrote How to Read the New Testament in 1981. He suggests that there are also three stages in the formation of the New Testament, but a more simplified version of Fuller. (p.10-11):

(1) Jesus of Nazareth (6 bce. to 30 ce.) - the historical Jesus. A Jew, lived in Nazareth, worked as a carpenter in his father's shop, became a roving preacher/teacher (Rabbi), interpreted the teachings of the Bible (Old Testament) appropriate to his days, had a band of followers, never wrote a thing, and was executed by the Romans for subversion in Jerusalem. There is not much more we know about him.

(2) The early Christian Communities (not really a church yet, as they remained at first part of Judaism) (30 - 70 ce. including all of Paul's writings and Mark's Gospel).

(3) The writings of the rest of the New Testament material post 70 ce. from the destruction of the Temple until approximately 100 ce.

The third theologian is Geering, who offers nine layers of belief in his Is Christianity going anywhere?, in 2004. He begins with the top layer, like an archaeologist, in the reverse order how it would have accumulated:

“I shall take you on a journey backwards in time. We shall remove, layer by layer, the growing beliefs that gradually turned Jesus into the Christ figure worshipped in the churches.” (p.22-25)

(9) The Dogmatic Layer, citing the Nicene Creed of 381 ce. where Jesus is described as: “the only begotten Son of God, very God of very God, by whom all things were made, who came down from heaven and was made man”.

(8) found in John’s Gospel, written about 100 ce. which says about Jesus: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. All things were made through him. In him was life …And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.”

(7) Luke’s genealogy (3:23-38) goes back to Adam, representing all humanity, Gentiles and Jews.

(6) Matthew’s genealogy (1:1-17) goes back only to Abraham, the father of the Jews.

(5) Mark’s story of Jesus’ baptism (1:9-13) “the spirit descended on Jesus like a dove and a voice came from heaven, ‘you are my beloved son; with you I am well pleased”. Jesus’ divinity came by adoption.

(4) Mark’s teaching mission of Jesus after which Peter declares: ‘You are the Messiah’. (8:29)

(3) Mark’s story of Jesus’ death, after which the centurion (a gentile) declared Jesus as: ‘This man was really the Son of God’. (15:39)

(2) Acts preserved an after the Resurrection story in 2:36 where Peter says: “Let all the house of Israel know that this Jesus whom you crucified, God has made both Lord and Christ/Messiah”.

(1) Paul’s teaching, reflected in his writings between 48-55 ce. Geering comments: “The man who has had most influence in shaping Christianity and in determining the framework of all Christian dogma never met the historical Jesus”. (p.25) Paul himself writes: “All I want to know is Christ and the power of his resurrection” (Phil.3:10 Jerusalem Bible). Paul was not interested in information about the historical Jesus.

(0) Rock bottom, as it were, is represented by the Christians in Jerusalem. “They included the original disciples, and also James the blood brother of Jesus.” (Geering p.22) Most recent studies have found that in this period some earlier Gospels were circulating, such as the “Q”-document (later incorporated in Matthew and Luke), and the Gospel of Thomas. These are a collection of the sayings of Jesus. They do not mention anything about his life and resurrection. “This suggests that after his death, the chief focal point of attention was not on his life but on his teaching… It was only some time after his death, and chiefly under the influence of Paul, that the initial emphasis on Jesus as teacher was displaced by increasing interest in Jesus as the crucified Messiah, the Lord and the divine Son of God.” (Geering p.26)

Introduction to the Gospels

When we turn to the Gospels in general, Spong believes that the God we meet in Jesus is real, and that by approaching the Scriptures through a Jewish lens, saving reality can be illumined and can still be entered. (Lib.p.20) And so he invites us to "place on your eyes a Jewish lens and open your mind and heart to Jewish understandings of that which is real, and come with me as I seek to enter anew that Jewish book that the world has traditionally called the New Testament." (Lib.p.21)

It is important to realise that Jesus never wrote any book or letter or parable, and that the first Gospel did not come to be written down much before the year 70 ce. When I went to college in 1966, we still learnt that the Gospels tell us something about the life of Jesus, though they were not considered to be biographies. We learnt that there were different sources which the Gospel writers used. The first three Gospels were known as the Synoptics, taking a common view.

Mark's came first, writing for, or perhaps in the Church of Rome. It was said to be associated with the Apostle Peter. Mark put together remembered sayings of Jesus, or drew on written material that had been circulating among the churches.

