Faith Venture

As a university student in the late 60s, I bought the common interpretation of Paul promoting male domination over female and also reading theologian interpreters such as John Calhoun in the 18^th/19^th Century about how races other than whites were inferior therefore slavery was not only justified but essential for well being.

Then I actually read what he wrote. Not what one theologian or politician said, but actually to read the text. Studying literature at university should have taught me how to read entire passages in order to glean meaning.

That was even before I carefully read NT Wright’s 1,700-page study Paul and the Faithfulness of God. 

For example, a favorite verse pulled from context is used to say Paul called for men to rule the wife and family. But reading the entire paragraph (which you must do to understand anything), a careful reader approaching without preconceived philosophy seeking justification, sees that Paul is calling for mutual submission. Doesn’t that sound a lot like Jesus?

Another time the subject of a passage talking about Greek homosexuality is passion. It’s part of a passage condemning all sexual passion. (People speculate whether he had a wife. I think he didn’t. For one, he was never home. For another, he seemed to have a dim view of marriage, suggesting we’d all be better off single. I bet I’ve given my wife reason to wonder about that.)

I don’t necessarily agree with everything Paul wrote. I have many questions. But we should be fair enough to at least read the entire context before condemning.

Paul’s letter to the Jesus-followers in Rome (Romans) is often as feared for study as is John’s Revelation. Scholars have written volumes probing into Paul’s supposed deep theology presented in that brief document.

I thought, why not apply the practice of Beginner’s Mind to the study of that letter?

Beginner’s mind—just experience the sound, sight, thought as new. Without labeling. No knowing, explaining, judging. You are always new. Always beginners not knowing what will happen in the next moment.

First century practice of sending these letters reflected the lack of reading ability on the part of many recipients. A courier would bring a document to the little ekklesia (gathering). The appointed reader would read the document aloud to the gathering. The entire document. Not just clips. 

I sat and read the letter straight through. No breaks. Just as if I had been sitting in that ekklesia. Beginner’s mind—no preconceived thoughts, no theology, no arguing.

Then I read a bit of background.

This totally changed my understanding—and how I teach it.

What came clearly to me was this was an essay on spiritual formation. Spiritual formation involves the journey of living with-God in the Kingdom of Heaven.

The meat of the letter begins with awareness of where we are—people not living a fruitful life in the spirit. Paul must address the differences of Jews and Gentiles (non-Jews). He does this through discussion of the law. Can we move to the next stage by following the law? Well, maybe, but it’s exceedingly difficult.

So he discusses faith. Abraham, the first Jew, was reckoned right with God through faith and not law (which hadn’t come, yet).

Paul leads us from faith to grace (you cannot have a letter about Jesus without discussing him).

Paul did not end the letter with the discussion of “being saved by grace through faith” as many do today. He answers the “then what” question. He adds chapters 11-15 which describe our lives as lived with grace.

I think that is the point. Faith is essential. Living life in the spirit is the necessary next step. After all, James, the brother of Jesus, told us that faith without doing something with it is dead.

Oh, and studying the final chapter is also instructive as he describes the ekklesia as a community of women (listed first), men, slaves, free people. Everyone welcome. How is your ekklesia (church) doing in that regard?

We worked off and on for a week. We looked for a small feature or shape or subtle change in color. The pieces covered most of our dining room table.

Of course, the wife and I were putting together a jigsaw puzzle. The motif of this series of puzzles concerns murder mysteries. This one was a Sherlock Holmes story. You read the story. It ends just before the detective solves the mystery. You solve the mystery which tells you the scene of which the puzzle is a picture. There is no picture to guide you. You figure it out as you go.

Now it’s complete. Seeing the complete picture brings all the elements together. Seeing the whole, you almost forget all the little parts.

Studying a difficult text is a similar endeavor.

I read the words of the Apostle Paul, for example, for years. Words. Sentences. Even paragraphs (in English, since there was not such a thing in Greek). 

Then I read 1,800 pages of scholarly research getting into the debate among scholars of the meanings of Greek words and themes. Somehow the scholar was one of those writers who could go from the detail to the theme.

What a difference in interpretation when you begin to see the whole picture and then go back to the parts finding where they each fit in the big picture.

We call it getting lost in the weeds. You must get out of the weeds to see the entire landscape. Same with study. Don’t get lost in the weeds. You’ll lose your way and miss the picture.