|
||||
This Month
Month Archive
Login
|
Monday, January 26
by
Peter Combes
on Mon 26 Jan 2009 04:56 PM GMT
41 (Claudius Emperor) Agrippa King of Judaea
42 43 44 "Agrippa dies Fadus Procurator" 45 46 Tiberius Alexander Procurator 47 48 Cumanus procurator 49 50 Agrippa II Tetrarch 51 52 Felix Procurator 53 3rd Missionary journey begins 54 Nero Emperor Paul in Ephesus 55 56 57 Paul leaves Ephesus Romans 58 59 Paul in Jerusalem Paul in Caesarea 60 Festus Procurator 61 62 Paul arrives in Rome 63 Albinus Procurator Death of James 64 65 66 67 68 "Galba Vitellius Otho Vespasian" 69 70 Fall of Jerusalem
by
Peter Combes
on Mon 26 Jan 2009 04:49 PM GMT
Paul emphasises the requirement that Christians obey the secular authorities. This is a little surprising, since it was presumably written at a time when resistance to Roman rule in Judaea was increasing. For that matter the civil authority that Paul cites is that of the Emperor Nero. We also discussed the possible response to this chapter from figures like George Washington and Oliver Cromwell. Were there Jews who were vegetarians? It seems unlikely, yet Paul discusses the Christian attitudes to vegetarianism. Some claim that this is a translation problem, and Paul is actually discussing whether Christians should eat non-kosher meat. Sunday, January 18
by
Peter Combes
on Sun 18 Jan 2009 07:06 PM GMT
Chapter 11 closes Paul's long discussion of the roles of Jewish and Gentile Christians, comparing Gentile Christians with a new olive branch grafted onto the old tree of Judaism. All Israel would eventually be saved. We looked at some translation issues in Romans 11 -- the good News Bible appeared to add extra explanation by appending the words "the false god" to the word "Baal", though the original Greek does not support this. The imagery of the "table" that as a "snare" and a "trap" was lost in this translation, though it was the only translation to hand that noted that Paul's concept of "hospitality" may well have been wider than the idea of entertaining fellow-Christians. It has been suggested that the New Testament is good theology but poor farming -- the parable of the Sower -- in which the sower recklessly misuses priceless see corn -- has been thought of as a parable that would amuse an agricultural audience, whicle explaining the complex theology that the response to the Word depends on the listener. Paul appears to have the theory of grafting backwards; usually one grafts a new branch onto an less advanced tree, whereas Paul's image does the opposite when explaining how Christianity will be a "wild branch" grafted onto the rich tree of Judaism.
Monday, January 12
by
Peter Combes
on Mon 12 Jan 2009 01:06 AM GMT
We did a quick review of Romans -- how Jewish Christains had been expelled from Rome under Claudius and were now coming back under Nero, to find their church taken over by Gentiles. Perhaps Paul was requested to write to them to ease the situation; certainly he goes into the status of Gentile and Jewish Christians at great length.
Chapter 11 is dense and difficult to follow, but faced with the argument that people behave in accordance with the way they were made by God, Paul can only respond with an argument of authority -- the same argument used in the Book of Job.
We looked at the history of the issue as to whether Gentile Christians should obey the Mosaic Law :
In the Old Testament, God agrees to a series of "deals":
Man Application Requirements Benefits Reference
Noah Universal No murder No More Floods Genesis 9
No meat containing blood
Abram All nations One God - circumcision No human sacrifice
(Gen 12:3) Ancestor of many nations Genesis 17
Moses Hebrews Follow the detailed code Keep the Land
e.g. Kosher foods
Restricted marriage
What should apply to Gentile Christians? According to Acts, the Jerusalem Conference, which might have been expected to be in favour of full Mosaic observance, in fact decided to impose only four regulations; Eat nothing strangled, Eat no blood, Eat no food offered to idols, be chaste. Paul seems to have remembered only two of these --
Nevertheless, Acts contains a history of conflict over how far the Mosaic law apoplied; "men sent from James" apparently went to the churches insisting on circumcision. Paul relaxed the rules over food, suggesting a "don't ask, don't tell" policy (I Corinthians 10:27) He was furious with the Christians who adopted circumcision, saying that if they did this, Christ would be of no value to them (I Corinthians 5:2 ). He wrote several diatribes aganist the (Mosaic) Law, writing that the Law actually suggested sins that the believer might then adopt (Romans 7:7-11).
Sunday, January 4
by
Peter Combes
on Sun 04 Jan 2009 07:01 PM GMT
Romans 7-8 Paul continued his line of complex reasoning, developing the thought that he might be controlled by sin, so that he did not do what he wanted, but what sin wanted. Some of the class compared this to the role of the Devil in some of Luther’s writings, others to Flip Wilson’s famous line “The Devil made me do it”. We looked briefly at how Paul describes the Devil as “Lord of this World”, and discussed how this might answer the question “Why does God let bad things happen to good people”. Paul, indeed, does not expect Christians to have a comfortable life, but warns them to expect suffering. Paul describes how the Law could suggest sinful actions, and thus be counter-productive. Paul suggests that Jesus can be the solution to these dilemmas, and concludes chapter 8 with the famous statement “I am persuaded that neither death not life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, no any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Jesus Christ our Lord."
A discussion we had on whether any scripture was written by women is posted separately.
|