Matthew came second, writing probably to the church at Antioch. He was a conservative Jewish-Christian. He used Mark as his main source, plus a source Matthew had in common with Luke, which already in the late 19^th century had been called by German theologians "Q" for Quelle (source), plus "M", which was original to Matthew.

Luke, the third to be written, and Acts, were by a Gentile Christian, who was most likely associated with Paul. He wrote to a church, whose members were Gentiles, probably in Antioch. He used big chunks of Mark, some material common to Matthew and Luke (“Q”), and his original material called "L". The book of Acts consisted mainly of his own material, “L”.

We then learnt about Form Criticism, which had developed early in the 20th century. Theologians had thought that many sayings and parables of Jesus had been circulating in the churches in separate units (forms) before they were eventually collected by the three Gospel writers and written down into the books we know today.

Forty years later, scholarship had evolved further. It moved away from the idea that there were any biographical details or a history of Jesus in the first three Gospels. Particularly Spong saw them as interpretations of the Jesus event in a very Jewish way. He said:

"They wrote in the timelessness of valid religious experiences. So the Gospels were not descriptions of what happened or what Jesus said or did, they were interpretations of who Jesus was, based on their ancient and sacred heritage. That was the only way they could understand and process the God presence they found in Jesus that was so powerful." (Lib. p.20)

Spong now questions whether there was a common source "Q" which both Matthew and Luke used, contrary to Geering. Spong believes that Matthew created "Q". (Lib.p.107) This point may not be accepted by the more conservative theologians, though. But many people have wondered why there are so many stories in the Gospels that remind us of similar ones in the Old Testament. Spong asks: "Was it accidental, coincidental, or have we missed a vital link?" In search for that vital missing link, Spong followed Bacon, Farrer, and Goulder, (Lib.p.89-92) who had seen earlier a block of teaching in Matthew, and came to the conclusion that this Gospel was written with the purpose of providing the early Christian communities with a lectionary reading for each Sunday of the year.

Between writing his book Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism and five years later Liberating the Gospels, Spong had changed his mind about the purpose of the Gospels. He now emphasises that all the Gospels are Jewish books:

“Recognising this, we begin to face the realisation that we will never understand the Gospels until we learn how to read them as Jewish books. They are written in the midrashic style of the Jewish story teller, a style that most of us do not begin even now to comprehend. This style is not concerned with historic accuracy. It is concerned with meaning and understanding". For instance: “The Jewish writers of antiquity interpreted God’s presence to be with Joshua after the death of Moses by repeating the parting of the waters story in Josh.3. (compare with Ex.14)”. (Lib.p.36)

Similarly, Elijah (2 Kings.2:8) and Elisha (2 Kings.2:14) parted the waters of the Jordan River to walk across on dry land. (Lib.p.36) This was to show that God was with both. When at Jesus' baptism we read that "the heavens" parted (beyond the firmament it was believed was water). This was the Jewish way of suggesting "that the holy God encountered in Jesus went even beyond the God presence that had been met in Moses, Joshua, Elijah and Elisha." (Lib.p.36)

Another example is the story of the Tower of Babel in Gen.11:1-9 which describes a confusion of languages to keep the peoples of the world apart. The New Testament describes the reversal of that story at Pentecost in Acts 2. In many other places Spong thinks that there is evidence in the Gospels of this midrashic principle, to describe their and their churches experience of the Jesus event.

"Jews filtered every new experience through the corporately remembered history of their people, as that history had been recorded in the Hebrew Scriptures of the past." (Lib.p.37)

This is the first key to understand the mystery of the spiritual experience of the Gospel writers, claims Spong. He is convinced that we will never understand the Gospels until we learn to read them as Jewish books, as the sub-title of his book makes clear: Reading the Bible with Jewish eyes.

"The Gospels are Jewish attempts to interpret in a Jewish way the life of a Jewish man in whom the transcendence of God was believed to have been experienced in a fresh and powerful encounter." (Lib.p.20)

A second key is 'the one year ministry of Jesus'. Former commentators always said that Jesus' ministry lasted only one year, although John has three years. Spong sees Matthew as lectionary reading material, with a reading for each Sunday of the year, in line with the Jewish lectionary of the Old Testament. This would explain quite persuasively why the ministry of Jesus appears to have lasted only for one year, as we have it in the Synoptics.

