Book Excerpt: Paul–Call not Conversion

April 20th, 2013 Rich Brown Posted in blog | No Comments »

Here is Chapter 2 from What Was Paul Thinking? The book is available in both print and e-book editions from Amazon and Barnes& Noble online:

Who is this guy Paul? Was he a Jew or a Christian, loyal to Torah (Law) or to Christ, a believer in works or grace? There are some traditional ways to answer that:

• “He was the first great convert to Christianity from Judaism,” who has served as the pattern for Christian converts ever since.

• “He was Christianity’s first real theologian,” and as such he institutionalized the words of Jesus of Nazareth, which led to the creation of one of the world’s great religions.

• “His doctrine of justification by faith lays out the path of eternal salvation for all individuals who accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior.”

What-was-Paul-Thinking-beachmed-200x300Those and related statements are often made without realizing how they came into being through the lens of 2,000 years of religious, social, and biblical interpretation. While it is impossible to remove those filters entirely, a good starting point is to at least recognize that those filters have had an effect—good, bad, or somewhere in between.

Pick up a New Testament and it’s easy to conclude its contents were written in a roughly chronological order: First come the four Gospels, followed by the story of the emerging Christian community in the Acts of the Apostles (a continuation of Luke’s Gospel). Then comes a collection of letters, written under the names of the early apostles, concluding with the book generally referred to as Revelation, which is an apocalyptic writing filled with strange and complex imagery related to the end of time.

Paul is credited with thirteen of the letters (fourteen if the Letter to the Hebrews is included, although that is rarely done anymore). Bible scholars agree that Paul definitely wrote seven (Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon). Not that the others should be discounted. The Colossians letter is the subject of continuing dispute regarding its authorship, with Ephesians close behind. Fewer scholars believe the remaining letters (2 Thessalonians and the so-called Pastoral Epistles: 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus) were actually written by Paul, but more likely they were written within a few decades after his death by followers devoted to his teachings. Lessons 3 and 4 will look at those issues more closely.

Bible scholars do agree the Gospel accounts (and Acts) didn’t come first. Most likely they were written anywhere from one to three decades after Paul’s letters (which generally are dated somewhere in the period from 50 to 65 of the Common Era). The Gospel writers represent a later stage of development (after 70 CE) in the believing community (it would be incorrect to actually call it the Christian church at this point). Furthermore, the four Gospel writers aimed their accounts at different communities (Matthew’s has a definite Jewish/Hebrew perspective while Luke appears to be writing to Greeks and Romans, for example).

Even Acts, which includes our most familiar portrayals of how Saul of Tarsus became Apostle Paul, as well as detailing his missionary journeys, was written a decade or two after Paul’s letters. In fact, Luke may not even have known about Paul’s letters. One concern is why Acts includes multiple accounts of Saul/Paul’s remarkable encounter with the risen Christ on the road to Damascus while Paul hardly mentions it. When he does, briefly in Galatians, his account is somewhat at odds with Luke’s versions.

One place to begin is to recognize, as noted above, that there was no such thing as “The Christian Church” in the first century CE, at least in the sense there is today. The teachings of Jesus of Nazareth were spreading rapidly throughout the whole eastern Mediterranean area. At first all the followers of this new way were Jews. Jerusalem was the central hub where James (the brother of Jesus) and Peter gained prominence among what remained of Jesus’ inner core of disciples. At some point they became known as apostles. They had lived with and been instructed by their teacher, Jesus. Luke actually credits Peter (as recounted in Acts chapter 10) with the idea that the good news of Jesus Christ should be shared beyond Judaism with Gentiles.

Martin LutherApostle Paul has become larger than life. Even at the beginning of the twenty-first century many people, probably without even realizing it, see Paul through the 500-year-old eyes of the great Protestant reformers, especially Martin Luther. A man of his times, Luther was deeply introspective. He was wracked by an overwhelming sense of guilt and despair over humankind’s inability to find real forgiveness for its sinful nature.

Luther must be understood in light of the medieval Roman Catholic Church’s practice of requiring penance in the form of indulgences to satisfy God, particularly in regard to reducing time to be spent in purgatory. Indulgences could take several forms but what upset Luther the most was what he viewed as an abuse by the church’s hierarchy, beginning with the pope. The payment of monetary indulgences became a primary method of financing construction on the long-delayed St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome. Perhaps it should come as no surprise, then, that Luther’s rocky relationship with what he thought was an overly legalistic and corrupt church transferred over into how he came to understand Paul’s relationship with Judaism.

