I personally don't get it - but I have been doing some other study lately...I was on my Roku (oh yeah it was a father's day present for my husband...but..) And I found on the Hebraic Roots network a teaching from Wildbranch about Paul. And after being called a Paul basher - I had to look it up and watch the silly video. I didn't want to fly off the handle - I want to examine all the options.
And here is some interesting things I found. (note: I am only half done with the study) The greek mindset had rooted so deep into the mindset of the first century people - the greek mindset being - gods are fickle and change their mood, the body is evil and the spirit is good. The gods do not care about your flesh because it is not your spirit - separation of religious commitment and worship has no place in the secular world. The OT God was a grumpy guy - but the NT guy is nice. So here is a tip on how Paul got to be such a bad guy: Marcion of Sinope. "Marcion was the first to introduce an early Christian canon. His canon consisted of still only eleven books grouped into two sections: the Evangelikon, being a shorter and earlier version of the gospel which later became known as the Gospel of Luke, and the Apostolikon, a selection of ten epistles of Paul the Apostle, whom Marcion considered the correct interpreter and transmitter of Jesus' teachings. The gospel used by Marcion does not contain elements relating to Jesus' birth and childhood, although it does contain some elements of Judaism, and material challenging Marcion's dualism."
So basically an abundance of greek thinking was trying to be overcome by Paul - but still what the early church understood is not what we understand. The obvious references to daily activities - I think are lost and abused by modern interpreters. At the time it was clear - but WAY more greek thinking was passed down to our culture than Hebraic concepts. I want to write about this after I milk. But I am only 3/4 done with my study and I want to get to the end also so I don't go off half cocked. I think my preliminary conclusion is this: Paul was not a bad guy - he did not know how his words would be manipulated. He does sound arrogant but I recently learned that is due to his home town of Tarsus. Which didn't mean much to me at first - but here is something about that city :Tarsus, a rich city on a well established trade route - on the south eastern section of what is now Turkey,once help over 200,000 books in it's library. It remained the civil and religious metropolis of a Roman Province, and was a grand city with palaces, marketplaces, roads and bridges, baths, fountains and waterworks, a gymnasium on the banks of the Cydnus, and a stadium.
So when Paul seemed to be being arrogant - maybe it was because he was from this super city. Like - look it here guys I come from the seat of World culture! I am RICH! I have knowledge - which would have raised his credentials in the eyes of the Greeks he was speaking to.
But I do agree with you about elevating his works to gospel - very dangerous. Mostly because we don't understand that the point of his books were to keep the greeks from arguing things to death - the greeks had a thing for seeing all sides of an issue but never reaching a conclusion. ~a
I know, I know
And I found on the Hebraic Roots network a teaching from Wildbranch about Paul. And after being called a Paul basher - I had to look it up and watch the silly video. I didn't want to fly off the handle - I want to examine all the options.
And here is some interesting things I found. (note: I am only half done with the study) The greek mindset had rooted so deep into the mindset of the first century people - the greek mindset being - gods are fickle and change their mood, the body is evil and the spirit is good. The gods do not care about your flesh because it is not your spirit - separation of religious commitment and worship has no place in the secular world. The OT God was a grumpy guy - but the NT guy is nice.
So here is a tip on how Paul got to be such a bad guy: Marcion of Sinope.
"Marcion was the first to introduce an early Christian canon. His canon consisted of still only eleven books grouped into two sections: the Evangelikon, being a shorter and earlier version of the gospel which later became known as the Gospel of Luke, and the Apostolikon, a selection of ten epistles of Paul the Apostle, whom Marcion considered the correct interpreter and transmitter of Jesus' teachings. The gospel used by Marcion does not contain elements relating to Jesus' birth and childhood, although it does contain some elements of Judaism, and material challenging Marcion's dualism."
So basically an abundance of greek thinking was trying to be overcome by Paul - but still what the early church understood is not what we understand. The obvious references to daily activities - I think are lost and abused by modern interpreters. At the time it was clear - but WAY more greek thinking was passed down to our culture than Hebraic concepts. I want to write about this after I milk. But I am only 3/4 done with my study and I want to get to the end also so I don't go off half cocked.
I think my preliminary conclusion is this: Paul was not a bad guy - he did not know how his words would be manipulated. He does sound arrogant but I recently learned that is due to his home town of Tarsus. Which didn't mean much to me at first - but here is something about that city :Tarsus, a rich city on a well established trade route - on the south eastern section of what is now Turkey,once help over 200,000 books in it's library. It remained the civil and religious metropolis of a Roman Province, and was a grand city with palaces, marketplaces, roads and bridges, baths, fountains and waterworks, a gymnasium on the banks of the Cydnus, and a stadium.
So when Paul seemed to be being arrogant - maybe it was because he was from this super city. Like - look it here guys I come from the seat of World culture! I am RICH! I have knowledge - which would have raised his credentials in the eyes of the Greeks he was speaking to.
But I do agree with you about elevating his works to gospel - very dangerous. Mostly because we don't understand that the point of his books were to keep the greeks from arguing things to death - the greeks had a thing for seeing all sides of an issue but never reaching a conclusion. ~a