Thirdly, why is there an ever increasing anti-Jewish bias evident in the Gospels, particularly in John. Between Marks Gospel and John’s, this very Jewish midrashic interpretation seems to be lost in the history of the early church. Spong points out that this is probably due to the gradual separation of Christians from the Jewish Synagogues. This was accelerated after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman armies, when the temple was totally razed to the ground. From that moment the Jewish nation practically disappeared, the Jews dispersed, and they believed that an orthodox interpretation of their faith would sustain them through another "exile". (Lib.ch.3)

Most New Testament commentators would agree that the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 ce was a clear dividing line for all New Testament writers. All of Paul's letters plus Mark were written before that time, the rest of the New Testament was written after this crucial event.

We now turn to the earliest writings in the New Testament, which are the letters or writings of Paul.

Chapter Nine

Paul's Writings

Enter Saul (Jewish) or Paul (Greek) of Tarsus, in Asia Minor. His father was probably a wealthy Jew who had obtained Roman citizenship. Born about 5ce., he learnt the trade of tent-making. He would have worshipped in a Greek speaking Synagogue. In other words, he grew up in Hellenistic Judaism. For his further education he was sent to Jerusalem, where he trained under Gamaliel (Acts 22:3). Whilst there he would have joined the order of the Pharisees.

Paul wrote about himself in Gal.1:14: “I was ahead of most fellow Jews of my age in my practice of the Jewish religion, and was much more devoted to the tradition of our ancestors.”

He must have met many people from The Way in Jerusalem, with their strange teaching about this Jesus. This new teaching of tolerance and "loving ones enemies" was too dangerous to Judaism, because it could become more popular and may even replace it. Paul knew well, that separation and exclusivism had helped to preserve Judaism in the past. In his zeal for the Law, he had to oppose this teaching and so he tried to “persecute the church of God and did my best to destroy it.” (Gal.1:13-14)

Spong has this to say about Jewish exclusivism:

"The Jews had survived the traumas of their national history by developing a powerfully protective shell that secured them against an alien and hostile world. In the service of that shell, they had constructed layers of interpretation that justified their policy of isolation. Jews did not eat, intermarry, fraternize, or worship with gentiles. Such practices as circumcision, dietary regulations, and Sabbath observances set off the Jewish people from the world as distinct, unique, and even odd. Thus separatism also served the Jews' survival needs and kept them alive as a recognizable ethnic group. The binding force on Jewish identity was the Torah.” (Resc.p.92)

Paul then had a conversion experience, which he describes in 1Cor.15:8-10):

"Last of all he (Jesus) appeared also to me - even though I am like someone whose birth was abnormal (or who was born at the wrong time. The Greek word is ektroma, which means an abortion, premature birth, or a puny birth). For I am the least of all the apostles - I do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted God's church. But by God's grace I am what I am, and the grace that he gave me was not without effect."

Spong describes the effect of this conversion in this way:

“So it was that when, in the first century, a Jewish teacher named Paul of Tarsus moved outside this defining religious system and began to question it in the light of a different experience, he exposed the fear, anxiety, insecurity, national pride, and immense hostility that ultimately cost him his life. Before he died, however, he had built a new structure that possessed Jewish roots but that also opened his followers to the startling possibility of a universal community." (Resc. p.92)

Paul, in defending himself against the accusation that he was not an apostle like the others, said in Gal.2:8. that he was no different than the other apostles. So Spong considers that the Easter appearance of Paul differed in no way from the Easter appearances of the other disciples. (Resc.p.81)

If this is so we need to ask ourselves seriously, how much the gospel message was later altered by the writers to more reflect their own circumstances, experiences or theology? keeping in mind that Paul wrote all his letters between 51 ce. and about 61 ce., a long time before the Gospels/Acts were written.

For Paul Jesus was:

"as to his humanity, he was born a descendant of David; as to his divine holiness, he was shown with great power to be the Son of God by being raised from death". (Rom.1:3-4)

With reference to the Resurrection, Paul always uses the passive verb: "was raised", so his understanding must have been that the resurrection was an exaltation rather than a coming back to life, as in the Gospels. (Resc.p.82)

Considering the physical resurrection, Paul writes:

"When the body is buried, it is mortal, when raised it will be immortal. When buried, it is a physical body, when raised it will be a spiritual body." ( Rom.15:43-44) and v.50: "what is made of flesh and blood cannot share in God's Kingdom, and what is mortal cannot possess immortality."

Through Paul's influence, the early Christian communities broke away gradually from the strictness of Law, as interpreted by the Pharisees, to restore 'the true Israel' to a covenant relation with God, based on faith, which sees the Law as a sign of a grateful response to God's grace.