It’s worth noting that Luther was an Augustinian monk. Augustine is considered by some to be the first true “Western man.” What is meant by this is that before Augustine (he lived from 354 to 430 CE) people didn’t have the kind of well-developed “inner life” that we take for granted in our contemporary world. Augustine, by the way, was among the first to read without speaking out loud, something that is almost unimaginable today.

Although Augustine had been born to a Christian mother and reared in the church, he eventually discarded his childhood faith. During much of his young adult years he explored lots of different philosophies and followed multiple religious paths, all to no avail. One day, as he related the story in his autobiography, he heard a child singing outside his open window, “Pick it up and read….” Coincidentally what he had closest at hand to read was Paul’s Letter to the Romans, where he found an answer to his inner turmoil. That was the moment that led to his conversion to Christianity, and he eventually became a bishop and one of the most influential theologians of his day. In discovering and accepting Jesus Christ he was freed of his past burdens as a sinner.

When Luther read Paul’s Romans letter (much as Augustine had done centuries earlier) he homed in on the idea that humans are saved (or “justified,” to use the theological term, which in its most precise but grammatically awkward form means “to righteous” someone), not by human works (particularly in keeping the commands of the Law), but by the grace of God. This justification was made possible by Christ’s atoning sacrifice and available to all who are “in Christ” by faith. This discovery lifted Luther from utter despair. Quite literally, his religion underwent a dramatic change: the prototypical conversion experience. However, this kind of deep, penetrating soul-searching and conversion (meaningful as it was for Luther and his contemporaries) was not at all characteristic of the thinking of the earliest Christians and Hellenistic Jews in the first centuries after the time of Jesus. That brings us back to Paul.

Judaism was not simply Paul’s religion, in the way we think of the term. People back then had tribal or at most national deities with related cultic practices. Our modern concept of world religions was simply inconceivable. More than doctrines and cultic practices, Judaism was Paul’s way of life and worldview. It provided his core identity as part of God’s chosen people, Israel. After two millennia we may tend to view Paul as Christianity’s first great convert, perhaps even as the de facto founder of the Christian church as a non-Jewish religion. Certainly, within a century after Paul the church would be entirely devoid of Jews, so perhaps it is understandable that viewpoint became prominent.

But Paul left no evidence in his own writings that he saw himself as a convert. Instead he proudly wrote to the Philippian church: “[I was]…circumcised on the eighth day, a member of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew born of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless” (Philippians 3:5–6). Those are not the words of someone who has discarded his old religion, Judaism, to accept a new one, Christianity.

Red_Star_of_David.svgPaul’s identity was as a Jew. It was his mission, however, that called him away from Judaism to be an apostle to the Gentiles. All the other apostles had personally known Jesus of Nazareth, who had called them from their individual lives to follow him. Paul makes it clear in both Galatians and Romans that his authority derived not from men or councils:

Paul an apostle—sent neither by human commission nor from human authorities, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead—all and the members of God’s family who are with me, to the churches of Galatia…. For I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel that was proclaimed by me is not of human origin; for I did not receive it from a human source, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ. —Galatians 1:1–2; 11-12

Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures, the gospel concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh and was declared to be Son of God with power according to the spirit of holiness by resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord, through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles for the sake of his name, including yourselves who are called to belong to Jesus Christ, to all God’s beloved in Rome, who are called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. —Romans 1:1–7

It was the risen Lord who met Paul (originally known as Saul of Tarsus) in a dramatic event on the road to Damascus one day. We tend to think of that extraordinary experience as Paul’s conversion, and by inference, his formal rejection of his Jewish past. A closer look at accounts of that experience (in Paul’s words found in Galatians 1:13–16 and by the writer of Acts in 9:1–19, 22:6–16, and 26:12–18) instead shows a strong resemblance to the divine calling of Old Testament prophets, particularly Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel.

