Return to Home

The Apostle Paul

Everything You Ever Wanted to Know

About the Apostle Paul

An APSE Ministry Bible Study

(AskPrayStudyEmbrace)

James Spangler

Course material/Workbook

Contents

Part 1

Introduction 1

Understanding 5 Myths About the Apostle Paul 2

The Apostle Paul 7

An Apostle Admired and Despised 7

How Should We Read Paul 11

Paul’s Life and Letters 14

Problems of Early Christianity 19

1 and 2 Thessalonians 25

Part 2

Life in the World - First Corinthians 30

Life in the World - 1 Corinthians (cont’d); Philemon 42

Life in the World - 2 Corinthians 50

Life and Law - Galatians 54 Life and Righteousness - Romans 57

Part 3

Fellowship - Letters from Captivity

Ephesians and Phillipians 68

History and Theology 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus -

The Pastoral Epistles 75

Paul’s Influence 80

Everything You Ever Wanted to Know

About the Apostle Paul

Jesus - Paul - The Church How did we end up here?

“Paul says some mighty strange things.” “I’m not sure I agree with a lot of the stuff Paul says.” “I’m a CHRISTIAN, not a PAULIAN.” “Paul is the most misogynist man who ever wrote.” “Paul is a male supremacist.” “Paul makes women second class citizens.” “Paul is pro slavery.” “Paul is the reference for “the church,” for good - or for bad…”

- Or -

“Paul is a champion of women’s rights” “Paul is a radical social pioneer.” “Paul is a peacemaker.” IF one considers the context of his writings.

One thing, however, is for certain: Paul was a servant of God who began the evangelism of the gospel to the world.

Introducing this radical, contentious, respected, loved, hated, disrespected, quoted, misquoted, understood, misunderstood, Jewish servant of Jesus who was missionary to the Gentiles and the world.

There is a big difference between Paul and Jesus. Paul was a Roman citizen and that afforded him certain rights, rights he sometimes denied - which led to floggings and jailings - and rights he sometimes used (Acts 22:25). No doubt Paul’s mission would have been much shorter had he not had the protection of Roman citizenship. Paul’s preaching of a new, non-recognized religion was every bit as subversive as Jesus’ teachings. Yet he was not crucified, very likely because of his Roman citizenship.

Jesus told people to keep his healings secret. Paul did no such thing. He advocated to proclaim the message of Jesus EVERYWHERE including public forums.

Paul’s birth town, Tarsus, was a favored City in the Roman Empire and had exemption from the heavy taxes Israel faced. Paul was a “city person,” learned. Jesus was a “country person,” perceived as dumb. Paul had privilege. Jesus did not. The caloric intake for a peasant Jew in Jesus’ time was 1400 calories, not enough to sustain weight. Hunger was everywhere and Jesus referred to it often.

We have seen the importance of “oppression” to Jesus' ministry (See APSE Study: The Life of Jesus). In contrast, Paul NEVER addressed the poor treatment of his fellow Jews by the Romans, instead saying in Romans 13: “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except from God. Those who resist the authority that God has appointed will incur judgment, for rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to BAD.”

Paul’s message was: “Don’t change society, just hang on. Jesus is coming soon.” But Paul was wrong. Were there ramifications?

Sadly, as mentioned above in 3), this position of Paul to not address social and political change led to years of Roman oppression with the people basically willing to accept the costs. That is until Constantine, when the radical faith of the oppressed became the official religion of the oppressor.

Discussion: Christianity wins? Maybe? Maybe not. Constantine’s use of religion in his governing mandate and social and political positions posed another whole set of problems - the use of religion to justify his every decision and act as ruler. “All of my decisions are correct because they came from God.” Now oppression can be justified because it came from God. This will be discussed again when studying Romans 13.

Understanding 5 Myths About the Apostle Paul

From Biblical Archaeology Review Summer 2023

By David Christian Clausen

Let’s review this interesting article for a brief introduction to Paul to help us get a better grasp of the complexities we are going to encounter in this study.

1. Paul was missionary to the Gentiles, not the Jews. But he, personally, remained a Jew.

2. Paul’s missionary horizon was short. But certainly much longer than Jesus’ ministry on earth. The consensus is Jesus’ ministry lasted 2-3 years. Paul’s ministry was roughly 20-24 years, 46-66 A.D. in the chart timeline and 44-68 A.D. in various cited timelines.

3. Paul believed Christ would return in his lifetime (1 Thessalonians 4:15). Thus, HE DID NOT WRITE FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS (Note: Author’s opinion).

This is an interesting and VERY important issue. 1 Thessalonians 4:15 says Paul got this position “According to the Lord’s own words…” Paul received a DIRECT message from God. “…those who are left UNTIL THE COMING OF THE LORD.” Does this mean God told Paul in no uncertain terms Jesus would return BEFORE some of them would die? Does this agree with and support Jesus’ words in Matthew 16:28 Some of you will not taste death until you have seen the Son of Man coming in HIS kingdom.

This begs the question: Which kingdom are they referring to?

A) Jesus’ resurrection which brought God’s kingdom to earth (and we are to fulfill it?),

B) Jesus’ return to God’s kingdom in heaven - where Jesus went in the ascension?

C) The kingdom that comes with Jesus’ return to earth in his second coming?

Matthew 24:33 “So also, when you see all these things, you know that He is near, at the very gates.”

Let’s look at some Bible verses that refer to the “coming of the Lord.”

Matthew 24:34 “Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.”

1 Peter 4:7 “The end of all things is at hand…”

Revelation 22:12 “Behold, I am coming soon…”

Matthew 24:36 “Concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only.” (Discussion: But the Father and the Son are the same - the Trinity. How could one know and not the other?)

1 Thessalonians 4:15 “...we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord.”

***Luke 17:20-21 RSV "Being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God was coming, He answered them, 'The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed; nor will they say 'Lo, here it is!' or 'There!' For behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you.” (Discussion: Who missed this verse? Does this put the Revelation interpreters out of business? The kingdom of God is already here? Now?)

It seems Paul is echoing Jesus’ words In Mark 13:29-32 where Jesus says: Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that it is near, right at the door. Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away. But of that day, or hour NO ONE KNOWS, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone.

So no one knows the exact day or hour, but it will be within the lifetime of some of you alive today. So it will be SOON!

Except it didn’t happen. Day after day, week after week, month after month, year after year. No Jesus - in the flesh, anyways. Earth is still here. What gives?

Did Paul change his mind? Did Paul get an update from God? A misinterpretation? Did Paul make a MISTAKE?

He certainly changed his story:

2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us — whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter—asserting that the day of the Lord has already come.

Paul is now saying: Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.

So the NEW theory is: The day of the Lord (again, does this refer to the second coming?) will not happen until the man of lawlessness is revealed. And that could take awhile. Paul suggests you not quit your job.