There is general agreement that Mark, the first Gospel to be written, dates to somewhere between 65 and 70 ce. Paul does not seem to know anything about the life of Jesus. The gap of approximately 35 years between the death of Jesus and Mark's account may point towards a different purpose of telling some part of the life of Jesus in the way he did. This needs to be kept in mind when we turn to the Gospels.

Regarding Paul's profound sense of guilt Spong writes that Paul had a very low opinion of himself. This low self-esteem may have contributed to his zealousness, first as an almost fanatic persecutor of Christians, then describing in 2 Cor.6:3-10 how he endured the most terrible hardships in order not to be found slack with his work for Christ. For one who had always tried to be faultless before the law, the realization that God's undeserved love was also for him, must have seemed too good to be true. (Resc.p.109)

Yet in spite of this, Paul felt that he could never do the right thing:

“I do not understand what I do; for I don’t do what I would like to do, but instead I do what I hate.” (Rom.7:15) and "Even though the desire to do good is in me, I am not able to do it". (Rom7:18)

Spong then offers the theory, that Paul may have been homosexual, hence the guilt complex, and also because he was against women. (see Resc.p110-120)

Interpreting Paul's writings

As we said earlier, none of the Gospels had appeared during his life-time. During this oral period, the basic stories and words of Jesus were passed on from mouth to mouth. Some communities may have held a treasured collection of sayings of Jesus, like the “Q”-document (see p.73) or the Gospel of Thomas. They may have been read during the liturgy. They would have circulated in other communities and used in their worship services, but there cannot be any certainty about this. Spong thinks that the problem of interpreting Paul is, that it is almost always done with the Gospels in the back of our minds.

"To interpret Paul accurately we need to put ourselves into that first-century pre-gospel frame of reference and to hear Paul in fresh and authentic ways." (Resc.p.96)

We now turn to Paul’s writings, in the order they were written:

1 and 2 Thessalonians

These are Paul's first letters, written around 48 or 49 ce. from Corinth, and they are the earliest writings in the New Testament, i.e. between 18 and 19 years after the death of Jesus. They were written to a young church called saints by Paul, who lived in a Greek place, now called Salonica, the capital of Macedonia. Paul had established that community himself. He shares with his people the belief that Christ will come again before long, but meanwhile he encourages them to go about their daily work as before. Some must have said there was no point in working, if Christ would appear soon!

He describes the 'coming of the Lord' as a 'parousia' to happen at some future time. The Greeks used this word for a ceremonial and triumphant entry of the emperor into his city. According to Paul, God has a loving purpose for his people. It is God who is calling "The Church, (Greek ek-klesia the community of those who have responded to the call [klesis]). It is not a group of like-minded people, but a group of people who are chosen by God and who respond to his call." (Charpentier p.48)

In Paul's theology, there is no room for achieving 'brownie points'. Right from the beginning he says that our calling is God's grace, his free gift to us, and we can only respond to that with thanksgiving and love. (2 Thes.2:13-14)

Corinthians

Paul spent three years in Ephesus (between 56-58 ce.). Several letters to the Corinthians were written from there. 1 & 2 Corinthians may be an amalgamation of four letters written at different times, in answer to certain questions and certain issues.

During that time Paul was grappling within himself with the question: 'what does it mean to say that we are saved by Jesus Christ? He shows in these letters that "he has gained a deeper understanding of the role of Christ in the history of salvation". (Charpentier p.49)

Christ is present within the community of believers, through the Word, the sacraments, and a sacrificial life. He deals with disunity in the church in Corinth. The famous analogy about the 'body of Christ' with different gifts, all given for the building up of 'Christ's Body' came from this time. (1 Cor.12).

He wrote the earliest account of the Lord's Supper (1 Cor.11:17-34), and in 1 Cor.15 he deals with the 'resurrection of Christ'. He writes that he had 'received' this teaching that Christ died for our sins, 'as written in the Scriptures' and that he 'was raised to life according to the Scriptures' i.e. of course the Old Testament. His thoughts on our resurrection is mentioned in detail in 1Cor.15.