Look at the way those ancient prophets received their callings: chosen by God even before birth (Isaiah 49:1), surrounded by light as the Lord spoke (Ezekiel 1:28), and given a specific commission (Jeremiah 1:7). Saul/Paul’s experience places him clearly within this prophetic tradition. Furthermore, what Paul is to accomplish for the Gentiles is a reflection of the prophecies that the eyes of the blind shall be opened and that salvation will come:

…to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in [Christ]. —Acts 26:18

Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf unstopped. —Isaiah 35:5

I have given you as a covenant to the people, a light to the nations, to open the eyes that are blind, to bring out the prisoners from the dungeon, from the prison those who sit in darkness…. I will lead the blind by a road they do not know, by paths they have not known I will guide them. —Isaiah 42: 7, 16

The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord has anointed me; he has sent me to bring good news to the oppressed, to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and release to the prisoners. —Isaiah 61:1

In recent years some scholars have begun to understand Paul in yet another way. They view Paul, not only in light of Old Testament prophets such as Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, but as a “new Abraham,” a model for Paul’s own identity.

Both men were called by God to a purpose benefiting them but also the rest of humanity. In Abraham’s case, the world would be blessed through his descendents. For Paul, the Gentiles (with that term understood in the broadest ways possible: Greeks and barbarians, meaning everybody in the world besides Jews) would discover that God has offered them the blessings of being part of God’s covenant community.

Just as Abraham was alienated from his homeland (Ur of the Chaldees), Paul was sent beyond his faith community by birth (Judaism) to proclaim the good news of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles (including his dream of eventually extending his missionary efforts to the so-called barbarians outside the Greek/Roman sphere). Finally, both Abraham and Paul became travelers among far-flung nations and ethnic communities.

Curiously, Paul devoted scant attention to his extraordinary experience on the road to Damascus. Meanwhile, Luke offered multiple instances of Paul sharing this “testimony” with others on his missionary journeys (each time with someone associated with Rome). All other things being equal, historians and biblical scholars tend to give greater credence to an individual’s own words over those of someone else writing about him or her, especially if there’s a significant lapse of time between the two sets of writings. As will be explored later on, most likely Luke had his own agenda at work in promoting the conversion accounts.

The experience on the Damascus Road was simply the opening act in a long process of commissioning him as apostle to the Gentiles. Scriptural accounts show that after spending a short time in Damascus (instructed by Ananias) Paul briefly returned to Jerusalem before heading off to “the wilderness” for several years of spiritual preparation. Once again, note the similarity to the way Old Testament prophets spent time in the wilderness preparing for their mission. The same is true, of course, for both Jesus and John the Baptist.

It is often assumed, as well, that the spectacular Damascus Road experience was also the moment Saul changed his name to Paul. Paul, unfortunately, never gives us a clue about this issue in his letters. But Luke does, although indirectly. He uses the name Saul exclusively up to chapter 13, where the expression “Saul, also known as Paul” is used in verse 9. From that moment on the apostle is referred to only as Paul.

So what’s going on in chapter 13? Saul was on the island of Cyprus, along with his traveling companions Barnabas and John. While they were there a magician (described as a “Jewish false prophet”) attempted to turn the Roman proconsul Sergius Paulus against Saul and his teachings about Jesus Christ. When “Saul, also known as Paul” blinded the magician by the power of the Holy Spirit, the proconsul was “astonished at the teaching about the Lord” and believed. Afterward Paul and his companions set sail for Perga, where John left them and returned to Jerusalem. Paul and Barnabas headed for Antioch.

The symbolism here is important: Instead of returning to Jerusalem and dealing once again with leaders of the “Jewish Christian” community, Paul began to turn his attention away from Jerusalem and toward his ultimate goal of reaching Rome and, he hoped, to the barbarians beyond (beginning with what we know as Spain). His acceptance of a mission to take the good news of Christ to the Gentiles was now complete.

Print Friendly
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

The Future Is What You Make It

March 31st, 2012 Rich Brown Posted in blog, resurrection, writing | 1 Comment »

Recently my wife and I had a nine-year-old boy staying with us for a week. Once he discovered my DVDs of the Back to the Future trilogy, he begged to watch them. I feigned reluctance at first, and then on three successive days we sat down to watch them together.

I didn’t tell him, though, just how important those movies have been to me and, in fact, that they changed the future course of my life. I’ll save that for when he’s a bit older. As odd as this probably sounds, Back to the Future helps explain why I’ve spent most of my adult life as an editor and writer.