This is actually a really big deal. Many of Paul’s instructions, recommendations, guidance is based on a soon return of Jesus. How did Paul’s positions change when it was evident that Jesus’ return was NOT imminent?

All the preaching on staying celibate, not marrying, SLAVERY (serve your master with glee), misogyny (woman, you are in church, NO TALKING), et.al, DO THEY NOW NOT apply to us because the second coming might not be for thousands of years??? Much more on this later.

A CRISIS? Something Paul definitely had to address. If Paul had made a mistake, if the apostles were teaching a wrong tenet of Jesus, WHAT ELSE WERE THEY TEACHING WRONG? Can Paul be trusted? Also, Paul wasn’t the only one evangelizing, and some had some very different thoughts. Why was he right and them wrong? What were his credentials?

It should be obvious now how taking Paul’s epistles verbatim without understanding the time, context, and audience can lead to a lot of misunderstanding. One little bump sends us digging for answers.

4. Paul’s mission was based on fulfilling the Jeremiahic Covenant found in Ezekiel and Jeremiah:

Ezekiel 36:24-28 NIV“ For I will take you out of the nations; I will gather you from all the countries and bring you back into your own land…” “...And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws. Then you will live in the land I gave your ancestors; you will be my people, and I will be your God.”

Jeremiah 31:31-34 NIV

“The days are coming,” declares the LORD, “when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them,” declares the LORD. “This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel after that time,” declares the LORD. “I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. No longer will they teach their neighbor, or say to one another, ‘Know the LORD,’ because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest,” declares the LORD. “For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more.”

Paul did not teach a law free gospel. Yes, Paul taught saved by grace alone, but he expected Jews to maintain their special relationship as God's chosen people and follow the laws of Moses. Gentiles were supposed to follow God’s law as dispensed through the Holy Spirit to each Gentile heart.

5. Paul did not teach that Christ died for THE SINS OF THE WORLD. He taught Christ died for THE SINNERS OF THE WORLD. Paul, Peter, and other Jews were already saved because they had a special covenant with God as the chosen people.

Discussion: Jews are saved simply by being Jewish (?). What about “no one comes to the Father but by me?” We will visit this again in later lessons. (See APSE Article: Is Jesus the Only Way to Heaven?) Or Paul’s Sola Fide, saved by grace alone, not by works (or ritual, or sacrifice, or “following the Law”) lest any man should boast. Doesn’t “saving” REQUIRE a confessed belief in Jesus? Must it also include baptism?

Christ died for the pagans and idolatrous pagans - those who were never in the covenant and those who were in danger of losing the covenant. To save these pagans Christ had to be cursed (removed from the covenant he held as a Jew) and become like a Gentile.

REALLY? Seems so. Saul, who became Paul, persecuted Christians because they worshiped a condemned man who hung on a tree. Such a man is evil in the eyes of a fellow Jew (Deuteronomy 21:22-23). Perhaps this was the gist of Jesus’ message to Saul, later Paul, when he lost his sight from the bright light. Jesus was hung on a tree as a Gentile for the Gentiles.

This Christ died, but was redeemed by God and was exalted by Him. By baptism, Gentiles could now SHARE in this redemption the Jews enjoyed with God and experience eternal life.

Which brings 2 questions. 1. Is baptism is required for redemption? 2. Gentiles were not eligible for redemption before Jesus? Only Jews - the chosen people - were? Would a loving God write off everyone but his "chosen people?" Does God provide a second chance?

A final thought: Paul wrote as though he was one of his Gentile audience. He was nothing of the sort. He was a devout Jew who had his salvation ensured through the Jewish Covenant with God. Is that true? We are going to dive deeper into Paul’s thinking with a study of his letters with Dr. Luke Timothy Johnson.

The Apostle Paul

The Great Courses

Dr. Luke Timothy Johnson

(Lecture numbers reference the 12 lectures of Dr. Johnson’s course)

Lecture 1 An Apostle Admired and Despised

Why Paul is significant:

1. Paul is an important missionary. A persecutor turned advocate. Paul stated in Romans that he traveled as far as present day Yugoslavia. Maybe even to Spain (?). There is nothing explicit in scripture saying definitively that Paul reached Spain in his missionary career, but other sources suggest it, perhaps during his “missing years of 64-66 A.D.” - at least according to one source.

2. Paul made Christianity a Gentile religion without reliance on Mosaic law. Christianity became a WORLD religion rather than a sect of regional Judaism.

We will see the great debate between Paul and James with Peter stuck in the middle - the deciding vote. Will Christianity become a “new religion” or will it be a sect of Judaism. Judaism that recognizes Jesus as Messiah who saves through resurrection, not through sacrifices at the temple. A Messiah who leads through peaceful means and not through violence.

Ironically Paul was a Pharisaic Jew who would not have sat for a meal with the people he was a missionary to.

Discussion: So was Paul really a Jew? Let the debate begin. And if he is NOT a Pharisaic Jew does he lose his credibility?

3. Paul gave us our most important interpretation of Jesus and the Christian movement. Paul is our earliest first hand witness to Christianity.

4. Paul’s writings dominate the New Testament.

5. Paul is the most distinctive voice of Christianity through the years. One must understand Paul to understand Christianity. The centerpiece. The authority.

Yet Paul is blamed by many who criticize the Christian religion.

1. From the Jewish standpoint: In Corinthians Paul states Jews can’t even understand their own scriptures without “the Lord.”

My Jewish friends while growing up weren’t too enamored with Paul. In their eyes Paul persecuted Jews AFTER his conversion the way he persecuted Christians BEFORE his conversion - be that accurate or not, that was the perception.

2. Paul’s anti-woman position, certainly not who Jesus was.

Discussion: Was Paul really anti-woman?

Although all 12 disciples were male, Jesus’ band of followers had many women tagging along - with important functions to boot. Like funding him.

Luke 8:1-3 After this, Jesus traveled about from one town and village to another, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom of God. The Twelve were with him, and also some women who had been cured of evil spirits and diseases: Mary (called Magdalene) from whom seven demons had come out; Joanna the wife of Chuza, the manager of Herod’s household; Susanna; and many others. These women were helping to support them out of their own means.

3. Paul was the source of fanaticism, supernaturalism, superstition, hatred of sex, and authoritarianism. The opposite of “enlightenment.”

4. To Thomas Jefferson, Jesus was perfect. Paul was dangerous.

It is reported Jefferson was no fan of The Book of Revelation either. Legend says he ripped the pages of Revelation right out of his Bible. Interesting, however, Jefferson didn’t find some solace in Paul’s position on slavery, him being a notorious slave owner and all. See APSE Article: The third president had a secret: his carefully edited version of the New Testament.

Apostle Paul Articles page 1.

5. Some prefer the Historical Jesus - the study of Jesus without the tainting of Christianity and the so-called “Christian Life and morality.”

