My Thoughts About Paul And The Bible Are Probably Dangerous, But This Is Where I'm At
I shared this stuff with my Patreon supporters a few weeks ago, but want to flesh it out a little more on the blog today. And I should say right off that bat that if you’re a Biblical inerrantist who believes the Bible is perfect and literal and all those things.
Wellll.
You might want to sit down or better yet just “X” out of this screen and go visit another website.
HA!
Sooooo. I talked to David Hayward (aka The Naked Pastor) a few weeks ago and we recorded a podcast episode that dropped on Good Friday.
Annnnnd.
I may or may not have said some things to him that I haven't ever really expressed to another human being other than my wife and maybe my mom.
We talked about ALL the things:
Jesus.
The cross.
The resurrection.
The crucifixion.
What it all means.
Or might mean.
Or might not mean.
The Bible.
And in talking with him and sharing with him all the things I did … I don’t know. I felt like something in me came loose and I felt like I left the conversation feeling much lighter, much more at ease, and much happier with where I am in my walk with God, Jesus, the Bible, etc, etc, etc.
For example.
At one point we were talking about Paul and how Paul is really big on words like "sacrifice" and "blood" and "propitiation" and "redemption" and all of these other random words and concepts that (honestly) sometimes feel super outdated and way over my head. And I said to David something along the lines of ...
"I don't know. It seems like Paul was trying to make sense of Jesus using the only words and concepts he really had available to him."
Right?
Because Paul's letters, remember, were all written BEFORE any of the 4 Gospels.
Think about that:
ALL of Paul's letters.
Were written.
BEFORE.
Matthew.
Mark.
Luke.
And John.
And so Paul had never read those Gospels while writing his many letters because those Gospels weren't written yet, which means that Paul didn't (and couldn't have!) borrowed from the Gospels, but the Gospel writers could have borrowed from the letters of Paul.
Going further, when I read Paul I see a guy who is desperately trying to work out his theology and trying to make sense of Jesus in the midst of his own very Jewish upbringing.
BUT.
When I read the Gospels I see not much more than stories about and quotes from Jesus.
Right?
Paul NEVER ONCE tells a story of Jesus and NEVER really even quotes Jesus other than maybe one time where he talked about the Last Supper and Jesus giving the bread and wine to his disciples.
BUT.
When I read the Gospels I don't see much theology or a whole lot of talk about sacrifice, blood, atonement, propitiation, etc.; instead, I see a lot of sharing of the things Jesus did and said with the reader being left to draw some of his or her own conclusions.
Don't miss this:
Paul (who wrote before the Gospel writers) wrote a bunch of theological concepts without ever telling a story of Jesus or really even quoting him.
And then the Gospel writers came along and did almost the exact opposite by filling their letters with quotes from Jesus and stories of Jesus.
With all of that in mind I said to David that it almost feels (to me) like the Gospel writers had evolved past Paul. It's like Paul spoke of Jesus one way, using the only words and descriptions he had from his very Jewish upbringing and schooling and then the Gospel writers came along and widened that language a bit to paint a much different picture of Jesus who then became more accessible and easier for the average person to grasp.
And so at the end of the day, sometimes I wonder if one of the Bible's main objectives is to show us how people have evolved in their thinking about God and Jesus not so that we can keep everything the same and keep it under lock and key so the thinking and understanding never ever changes.
BUT.
… So that we can follow in their footsteps and keep evolving.
And I say that because …
In the Old Testament we see the prophets talking about God in one way.
And then we see Paul talking about God and Jesus in similar, but different ways.
And then we see the Gospel writers presenting God through Jesus in an entirely new and unique way.
... All of which makes me wonder if now (2000 years later) you and I need to follow in those footsteps and talk about God and Jesus and the cross and all the things in a way that makes sense to us, in our world.
The Old Testament prophets wrote about God while Israel was in and out of exile, having escaped slavery in Egypt, moving into the Promised Land, etc.
Many years later Paul wrote about God and Jesus in the midst of intense persecution of Christians.
A few years later the Gospel writers wrote about Jesus in the aftermath of things like the fire in Rome, the destruction of the Temple, etc.
And so the question TODAY becomes not “how will we keep this all the same and teach everybody to think about God in these ways”, but how will we speak of this same God and this same Jesus and his crucifixion, resurrection, etc. some 2000 years later in the middle of COVID-19 and other major world events as well as smaller and more personal life events?
Will we keep talking about these things in the ways they've always been talked about because "it's in the Bible" OR will we allow ourselves to evolve in our thinking of God just as the Biblical writers evolved in theirs?
I love the Bible and I do take the prophets, Paul, Gospels, etc. super seriously and I do believe that they contain Truth that can help all of us become more authentic human beings, but I don't take them so seriously that they get me stuck in my thinking and unable to move forward in 2020 in ways and for reasons that would have been foreign and irrelevant to the Biblical writers.
Something to think about.
Peace.