In early summer 1985 I was working a series of temp jobs, after abruptly and unexpectedly leaving my previous job selling insurance. With the perspective of time, I now view that job loss as an appropriate career change. Even back then I knew I had no passion whatsoever for insurance sales, but I had gotten into that a few years previous at the urging of my parents. They wanted to retire from their suburban insurance agency and somehow managed to persuade the company to hand over the agency to me. That’s probably more than needs to be said about all that, so I’ll move on to more important aspects of this story.

With an undergraduate degree in journalism, four years working as a newspaper reporter, and two years of seminary training I knew, deep down within me, my real passion would somehow combine those three areas into a useful and productive career. I wasn’t quite sure what that would be, however. At the same time I looked honestly at my personal/family situation: my wife and I had been married six years and we were blessed with a three-year-old son and a three-month-old daughter. In June 1985, as much because of the oppressive Missouri summer weather as our bleak financial situation, we agreed she should take the kids for an extended visit to her family in Michigan.

Coincidentally, that was when the movie Back to the Future (what came to be known as Part 1) opened in movie theaters. I’ve always been something of a sci-fi fan, so I was eagerly looking forward to seeing it. And so, after my temp job one day (setting up tents and other supplies for parties–that’s a whole other blog posting) I eased into one of the multiplex theaters at Crown Center in Kansas City.
Read the rest of this entry »

Print Friendly
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

What Was Paul Thinking? E-book Launched

January 26th, 2011 Rich Brown Posted in blog | No Comments »

Apparently not everybody is as Old School as I am when it comes to owning books. I happen to like the feel of a printed book in my hands. But then, I’ve been a book editor since Reagan was in the White House. I’m not an idiot or a hopeless geezer, though.

Amazon Kindle 3

More e-books were sold last year in the United States than hardcover books (paperbacks are still ahead in sales, I have to note). And so I can see the handwriting on the wall–or on the LCD or E-ink screens, I suppose.

I’m pleased to announce that my book, What Was Paul Thinking? is now available as an e-book, through the two largest online booksellers: Amazon and Barnes & Noble. Exactly same text as the print book, just a different way to present it. As the folks at Amazon point out on their site, the downloaded e-book can easily be transferred by Whispersync to a number of other devices (iPad, iPhone, Android, Blackberry, PC, and Mac).

Because no trees had to be harmed, ink mixed, or bindery glue used in the making of the e-book, it stands to reason the list price should be lower than the paperback, as well ($7.99 on both sites, compared to $12.50 for the paperback).

Still, I’m confident there’s other book lovers out there who share my personal preference for holding a bound, paper-filled book in hand. So rest assured, the print edition will still be available for a long time to come.

You can find both paper and e-book editions available on the same page at each online site: Amazon here and Barnes & Noble here.

[Update 1/28/2011: In today's USA Today newspaper, Amazon reports that with its 4th quarter 2010, sales of its Kindle e-books have now surpassed paperback books as well as hardbacks.]


Print Friendly
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

New Review of What Was Paul Thinking? now up on “The Paul Page”

October 30th, 2010 Rich Brown Posted in blog | No Comments »

A review of What Was Paul Thinking? has been posted on The Paul Page, which serves as something of a clearinghouse for all things “New Perspective.”

The review was written by the creator and administrator of The Paul Page, Mark Mattison, and can be accessed here.

I have now added a response to the review. Just click on the link above, then click on comments.

Print Friendly
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Book Excerpt from What Was Paul Thinking?

August 17th, 2010 Rich Brown Posted in blog | 1 Comment »

My new book, released at the beginning of summer by Isaac’s Press, is available from Amazon (US here; Canada here; UK here). Also at Barnes & Noble online.

There are eight lessons, each suitable for use in one or more class sessions (with discussion questions included).

A preview of what’s in the book, along with comments by numerous reviewers (both inside and outside Community of Christ), can be found here.

A review by former Kansas City Star religion writer Bill Tammeus appeared in early July on his influential “Faith Matters” blog.

Here is the complete introduction as it appears in the book.

Introduction

People tend to either love Paul or hate him. Even after two thousand years he’s a polarizing figure. There’s something in his writings that endears or offends readers—and it’s possible to love him some of the time and despise him at others, depending on the topic under consideration.