That is nothing unique. I sometimes have called myself a “Christian, not a Paulian.”

6. From the beginning, Paul was polarizing. Evolving from a persecutor to the most ardent proselytizer of Jesus. And he did it with NO credentials. He had “an experience,” but no history to provide him ANY authority.

7. Early churches were very wary of Paul. In Christ there is no male or female. Then again, woman, be submissive to your man. Be silent.

What came first? “Woman stay quiet” or “male and female are the same in the eyes of God?” Perhaps more importantly, what came LAST?

8. Paul defends Gentiles, yet he, himself, was a circumcised Jew.

9. Paul (supposedly) taught for free, yet the Old Testament, Jesus, and even Paul himself said a person should be paid for preaching. What he doesn’t say is that he had been financially supported by the Macedonia Church all along. Paul did look for financial support from many places.

Paul was actually suspected of fraud by some churches. More on that later.

10. Paul deemed himself “a PROPHET,” with full authority given to him BY GOD (the Spirit of God). It is possible that when a child, Paul saw Jesus in the flesh in Jerusalem before the crucifixion. Also, he and the people he traveled with saw a bright light and heard the voice of Jesus on the road to Damascus. Does this mean Jesus truly spoke directly to him? Did Paul get his message directly from God?

11. Paul demanded allegiance. Works or grace. In the flesh or in the spirit. Disobedience or faith. NO GRAY AREAS. Paul was often NOT trusted. Many churches respected leaders other than Paul. Rival leaders swooped in as soon as Paul moved on. Hence, many of the epistles deal with CORRECTION of what churches were doing.

Most of Paul’s missives are letters of correction of something a church was doing WRONG including the EUCHARIST (1 Corinthians 11:17-34). How much would we know about Paul’s vision of the “church” had the churches not been deviating from his blueprint for worship and structure? WE DO NOT EVEN HAVE THE ORIGINAL “BLUEPRINT” OF WHAT PAUL THINKS A CHURCH SHOULD BE!

Discussion: By the way, how are we doing? Would Paul need to write letters of correction to us? Many of Paul’s letters reconcile Christianity with the Greco-Roman culture of the day. The key word being RECONCILE. Jesus wanted peace and harmony, and despite the many words of Paul that sew disharmony today, PAUL WANTED HARMONY AND CO-EXISTENCE as well. Would his guidance be different because of the American culture we live in today? Would they be different in the culture of Caribbean or South American countries? African countries? Far East? India? China? Should we live according to Greco-Roman standards of the 1st Century A.D.? Are we REQUIRED to?)

YET… with proper interpretation: Paul is a true lover of God. A true champion of freedom. He does show how the Spirit can transform one’s life. Yet he reflects the biases of his life and society - Greek and Jewish thinking. The social structure of his age.

Paul seems to shift and change from letter to letter. His message is not very consistent. Not to mention we (and all other Christians) read with our own selective ideology. There is no neutral reading of Paul’s many letters.

The key to understanding Paul is recognizing that Paul is a MORAL TEACHER.

1. A teacher of early Christian communities. Paul is not a teacher of religion, he is a teacher of MORALITIES. The way people behave.

2. Paul is not a philosopher, he reacts to problems. He is responsive.

3. Paul is analyzed by the way he approaches the problems.

Note: We discussed Jesus in a different light (See: The Life of Jesus), as an advocate for the plight of his fellow impoverished “oppressed” Jews, and his disdain for the Jewish priests and leaders who sided with the Roman occupiers for the money and the power it afforded them. All the while neglecting the task given to them BY GOD to care for the “widow and the orphan” - those who needed help but could never repay for that help. Placing the time of Jesus under the rule of a puritan thinking emperor, Caesar Augustus. However things were changing - Jesus' ministry (short ministry) and crucifixion/resurrection occurred under Tiberius, a man short on morals.

Now we will look at Paul in a different light, at all times understanding his letters were written under Caligula and Nero, two of the most depraved emperors in Roman history.

For a better understanding of the culture and challenges Paul faced read APSE Article: Facts About The Ancient Roman Empire AND APSE Article: Rome’s Bloodiest Emperors. Much had changed from the “moral days” of Caesar Augustus mentioned earlier in this study.

So let’s get to know Paul - deeper than the 5 quick statements we may have learned in Sunday School.

Lecture 2 How Should We Read Paul

Paul is a figure who divides. 3 critical questions:

1. Do Paul’s letters reflect his personality or rhetoric? Asking questions to create discussion, controversy, and debate. Not necessarily in that order…

In his letters are we seeing Paul’s own ego? The Gospels give “the story.” No mention of the author. Paul’s letters are always “It is I, Paul…” Paul feels his authority,

He suspects his rivals.

He has mood shifts. Love the audience one minute, castigate the next.

Did Paul create Christianity? (He didn’t - Dr. Johnson’s opinion.)

Did he have psychological issues? Maybe? Does it distort or affect Christianity? Do we let it?

Paul DID have many close relationships that lasted for years. Even churches he admonished seemed to come around to him. Don’t overlook his accomplishments. Problems? Yes. Successes Definitely. He is NOT a diseased person.

Discussion: Although he mentions his “thorn in his flesh,” something he always had to deal with. (2 Corinthians 12:7) What was the thorn? Depression? Bad knees? Sore feet? Some irresistible temptation? - Was Paul GAY? Would that matter?

CONCLUSION: Paul’s letters don’t reflect his personality. He was trained rhetorically, and that was how he wrote. He wrote in character. The way the Greek community wrote. Argumentative. Not just to argue, but to analyze, debate, and conclude. Should we not do the same?

2. Genius or company man - Did Paul invent Christianity?

In the gospels Jesus talks not of himself, but of GOD. In Paul’s letter Jesus is the Center of the message. Do it in JESUS’ name. Jesus is almost a cult figure.

Paul didn’t CREATE Christianity, he entered into the Christian community. Jesus was already the cult figure. Paul didn’t invent anything - baptism, communion, etc. He merely promoted what was already there.

BUT… Paul was a creative thinker, and he wanted fellow thinkers to join along with him in this thinking. Paul was a radical thinker. And he demanded a choice. Law or grace. Slavery or freedom. Light or dark. Obedience and disobedience.

Paul was also a radical SOCIAL thinker (as was Jesus, by the way). He accepted tradition, but he worked it into the Christian theology.

Discussion: Maybe Paul didn’t INVENT Christianity, but did he DEFINE it?

3. Who is the real Paul?

A. Appearance: From the legendary 2nd century book of Paul and Thecla.

(Note: We will look at Paul and Thecla, an interesting take on women’s rights in this new religion of Christianity, later in this study.)

Paul was short, bald, a hook nose, and bowed legs. These are not attractive characteristics today, but are HISTORICALLY representative of what was looked for in a GREAT LEADER. So is the description of his appearance fact or fiction? Was he described this way out of respect?