Galatians

Like Corinthians, this letter was written most likely in Ephesus. Again he defends his Apostleship, (before in 1 Cor.9:1-3), here in Gal.2:1-14). He tells the Galatians that he is even a superior Apostle to Peter, whom he had to rebuke in Antioch for being a hypocrite. Peter’s group were siding with the Judaizers, who tried to add Jewish practices from the Law to their new Christian converts, who had been Gentiles before. If they would allow themselves to be circumcised, Paul said, it would mean: “that Christ is of no use to you at all". (Gal.5:2) He is quite passionate when he thinks about this, his core teaching and calls them: "Foolish Galatians”! (Gal.3:1)

"Those of you who try to be put right with God by obeying the Law, have cut yourselves off from Christ. You are outside of God's grace." (Gal.5:4)

After this comes a most important sentence in Gal.5:5:

"As for us, our hope is that God will put us right with him (that's faith); and this is what we wait for by the power of God's Spirit working through our faith."

It is worth noting that Paul probably arrived at this new insight during his conflict with the Judaizers.

Christianity would have never developed without this. Paul is rejoicing in the freedom we have: "Christ has set us free". (5:1) No longer can anyone rely on 'being saved' by observing the Jewish Law. We are set free from the Law! If we could convince our Muslim brothers and sisters of this, that nothing we can do will influence our salvation, we may get peace in this world. I do not mean to convert them to Christianity, but to show that God, whom they call ‘all-powerful, almighty’, etc. is also in charge of their salvation!. "For a Christian there are no more commandments; only this inner law, 'the Spirit of God', not yet called the Holy Spirit, which is in the heart of every believer."(Charp.p.51)

This new idea of salvation by faith alone, has probably prompted Paul to write the next letter, the most theological of all:

Romans

It is certainly the most comprehensive statement of Paul’s theology that exists. It is not so much a personal letter, though some personal greetings are appended to it, but a summary of his faith. Paul sees the Old Testament as paving the way for his new understanding. Abraham is considered righteous because of his faith. (chapter 4) As through the one man Adam sin came into this world, so through the one man Christ a new humanity was born. The old Adam was judged by God guilty, the new Adam (Christ) is declared by the grace of God not guilty. (Rom.5:16) Life in the Spirit unifies the believer again with God, it changes "God's enemies into his friends". (Rom.11:15) This can never be achieved by our own efforts, but is always a gift from God. So if we live a life that is in accordance with God’s will, it is always as a thankful response to God's gift.

When he contemplates the never ending love of God, his conviction becomes poetical, when he writes:

“For I am certain that nothing can separate us from his love: neither death nor life, neither angels nor other heavenly rulers or powers, neither the present nor the future, neither the world above nor the world below – there is nothing in all creation that will ever be able to separate us from the love of God which is ours through Christ Jesus our Lord”. (Rom.8:38-39)

Paul is preaching a universalism he found in the Old Testament, which few have seen before him. He quotes from Isaiah 65:1 when he lets God speak: “I was found by those who were not looking for me; I appeared to those who were not asking for me”. (Rom.10:20)

Having finished all his arguments, and pointing out that there is no difference between Jew and Gentile, Paul cannot escape his very Jewish conviction: "For I tell you that Christ's life of service was on behalf of the Jews, to show that God is faithful, to make his promises to their ancestors come true, and to enable even the Gentiles to praise God for his mercy." (Rom.15:8-9)

Philippians

The church in Philippi is the first Paul established in Europe, and he is always very fond of them. This is the only church he was willing to receive financial help from. In spite of all his sufferings in prison, his love for Jesus had never been stronger. It was probably written in Ephesus around 57 ce.

Philemon, Colossians

Both were written in Rome, where Paul was under house arrest. This must have been between 61 and 63 ce. The most personal brief letter was to Phile-mon, a slave owner whose slave Onesimus had run away. He had become a Christian and served Paul in Rome. For Paul the institution of slavery was simply accepted, but he undermined it by saying that master and slaves are equal. He therefore pleads with Philemon to redeem Onesimus from slavery, and send him back as a free man, to continue to serve Paul.

His last letter was probably Colossians, written about 62 ce. The Colossians had accepted a weird teaching and they thought that Christ was among the various heavenly powers they thought existed. Paul corrects this, putting Christ right into the heart of the universe and of the church.

Ephesians is similar in content and was probably written by one of his disciples. It will be dealt with later.

Conclusion

Spong reminds us that when Paul died (around 64 ce.) "not a single Gospel had yet been written, and at the time of Paul's death none of his letters were regarded as anything more than what they were - treasured letters from a revered Christian leader." (Resc.p.80)

The next book to be written in the New Testament is the Gospel of Mark.