The familiar and traditional approach to Paul credits him with co-founding the Christian church along with Jesus Christ. Today this thoroughly Gentile religion is widely considered not only separate from Judaism but, in fact, supersedes it as God’s new covenant people. Meanwhile, when many Jews revisit two thousand years of Christian anti-Semitism they follow the trail directly to Paul.

Feminists home in on the parts of his letters that offer guidelines for the place of women in the church (most notably, being subservient to men and remaining silent in classes and worship). And yet, Paul’s Romans letter concludes with specific reference to two women (Junia and Phoebe) identified respectively as an apostle and a deacon. Gay-rights opponents and proponents argue over other passages and debate just what they meant in the culture of the first century of the Common Era—and exactly what that means in the twenty-first.

So, who’s right and who’s wrong?
Read the rest of this entry »

Print Friendly
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

New Study Text: Now Available!

May 19th, 2010 Rich Brown Posted in blog | 8 Comments »

What Was Paul Thinking?

Introducing the “New Perspective”

My new book, What Was Paul Thinking? (the first book release of Isaac’s Press), is now available on Amazon.com. It’s also available on Amazon.uk.

The eight-lesson text will be ideal for use in Sunday school classes, small group situations, and individual study. For a little preview of what’s covered (and what a few early reviewers already have to say about it) go here.

Here’s an excerpt of what one respected Pauline scholar has to say:

“Richard Brown seeks to help the contemporary Christian understand shifting ideas in the study of Paul that have arisen in the past four decades but still have not become widely known outside of scholarly circles or seminary classrooms. This is no simple task, not least because of the enormous cultural gaps between the concerns of Paul and his audiences and those of our own times…. I am confident Brown’s teacher, Lloyd Gaston–may his memory be for a blessing–would have been pleased with his student’s effort to popularize current trends in the development of these ideas and some of their implications for Christian readers of Paul today.”

Mark D. Nanos, Ph.D. (University of St. Andrews, Scotland), Rockhurst University
Author of The Mystery of Romans: The Jewish Context of Paul’s Letter (Fortress, 1996; winner of The 1996 National Jewish Book Award in Jewish-Christian Relations), and The Irony of Galatians: Paul’s Letter in First-Century Context (Fortress, 2002).

And from the dean of Community of Christ Seminary:

“I thought I knew Paul well, but Richard Brown’s very readable study gave me many startling new insights, especially about Paul’s Jewishness and his desire to include all people in loving community. He does a great job of presenting the findings of recent research and their implications for contemporary Christian practice. I highly recommend use of this excellent resource in adult study classes everywhere. It will deepen people’s engagement with the Bible.”

Don H. Compier, Ph.D. (Emery University), dean
Community of Christ Seminary
Graceland University

And from a social-justice perspective:

“Whether you are annoyed or satisfied by traditional views on Paul, prepare yourself for a highly stimulating read! No one should use or study Paul without engaging in the ‘New Perspective on Paul’ – and Rich Brown does a superb job of outlining its basic tenets. As someone who at best would only cherry-pick Paul’s writings, I am finding I have to reconsider the entire enterprise of Paul’s central aims. I was also glad to see Rich tackle the thorny issues of the place in society of women and homosexuals. In the Christian dialogue on these topics, Paul’s writings sometimes form central anchors and Rich shows how ill-grounded these are. Finally, while the book doesn’t explicitly probe this, I found that the New Perspective provides more solid footing for Christian-Jewish relations. Overall, a very worthy read!”

Rod Downing
Vancouver, B.C., Canada
International Human Rights Award recipient (2007)
Community of Christ

Now that Amazon and Amazon-UK have What Was Paul Thinking? I’ll be adding more updates, features, reviews, and excerpts as they are received.

Cover photo by Nona Cady

Print Friendly
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Thank You, Dialogue

April 17th, 2010 Rich Brown Posted in blog | 4 Comments »

Recently, the editors of Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, opened their online archives to permit free viewing of Volumes 1 through 37 (Spring 1966 through Winter 2008). That’s an amazing treasure trove of articles related to “all things latter-day saint.”

If you’ve ever read an article in Dialogue and wished you’d saved a copy, well, here’s a chance to at least read it again. (It appears to be impossible to print the article as it appears on the screen, however, although copies can be obtained for a small fee.)