B. Questions arose concerning the collection of money by Paul for churches at the council in Acts and later references by Paul in Galatians. The accounts differ. This topic will arise again later in our study.

C. But here’s the real rub. Of the 13 or 14 books attributed to Paul, how many did Paul actually write?

Six books written by Paul are suspect as to authorship: Colossians, 2 Thesalonians, and Ephesians. Then the pastoral epistles, 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus, agreed NOT written BY Paul but may still strongly reflect his thought.

Our lecturer and source, Dr. Johnson, is more accepting of Paul being an author or co-author of disputed letters. Paul was at least present and had a strong influence on the message of these letters, perhaps written by a “team of authors.” Perhaps a 7th book of suspect authorship is either Hebrews - author unknown - or less likely the apocryphal 3 Corinthians.

Seven books - Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon (the Book of Philemon being the source of much discussion on slavery) are considered AUTHENTIC.

Another Opinion - Dr. Bart Ehrman: 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus are considered INAUTHENTIC. They are referred to as the PASTORAL EPISTLES as they describe who a pastor should be, how he should act, and how he should lead his church. Colossians, Ephesians, 2 Thessalonians, and the apocryphal 3 Corinthians are suspect for authentic authorship by Paul, and hence are called Deutero-Pauline epistles. 3 Corinthians is actually a 3rd Century epistle attributed to Tertullian.

The thought is that Paul wrote at least 4 letters to the Corinthians. The first letter was referenced in what is now known as 1 Corinthians and is a “lost letter.” 2 Corinthians is thought to be authentic but also appears to be a combination of 2 separate letters.

Notes on Tertullian: Tertullian (155-220 A.D.) is considered the Father of Latin Christianity and Western Theology. However, two of his major theological concepts were rejected.

1) Transubstantiation - Tertullian used the words the bread and wine are “the FIGURE of my body,” NOT the words “this IS my body.” The church is back to this IS my body. Actual body, actual blood in the Eucharist.

2) Regarding the Trinity: Tertullian considered the Son and the Spirit as subordinate to the Father. The church considers the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as 3 persons of the same SUBSTANCE.

Lecture 3 Paul’s Life and Letters

The persecutor:

Paul’s cultural background: Paul came from a pluralistic culture, although controlled by Rome, it was GREEK (Hellenistic). Paul was exposed to Judaism AND Greek culture in the city of Tarsus. Paul knew Judaism, philosophy, the Greco-Roman religious movements, and rhetoric. Paul’s language and scripture were GREEK. His Jewish Holy Book would have been the Septuagint. He was a minority in a pluralistic society.

He was a Roman citizen.

Was it true? If so, he was from a well-off family - prestige and financially. In all likelihood he didn’t make tents, more likely his family OWNED THE COMPANY that made tents. See below.

Acts cited Paul as a student of Gamiliel. Is it true? It is believed to be true but not verified in the opinion of Dr. Johnson.

Discussion: Acts 22:3 “I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city. I studied under Gamaliel and was thoroughly trained in the law of our ancestors. I was just as zealous for God as any of you are today.”

Is this true? Is Paul inflating his credentials? How long did he study under Gamaliel? 2 hours? A week? A month? A Year? I studied under Blomberg (Denver), Keener (Asbury), Doug Moo (Wheaton). Each for 6-12 hours. Does that count for much? Maybe?

How did Paul get to Jerusalem (355 miles) to study if he was just a poor tentmaker? Or is it true because his family OWNED the tentmaking company? WAS PAUL THE DEVOUT JEW HE IS PRESENTED AS WHEN MANY DIASPORA JEWS WERE FAR LESS OBSERVANT OF THE LAW? Any wonder people - James, Peter - were suspicious of Paul? Did Paul win because he was a good fundraiser? More on that later.

Paul DOES reflect the conventional Jewish thought of Palestine at his time in his writings. But remember, his writings are in Greek, not Hebrew.

The Greek and Roman society developed a theory of history called APOCALYPTIC. The current age is evil. In the age to come God will overcome evil (the oppressors) with a messiah, the son of man. Keep this in mind when considering Paul’s letters concerning Heaven and Hell. Are his writings influenced by Jewish thought, Greek culture, a combination of each, OR a message directly from God?

Dr. Kenneth Harl - In the diaspora the Jews made up 10% of the Roman population and in some cities were as high as 30%. With little issue. Some Roman leaders respected the Jews because by behaving Jewish law they didn’t cause any problems. Philo (a Jew), for example, was well versed in pagan studies and philosophers of Rome.

But there were exceptions. The Zealots. Always a few stirring the pot. They found their foils in the corrupt Emperors of Rome. First with the Emperors who started equating themselves with the pagan gods and demanding to be worshiped as a pagan god, then the stupid decision of Caligula who demanded a statue of himself to be erected in the Jewish temple, the Holy of Holies.

That gave the Zealots something to rally around resulting in the Great Jewish Revolt (The First Jewish-Roman War) of 66 A.D. which included the destruction of the Temple.

What does this have to do with Paul? He was a Jew, but also a respected Roman citizen. From a well to do family. With a good education in both Judaism AND Roman and Greek studies. He was no doubt fluent in Hebrew, perhaps Aramaic, and definitely Greek. Life was good. Was he a tent maker? It is more postulated he OWNED or MANAGED or REPRESENTED (perhaps as a salesman) for a tent making enterprise (hey Roman Army, you need 1000 tents? I’m your guy!).

The early church had a big question. Do we remain obedient to the Jewish Law(s)? Circumcision - the sign of Abraham being the big one, kosher food being another. Do non-Jews converting need to be circumcised? Say a 70 year old man, for example. Or has the Old Covenant with the Jews been completely replaced with the New Covenant - its sign being BAPTISM.

It was Paul vs. Peter and James.

Paul was intelligent, knowledgeable, and persuasive. Peter agreed with Paul. James, being the brother, perhaps cousin (for all the adherents of the perpetual virginity of Mary See APSE Study: The Life of Jesus) - seemed to maintain a Jewish oriented Christian church. But for the most part the apostolic church came from Paul.

ONE BIG REASON WHY? The Jewish Christians were amazed at Paul’s ability to RAISE MONEY from his Gentile converts. Money… Of course it was for charity, so Paul (and the money he raised) won out for a good reason?

Regardless, this cannot be denied: Paul started something completely new - he took Christianity to the masses. He was the first missionary.

Discussion: Paul was the first missionary? Is that true? Were not the 12 disciples of Jesus not “missionaries” to the “ends of the earth?” Mark 16:19-20 and Matthew 28:19-20 - “they went out and preached everywhere…” Book 3 Church History of Eusubius: Thomas went to Parthia (Iran - India?), Andrew went to Scythia (present day Iran, Ukraine, other Eastern European countries), John went to Asia (although he returned and died in Ephesus), Peter went to Pontus, Galatia, Bythinia, Cappadocia, Asia, and eventually Rome. The Apocrypha Gospels state the disciples were divided into 3 teams: Team 1 Peter, Andrew, Matthew, and Bartholomew were in the Black Sea area; Team 2 Thomas, Thaddeus, and Simeon went to Parthia; Team 3 John and Philip went to Asia Minor. Some postulate that the disciples scattered when James was martyred and Peter left Jerusalem but that is HIGHLY disputed.

Back to Dr. Johnson:

Saul (later Paul) was a Pharisee and was convinced all commands of Torah were MANDATORY. 613 commandments. Not a burden, but a JOY! To be righteous, keep the commandments. Purification laws. He was FANATICALLY devoted to and a defender of Torah. The idea that Jesus (a chosen one or a messiah) could be hanged on a tree then resurrected was BLASPHEMY. Torah states: CURSED IS ANYONE WHO HANGS ON A TREE! (Deuteronomy 21:23) Worship of Jesus was a direct contradiction to Torah. As a Pharisee, these worshipers of Jesus were BLASPHEMOUS and deserve persecution. And he, Saul, was good at it. Jesus was a sinner. He hung on a tree because He was cursed by God. Jesus deserved his death. So did His followers. Wipe them out.

The conversion (resurrection) experience:

Acts and Paul differ on this account. In fact the 3 accounts in Acts all differ. (Acts 9, Acts 22, Acts 26) Of importance, Paul experienced the Lord. Paul saw Jesus AS THE RESURRECTED LORD. Paul is the only writer of the New Testament who states he SAW the resurrected Lord. (1 Corinthians 9:1b Have I not seen Jesus, our Lord?)

Paul did not leave Judaism and become a Christian. Paul was always a Jew (until perhaps his final few days). Paul never suggests he was unfaithful to God when he was a persecutor. He was blinded by the Law, and he did what the Law said he should have been doing.

Note the correlation - Paul was blinded by the Law, then he says he was blinded by God and when he was challenged by Jesus he saw the truth and then, when the scales fell away, could see the TRUTH IN JESUS. Paul met a power he did not recognize existed.

Source unknown: Why blindness? Acts 9:4 “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting ME?” Saul, later named Paul, was blind to the persecution he was inflicting on “me,” Jesus, a metaphor for “the people.” All people. Saul was healed not only from his physical blindness but also from his spiritual blindness. He could not see that the people he was persecuting were God’s people every bit as much as the Jews he was representing. In Galatians Paul stated God did not reveal His Son TO me, he revealed His Son IN me.

Source unknown: Follow this path to conversion. Is it not what we all go through?

1. Persecution of others: Paul, as a Jew, persecuted the new Christians. Though

he need not represent only the Jews. It could be any group of people who reject the Gospel.

2. Paul is “blinded” to the message. Paul cannot not see Jesus, the light. Paul needs help. He prays for an answer. He prays to be able to see the way. The “scales” on his eyes are taken away. Paul can see the truth. He gets the message. How long did it take??? In 3 days (always a significant number in resurrection, rebirth) Paul has been reborn into the faith in Jesus. Paul accomplishes in 3 days what we often need a lifetime to experience. In three days Jesus’ resurrection saved the world.

3. Just as Mary Magdalene responded to Jesus’ voice (she knew and trusted Jesus’ voice even though she did not recognize him), Paul also recognized Jesus’ voice: “Saul, why are you persecuting me?” “Who are you, Lord?” “I am Jesus whom you persecute.”

4. In those 3 days Saul is in “liminal space,” between two worlds, abstaining from food and water from the “old world,” and transitioning into the “new world” under Christ.

Discussion: Is it ironic that we talk about persecuting Christians? Over the years how often do Christians persecute others in return?

Looting Pagan Temples of their Gold, etc. Persecuting Jews. Persecuting Muslims. The Crusades. The Inquisition. Hitler. Christians love to bemoan how TODAY they are rejected and persecuted around the world. Do they not see their own judgment and condemnation of others?

Paul’s “experience” and what Torah taught did not mesh.

He had a choice - Torah or the new experience. He chose “the experience.” He chose Jesus, and he spent the rest of his life telling others they can have the same experience.

1. Paul focused primarily on Gentiles (a paradox since Paul is a Pharisaic Jew).

2. Paul traveled frequently. There are no 3 journeys, he is journeying all the time. (Lecturer Johnson’s opinion.)

3. Paul concentrated on urban centers to preach to the populace. Jesus was rural, Paul was urban.

4. Paul was not a loner. He had a team of males AND FEMALES. See APSE Article The Acts of Paul and Thecla Apostle Paul Articles page 3.

5. Paul was frequently imprisoned, twice for 2+ years.

Many parts are missing from Paul’s life. 8 years of his life are covered in Acts by a single sentence. (Acts 9:30 Perhaps the years 38 A.D. - 46 A.D. Was Paul cramming his lessons in scripture and the teachings of Jesus? Was he getting his story straight before he hit the masses with his message? My speculation.)

The letters: EPISTLES - our knowledge comes only as a “last resort.”

The epistles do not give a framework but give information on how Paul interacted with the communities he served. Dealing with churches was his most difficult challenge.

He loved personal visits, but when he couldn’t he sent delegates such as Timothy and Titus. As a last resort, he wrote letters. Epistles were the last choice, but ironically, that is what we have to count on for our knowledge. The epistles were complex, seriously written and composed, and perhaps edited by a team for completeness and exactness of message.

Lecture 4: Problems of Early Christianity

Some questions that seem simple, maybe even silly, that turn out to be pretty deep, complex, and important. Remember: This is a new religion introduced to a completely foreign culture.

Paul’s letters were read out loud and considered as though he was actually there. Paul uses cognitive dissonance: 2 thoughts - Time and Space

Time: At what time in history were his readers living? There is this world and the world to come. Jesus had been raised from the dead.

Their thoughts were still in the “old community.” If they were filled with God, why were they so powerless? If they were filled with the Holy Spirit, why was there still sin? If they had peace with God, why was there still conflict in the community? If they had been given life in God, why were people still dying?

But they were in the “new age.” What had changed as a result of the Resurrection?

1. Did Jesus’ resurrection only apply to Him? Nothing had changed. “We are in limbo. We will share in God’s victory in the future, but for now it is pretty much unchanged.”

- OR -

2. The changes were internal. The spirit had changed believers internally but had no effect on society.

- OR-

3. Christ’s resurrection did impact society but the full realization of victory DEPENDED ON THE LIVES OF PAUL’S READERS (Christians) and how they CREATE this utopian society, the new creation. HEAVEN ON EARTH.

The tension of what has been created and what is in the future. Christians: Who are they? Paul needed to identify the boundaries that defined a Christian: Christians were to be: Saints. Holy people. A people set apart. Different from the world.