Of course, I bring this up for my own purely selfish reasons. The Spring 1991 issue (Vol. 24, no. 1) included an essay of mine, “The Temple in Zion: A Reorganized Perspective on a Latter Day Saint Institution.” Back then the Independence Temple was rising from what had been a parking lot just a few months before. I attempted an explanation to LDS readers as to why in the world we were building a temple without an oxen-supported baptismal font in the basement or any of the other typical features of modern LDS temples.

Reading now almost 20 years later, I am Read the rest of this entry »

Print Friendly
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Apostle Paul Thought Everybody Was Straight

April 10th, 2010 Rich Brown Posted in blog | No Comments »

Theologian Walter Wink put it this way in his excellent essay, “Homosexuality and the Bible.”

“He [Paul] seemed to assume that those whom he condemned were heterosexuals who were acting contrary to nature, ‘leaving,’ ‘giving up,’ or ‘exchanging’ their regular sexual orientation for that which was foreign to them. Paul knew nothing of the modern psychosexual understanding of homosexuals as persons whose orientation is fixed early in life, or perhaps even genetically in some cases. For such persons, having heterosexual relations would be acting contrary to nature, ‘leaving,’ ‘giving up,’ or ‘exchanging’ their natural sexual orientation for one that was unnatural to them. In other words, Paul really thought that those whose behavior he condemned were ‘straight,’ and that they were behaving in ways that were unnatural to them. Paul believed that everyone was straight. He had no concept of homosexual orientation. The idea was not available in his world.”

Wink goes on to say that the relationships Paul describes are “heavy with lust; they are not relationships between consenting adults who are committed to each other as faithfully and with as much integrity as any heterosexual couple. That was something Paul simply could not envision.” The crux of the matter, Wink explains, is simply this:

“…the Bible has no sexual ethic. There is no biblical sex ethic. Instead, it exhibits a variety of sexual mores, some of which changed over the thousand year span of biblical history. Mores are unreflective customs accepted by a given community. Many of the practices that the Bible prohibits, we allow, and many that it allows, we prohibit. The Bible knows only a love ethic, which is constantly being brought to bear on whatever sexual mores are dominant in any given country, or culture, or period.”
Read the rest of this entry »

Print Friendly
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

What Would the Apostle Paul Say Right Now to the Community of Christ?

April 3rd, 2010 Rich Brown Posted in blog | 1 Comment »

The letters attributed to Apostle Paul offer particular guidance to Community of Christ in its current struggles related to baptism and human sexuality. Of course, they need to be considered along with 2,000 years of Christian history and doctrinal development, almost two centuries of the same in Joseph Smith Jr.’s Restoration movement, and 150 years of the Reorganization.

Let’s begin with baptism. One basic statement stands out in the seven letters just about everybody agrees were actually written by Paul (Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Philippians, Galatians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon):

“Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus are baptized into his death? Therefore we have been buried with him by baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. We know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin. For whoever has died is freed from sin. But if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him.” –Romans 6:3-8 NRSV

Clearly Paul positions the act of baptism as participation with Christ in being raised from “death” to “life.” Thus believers experience a symbolic death to the power of Sin and a rising to new life. Note what’s not in that passage: the idea that baptism washes away sins (meaning individual transgressions), the ministerial authority of the person administering baptism, the particular method of baptizing, any connection with an institutional church, and baptism’s relationship with confirmation.

Does that mean none of these other areas are important or connected somehow with baptism? No, it just points out that (1) Paul’s theological understanding of baptism was focused on participation with Christ and (2) he wrote his letters before the believing community had begun to institutionalize its practices. The second point shouldn’t be surprising, considering Paul’s belief that Christ’s return was imminent. If anything, it might raise a question as to whether Paul even felt the need for an organized institution.
Read the rest of this entry »

Print Friendly
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

The “Seven Year” Mystery

February 27th, 2010 Rich Brown Posted in blog | 3 Comments »

First of all, I’m delighted the Herald will be getting a complete redesign effective with the April issue, as touted in this news release on the Community of Christ Web site. It’s something that Jim Hannah (my immediate predecessor as Herald editor) and I, along with graphic-arts director Jack Martin, pushed for year after year without success. But I can’t help but be curious regarding the lead sentence in the statement:

“For more than 157 years, the Herald has been sharing stories that emphasize the church’s mission and message.”
Read the rest of this entry »

Print Friendly
AddThis Social Bookmark Button