How were these people were to be different from Jews and Greeks?

Jews were set apart by following “the Law.” Without using Jewish Law or a “new Law,” what “behavior” would define a Christian?

Galatians 3:28 Those baptized in Christ there is no Jew or Greek, male or female, slave or free. All differences were to be dissolved. That was the ideal. If the ideal was not reached, the differences were to at least be marginalized.

Christianity is a MULTICULTURAL PHENOMENON.

(Note: Keep this in mind when reading Paul’s epistles. He is trying to settle differences. Meld cultures. Was Paul misogynistic or trying to bring misogynistic Roman and Greek cultures into the Christian community? Get them in the fold, we will expand women’s rights later…)

Discussion: No longer just a Jewish religion - which raises the question: “Up until Jesus was “GOD” only the God for the chosen people, the Jews?” Does that bother anybody? What were other peoples supposed to do to honor the “one true God” before Jesus? Does this make other religions relevant?

See APSE Article: Is Jesus the Only Way to Heaven? Apostle Paul Articles page 5.

4 polarities need to be addressed:

1. Relating Christ and Torah: Is the Torah obsolete? Has God rejected his covenant with the Jews? Has God been UNFAITHFUL? Romans 9-11 Paul struggles with this.

How do we reconcile Jews and Gentiles? Purity laws? Do they eat together? This is a betrayal of Jews to Torah. Must circumcision be required? Can only MALES be full fledged citizens of the Christian community? (Females participated in Judaism by marrying a circumcised husband. Will it be the same in Christianity?)

2. Male vs. Female:

Caesar Augustus was basically a Puritan thinker. Augustus wrote the Augustan reforms of purity and marriage. Strict requirements on marriage and divorce.

Adultery was made a crime. Which was a problem since Augustus’ own daughter, Julia, was publicly promiscuous. Families were to be stable. Children were REQUIRED. Failure to have children carried a financial penalty. The “Law of 3 Sons” held those who produced 3 male offspring in high regard. Remember this law when we discuss the liability of a female baby. How many children could one afford before the 3 male offspring quota had been met? Were female babies “expendable?”

This morality of Caesar Augustus had substantially eroded through the years. Greed stayed the same, obviously. Caligula (37-41 A,D.), Claudius (41-54 A.D. when he was murdered by his own wife) and Nero (54-68 A.D. when he committed suicide) were Emperors during Paul’s ministry. Caligula and Nero were prime examples of moral perversion of Rome. Slavery and homosexual relations with young boys represented significant issues that Paul faced. Did Paul’s response to these issues affect how we address them throughout history and even today? See APSE Article: Facts About The Ancient Roman Empire and APSE Article: Rome’s Bloodiest Emperors and APSE Article: Caligula. Apostle Paul Articles pages 8, 12, and 14.

Cultural gender identity was very important. Men were the head of the household and spouses and children were to respect them. Liberal thinking of expanding women’s roles and education WERE SUPPRESSED. Women could learn to read and study philosophy - and by doing so they would learn how to keep house better. Gender differences MATTERED. Cults that pushed GENDER EQUALITY were being suppressed by the Roman Empire.

Discussion: Wouldn’t that have an effect on a new religion (CHRISTIANITY) that promoted Gender equality? A dangerous phenomenon. How much did this societal norm affect Paul’s positions and writing? How radical did Paul dare be? How much could he rock the boat without dooming his fledgling churches?

Discussion: Consider the irony. Christianity is losing favor today because of its misogyny and relegation of women to second-class citizenry by many denominations. Yet in Rome, Paul was considered almost RADICAL in promoting the status of women in the new Christian Faith.

See APSE Article: Evangelism and Apologetics Questions 13) What about misogyny? And 81) Are women second class citizens? Apostle Paul Articles page 19.

For example: Is Paul a misogynist by saying women were to be quiet in church or was he a revolutionary by allowing women in the church at all? Or was it a good try at compromise?

Romans 16 names Junia as a female apostle. Phoebe was a financial agent. Paul stated women could prophesy and pray out loud in the assembly. But if this affected the PATRIARCHAL structure of society, then Paul had a problem. Did Paul’s position change? So women can’t TEACH in the assembly. Teaching is a MALE responsibility, as the head of the household. So the role of women was oppressed again. A change of position to maintain peace?

In the Great Courses: The Apocryphal Jesus by David Brakke / Lecture on Thecla he reported women were converting to Christianity and becoming celibate to escape their expected role as wife/child producer, household manager, and housekeeper. Another possible reason for Roman society to reject this “new” religion.

See APSE Article: The Acts of Paul (and Thecla) and Shut Up Woman! Explaining Thecla.

Apostle Paul Articles page 3 and page 27.

Discussion: Women were required to have children. A family was honored - and a husband would certainly want that honor - if it produced 3 sons. Say a family had 5 girls, it must try for 8 children so they could produce the three boys? A woman was perpetually pregnant from age 12? 14? With what medical care? How many died in childbirth? How many died from raising this family? Or mental illness? Depression? Were women in Jesus’ and Paul’s time expendable? Are we trying to continue this practice today?

Discussion: If a woman had 3 daughters she MUST produce at least 3 more children - and hope they are BOYS. Genetic odds suggest a woman was required to bear 6 (articles say 7) children, probably more since 25% of children did not survive the first year of life. Maternal mortality in child bearing was 500 to 2000 deaths per 100,000 births. .5 to 2.0% Given 6 deliveries mothers had a 3 to 12% chance of dying during childbirth? Moms, Caesar thanks you for your service. National Geographic: In the Time of Jesus: “IF a girl survives birth, gets adequate nutrition, survives the birth of her children, and does not work too hard, she has a chance to live a fairly long life…” (Granted the math may be a bit fuzzy here, but don't let the math obscure the facts. Women dying from childbirth in the Roman Empire at the time of Jesus was a serious concern.)

3. Slave and free. Slaves were property. They had no personal rights. They could be killed for disobedience with no penalty. But Christianity put them on the same level with the master. Really? Brother and sister, ONE IN CHRIST. One in Christ while at the church, but they went home and back to slavery? Should this be?

Discussion: Ephesians 6:5-8 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not people, because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do, whether they are slave or free.

OUCH!!! Why did Paul write this? Serve from your heart the one who BEATS YOU? Was this on a sign hung in the barn of every plantation in good ol’ Dixie? Or was Paul saying: “Hang in there. Just a couple more days, two weeks at the most. Jesus is returning and it will be all over.”

4. A 4th polarity: Were there rich and poor within the Christian community? Christianity consisted of more than just the poor, women, or the oppressed. The Christian community was better described as a middle class group. (Note: In Paul’s Gentile world taxation was not as severe as in Israel. They did have a middle class.) Yet there were some wealthy and some truly poor. How should they get along?

Discussion: According to SOME historians the top 1% of Romans controlled only 16% of the wealth. In the United States the top 1% control 40% of the wealth. Unstated is what year this represents. It says this concentration of wealth was addressed by Julius Caesar, which puts it pre-Jesus. Was it high, then reduced, then high again? There is debate over whether this concentration of wealth led to massive growth of the economy(?). It has also been blamed for the downfall of the Roman Empire. Never mind Rome. WHAT ABOUT US??? Is concentration of wealth bad? Did it lead to the 1929 market crash? Are we headed there again? The end of the American Empire?

Discussion: Did concentration of wealth doom Viet Nam? Did we prop up a government that hoarded money and had no support from the rest of the country that lived in poverty? Will it doom other countries as well? I asked this of Jennifer Scuibba, author of 8 Billion and Counting. Was unequal distribution of wealth factored into her projection of population change? Wars from wealth inequality? Her response: “I don’t know, what do you think?” I didn’t know, I asked HER!!! She’s the expert! What do YOU think?

The gospels championed the poor and the oppressed. But the church, like society, depended on the wealthier members to survive. Those who provided the financial support EXPECTED TO HAVE AUTHORITY. They were PATRONS. Did they expect a return on their money?

Discussion: How do we feel about that? Do we like being told how to spend “our” money? Isn’t it supposed to be God’s money? Should wealthier or more generous givers have a bigger say in how the church (or Presbytery, or Synod, or whatever group) spends its money?

An example: 1 Corinthians 11 Addressing the Lord’s Supper (in Paul’s time it was a full meal, not just a wafer or cube of bread and a sip of wine or juice) some gorged while others went hungry. Were the rich to eat first and the poor get the scraps? Or perhaps nothing? Hey, we paid for it, we get to eat it. If there are no leftovers, well, you get what you paid for - NOTHING.

How does Paul respond?

1. Paul always put the communal over the individual.

2. Paul respected a plurality of practice and a diversity of perspective when fundamental principles (like circumcision) were not involved.

3. Paul called for moral boundaries rather than ritual (Laws of the Torah).

4. The pattern of moral behavior that Paul espoused was the “mind of Christ.”

5. To get from the mind of Christ to moral behavior REQUIRES THINKING.

From the beginning there was no “right answer.” They must be thought through - AND - were influenced by the society, morals, and traditions OF THE TIME.

Should we not do the same? Is it not what we are doing here with this Bible study?

Discussion: Do you believe that is how Paul has been studied and applied to the church and society? Are Paul’s statements hard and fast rules or up for discussion?

Discussion: Society has changed since the Greco-Roman society of the 1st century, where child mortality was 25% by age 6, 50% by age 12. Where an abscessed tooth was a death sentence. Do we still live according to the morals and traditions of that day? Should or must other countries live according to OUR morals and traditions? Are WE the chosen ones?

Who makes the final decision of RIGHT and WRONG? Does there always have to be one FINAL UNIVERSAL ANSWER?

An example: Look at Jamaica, “Mon.” A chatty taxi driver wants you to be saved, he has the drive from the airport to the hotel to accomplish his goal. Being Christian is vital in Jamaica. Then again, open marriage is the accepted norm. Don’t ask, don’t tell. Have fun, because I am gonna have fun myself - well, not BY myself, but with any partner I can find. He is saved, he wants you saved, and he also wants his slate of girlfriends saved as well as his wife. Is this fella a Christian or not? Who are we to judge?

Lecture 5: 1 and 2 Thessalonians

Thessalonians - the oldest written information of the early church. These books are mostly considered authentic, although some minor questions exist over parts of 2 Thessalonians. The timeline here is Paul’s second missionary journey. He is moving from Philippi to Thessalonica.

Paul had founded a house church in Phillipi whose leader was a wealthy woman, Lydia.

Acts 16:11-15. The significance of Lydia: Lydia - the “purple woman” presumably because she dealt in purple cloth. Presumably she was “independent” and had significant wealth - a businessWOMAN. (Not married? - Paul did baptize her and her whole household. Did that include a husband?) She is recognized as the first convert to Christianity in Europe. She provided hospitality to Paul and his associates in their travels at HER household. One would think if she was married it would have been HIS, or at a minimum THEIR household.

Acts 16: 16-24. Paul was arrested in Philippi when he healed a “magic woman.” Her “keepers” had lost their source of income. Paul and Silas were beaten and tossed into prison. Their chains fell loose with an earthquake but they did not try to escape. The guards asked for salvation and Paul and Silas were released - THEN informing their captors they were Roman citizens. A LESSON TO BE LEARNED FROM STUDYING PAUL. He was bringing a NEW RELIGION to these people which meant he was replacing something else. Those involved in “something else” were very likely to have some bad feelings about that.

Discussion: Should we expect any different when we evangelize to other nations? Missionaries being persecuted. Some Christians - the Baptists come to mind - love to mourn how Christians are the most persecuted people in the world.

Do we not react defensively when new religions move into the U.S.? Christian Nationalism has gained traction recently. The prevailing attitude is that in the U.S. we are Christian. It’s ok if we try to convert you to Christianity, but it’s not ok if you try to convert us to Islam, for example. Actually a very good example.

Consider new DENOMINATIONS of Christianity. Mormons. JWs. Accepted? Did Paul accept other interpretations of Christianity that differed from his?

Question: DO YOU THINK THEY TOLD PAUL “GO BACK TO WHERE YOU CAME FROM” AS THEY WERE RUNNING HIM OUT OF TOWN?

Paul then moved to Thessalonica and formed a church there. He again created a stir and had to be sent away. There was some overlap from the Books of Acts and Thessalonioans, yet also some differences. For example: Acts says the church was mostly Jewish and Thessalonians says it was Gentile. Example: 1:9 They turned from dead idols to the true God. That would be a reference to Gentiles.

And now a tough one: 1 Thessalonians 2:14-15 For you, brothers and sisters, became imitators of God’s churches in Judea, which are in Christ Jesus: You suffered from your own people (fellow tribespeople) the same things those churches suffered from the Jews who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and also drove us out. They displease God and are hostile to everyone.

Discussion: Is Paul saying: “The Jews killed Jesus?” Does Paul’s comment fuel and justify the years of persecution of the “Jesus-killers?” Or do we read this too fast and jump to a conclusion. Look again: The early Jewish Christian churches were persecuted by THOSE WHO KILLED JESUS. Who were THEY?

I believe it means the wealthy Sadducees and some Pharisees who were in cahoots with Pilate and the Roman Government. The leadership, along with Pilate, were responsible for crucifying Jesus. My opinion: To pin Jesus’ crucifixion on the entire Jewish people is just plain WRONG, but has been used politically and morally for years to unjustly persecute a Godly people.

Others disagree. Sometimes vehemently, Sometimes to advance their agenda. History is littered with examples. Not that the Jewish people didn’t use the same tactic when they had power and control.

Discussion: Remember who won the Super Bowl in 2024? Kansas City. KC Chiefs placekicker gave a graduation address to Benedictine College 2024, Harrison Butker, a devout Catholic, spouted some of the misogyny stuff we have been talking about: Women, congrats on graduation and all, nice awards, but we know you really can’t wait to start a home and having children. Don’t let your career get in the way! Chuckle-chuckle. Lost in that comment was this little ditty. Harrison also claimed that "Congress just passed a bill whereby stating something as basic as the Biblical teaching of who killed Jesus could land you in jail."

This is a reference to the Republican-led House of Representatives passing a bill (H.R. 6090 The Anti Semitism Awareness Act) that would threaten federal funding for colleges and universities that fail to restrict antisemitic speech. The controversial legislation was almost certainly designed to limit speech criticizing Israel, but it would also target "claims of Jews killing Jesus." LIKE IT SAYS HERE IN THIS COMMENT BY PAUL.

Some conservative lawmakers opposed the bill on this basis, arguing it would effectively outlaw the classic antisemitic belief that Jews killed Jesus. To be clear, though, the bill threatens university funding, not jail time for bigots - {Harrison was wrong here, the university was threatened, not the student.} It has not been voted on in the Senate.

(An aside: The bill was also opposed by the ACLU making it one of the few times the Far Right and the ACLU have agreed on anything, albeit for far different reasons - being able to blame Jews for killing Christ vs. protecting Free Speech.)

See APSE Article: Chiefs Kicker Harrison Butker. Apostle Paul Articles page 30.

We have agreed that 1 and 2 Thessalonians are authentic Pauline epistles. They follow Paul’s writing pattern.

1 and 2 Thessalonians do match up well but they deal with end times in a very different way. Also Paul was a bit rough in his treatment of the church. But the thought is that both Thessalonian letters are authentic.

1 Thessalonians - Paul worked up the church and scared the bejeezus out of the members as outlined below:

Paul told this audience to “BE HOLY,” be different, and he listed 3 characteristics they were to exhibit: 1) Faith (a personal response of trust and loyalty to another - GOD), 2) their hope (not for the future, but for the present - full of possibility), and 3) their love (a disposition of goodwill for another).

Aside: Reverend Lee Beckes tells a story about the song “They Will Know We Are Christians by Our Love.” He had just listened to an unnamed minister give a diatribe on his gay child - son? daughter? I don’t recall. The minister had just tossed the wayward child from the home with the words: “Come back when you come to your senses.” After his sermon this unnamed minister announced: Let us now close by singing “They will know we are Christians by our love.” Lee couldn’t sing it.

The church was to show their faith to other churches. Love, well God provides that. But Hope, they failed. They grieved over their loved ones. They doubted God could raise their dead loved ones.

As hey, we’re “waiting for Jesus” who would rescue them from their wrath. They worried that their relatives that had died before Jesus’ coming had lost out on God’s gift. An “eschatological crisis” had been created.

They were so emphasizing the “not yet” they forgot what had already happened. God raised Jesus, he can raise those already dead as well as those who still live. “Even the dead get to participate in God’s victory.” He got this from various eschatology in Judaism. The dead rise first, then we will rise to join them.

Do not underestimate the power of this eternal life in heaven message. It is meaningful to us. It was CERTAINLY meaningful to a people whose life challenges include 25% death by age 1, 50% death rate by age 12.

So yes, Paul said, Christ is coming; but he also cautioned them, this will all happen suddenly and WITHOUT WARNING. Echoing Jesus: No one knows the time nor the hour.

1 Thessalonians 5:2 For you yourselves are fully aware that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night.

1 Thessalonians 5:4 But you are not in darkness, brothers, for that day to surprise you like a thief.

You are not in darkness IF you are alert and pay attention. Be awake. Be sober. Paul is playing right into their anxieties. Jiminy, don’t you dare get drunk. Jesus might come while you are passed out in your drunkenness and you will miss your chance!

Aside: To be honest, I heard this as a youth myself in the 1960’s and 70’s. HOLY SMOKES!!! Do we even dare falling asleep??? What if one has a naughty dream? Don’t use a hammer. What if you hit your thumb at the wrong moment and Jesus catches you cussing up a blue streak! Plumbers would have NO chance of getting into heaven!

People bought it. They panicked. And it got worse:

Paul also compared the second coming to birth pangs and the unknown of when the “birth” will actually occur (1 Thessalonians 5:3). Pandora’s box was opened. We can predict the birth by associating the timing with the “birth pangs.” Events (pain, suffering, AFFLICTION - persecution) will give us some reference to when the birth (second coming) will happen.

As persecution of the church and its people increased, the closer the second coming approached.

Times were tough. Someone stood and said: “The day of the Lord is come!” PANIC. People bought it, so much so that they stopped working. They sold the house. They “dropped out.” The end is soon. They were dysfunctional.

Aside: I remember the day at Jefferson Elementary in the 1960’s. Some self-proclaimed guru assured us all the world was ending at 3:00 PM that day - I assume Eastern Standard Time. We asked our parents for all our allowance money in advance. We were skipping school and blowing all our money on ice cream sundaes. Don’r worry about the stomach ache, we were gonna die anyways. The answer was “NO.”

To recap: Paul is on his second journey. He’s getting his message out there. Was he a great speaker? A great communicator? Did he need edited? Were his letters better than his speeches? Was his audience not listening? Listening but not hearing? Hearing but not understanding? Regardless, Paul made some statements that created confusion if nothing else. Paul needed to reset this so he wrote 2 Thessalonians.

He offered another take: Enter the AntiChrist. Paul’s point: Local history is not world history. Don’t fret over this. It will be a COSMIC event, not a LOCAL event. Pay attention to your own lives. This is NOT a down time. This is a time to live. Pay attention to your own lives.

Discussion: Has Paul reinvented the second coming of Christ? Has the second coming been redefined? Or was Paul WRONG? Or at least lacking in clarity in his initial position of the second coming, and now has returned to the end times as described in Daniel and echoed in the yet to be written Book of Revelation? See APSE ARTICLE: The Antichrist. Apostle Paul Articles page 33.

(NOTE: Jesus never mentions the Antichrist in scripture.)

Paul said, to reinforce this: 2 Thessalonians 3:10 For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.”

Discussion: Oh boy. How many times has this verse been misused to persecute those who struggle to work or find work? This has NOTHING to do with lazy people. This is in reference to people who had quit their lives because they were being persecuted, which meant Jesus was coming SOON. Why work? Nevermind that Christ, himself, said we cannot use world events to predict the second coming of Jesus. Luke 17:20 The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed…

The Apostle Paul - Part 2

Return to Home

The Apostle Paul

Privacy Settings

Select all services

Website Translator