Apostle Paul's Suffering and Our Christian Lives Now

Paul's Jail Cell in Philippi

Tonight we're reading in 2nd Corinthians, where the Apostle Paul is taking some pretenders to task. Some preachers and self described apostles have moved in on the church he had founded, and were teaching lies for personal  profit and gain. Paul is reduced to exposing them by defending himself, the founder of the church. During the nearly three thousand miles of travel, mostly walking, and a lot of time on dangerous boats in dangerous waters, he suffered much.

While he was pushing back against these 'false apostles' he sums up his suffering. All what he went through to bring God's truth into pagan society, into Jewish culture and belief, is spread through much of the New Testament, so it's a bit diluted.  It's shocking to imagine the sacrifice, agony and pain of this magnitude when condensed like he does here.  

Take a listen:

Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they the seed of Abraham? So am I.  Are they ministers of Christ?—I speak as a fool—I am more: in labors more abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequently, in deaths often.  From the Jews five times I received forty stripes minus one.  Three times I was beaten with rods; once I was stoned; three times I was shipwrecked; a night and a day I have been in the deep;  in journeys often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils of my own countrymen, in perils of the Gentiles, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren;  in weariness and toil, in sleeplessness often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness—  besides the other things, what comes upon me daily: my deep concern for all the churches. Who is weak, and I am not weak? Who is made to stumble, and I do not burn with indignation?

 Beaten with rods, stoned and left for dead. The forty minus one lashings was was to avoid breaking the law's limitation of forty lashes. Five times he received this. What scaring his body had to have been covered with. I think of Christ's suffering, to absolve us of our sins, followed by Paul's sacrifice and suffering to lay the foundation of our Church.

We in turn live in luxury, and scarcely speak of what we believe, and know to be true. We personally are diminished by our lack, our church is diminished, those we could reach out and touch are diminished, our neighborhoods are diminished, our loved ones diminished, and it keeps going until our nation is diminished, and our world is diminished.

To have just a portion of Paul's passion for the Good News, for love of God, to so dedicate all my heart and all my soul, all my mind to Him. I'm so stressed and tired from work at the end of the day I just want to withdraw and be done; but so was Paul making tents and running his business. Yet he made the time, had the passion to speak, teach and pray. If we all could do a just a little more, just 2% a day more, loving God 2% more, loving others 2% more, praying just 2% more than the day before.

I pray for myself the discipline to do this, and pray for other Christians to speak their faith in public a little more, reach out a little more, love God a little more, be Christlike a little more, pray a little more. When we do it we don't get 39 lashes, stoned, beaten with rods, shipwrecked or imprisoned. It's got to be a heck of a lot easier than what Paul went through.

On Submission

Apostle Paul Writing Epistles

Byron York: “In 2006, when you were running for Congress, you described a moment in your life when your husband said you should study for a degree in tax law. You said you hated the idea. And then you explained, “But the Lord said, ‘Be submissive. Wives, you are to be submissive to your husbands.’ ”

“As president, would you be submissive to your husband?”

Bachman: “Marcus and I will be married for 33 years this September 10th. I’m in love with him. I’m so proud of him. And both he and I — what submission means to us, if that’s what your question is, it means respect.

“I respect my husband. He’s a wonderful, godly man, and a great father. And he respects me as his wife.”

“Submission” is seriously misunderstood and misapplied word; one of those words that has transformed away from its original meaning. It’s important to know the source of ideas and words, especially in the case of Bryon York’s question.

Most think of submission as being exploited or dominated or manipulated, that it’s not voluntary. The word derives from the Greek hupotasso “to submit”, and regards military structure. The idea in scripture, which York and most others seem not to understand, has an entirely different meaning from their modern belief system.

Matthew 8:5-10 Now when Jesus had entered Capernaum, a centurion came to Him, pleading with Him, saying, “Lord, my servant is lying at home paralyzed, dreadfully tormented.”  And Jesus said to him, “I will come and heal him.”  The centurion answered and said, “Lord, I am not worthy that You should come under my roof. But only speak a word, and my servant will be healed. For I also am a man under authority, having soldiers under me. And I say to this one, ‘Go,’ and he goes; and to another, ‘Come,’ and he comes; and to my servant, ‘Do this,’ and he does it.” When Jesus heard it, He marveled, and said to those who followed, “Assuredly, I say to you, I have not found such great faith, not even in Israel!

We live in a hierarchical universe, like it or not. The centurion speaks of being under authority, and he willingly submits to that authority. He gives orders based on that authority. His subordinates willingly obey that authority. When this happens everyone benefits. The mission gets accomplished. The goal is reached. There’s purpose to the group.

Would York have a job writing for the various organizations he does if he didn’t submit to the rules, the authority, of those organizations? I don’t know if York has children, but if he, or anyone does, I would hope he expects submission of them to him. If he’s married I would hope his wife listens to his suggestions and ideas and vice versa. Oversimplified, but to the point, everyone has a boss. You don’t have to submit, you can’t be forced. If one is forced, that not submission, that’s oppression or slavery.

The question York asked comes from the misunderstood and misapplied passage in Corinthians 11:2-16  

“Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you. But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head. But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved. For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. For man is not from woman, but woman from man. Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man. For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. Nevertheless, neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in the Lord. For as woman came from man, even so man also comes through woman; but all things are from God.
Judge among yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him? But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her[a] for a covering. But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God.”

The word “head” in various forms is used nine times in Scripture, mostly having to do with the physical head. There’s a lot more to this, but the veil for women Paul wanted used in church was egalitarian in nature. “To get married” and “to veil” were the same word. If a woman was veiled she could also be a widow. Women in the upper classes had their hair styled, which the lower classes and slaves couldn’t afford. Paul saying that all women should be veiled in church was for the purpose of eliminating class distinction.

Paul talking here of a man not being independent of a woman or a woman independent of a man is really radical, because in those times there was no equality between the sexes. The veil is a “symbol of authority on her head”. Equality in a public place, never before even contemplated. Paul wants this egalitarianism in marriage too, going back to Genesis that married couples become one flesh. Some have even suggested that having sex makes the couple one flesh; which is why ‘friend with benefits’ can’t work.

Paul also creates another radical idea; about divorce. The word at the time meant “to throw out”. It was a one way ticket; the man could just toss his wife out on the street with no means of support and have no rights to any of his property; there was no concept of shared property.  Paul says even this, divorce, should be made equal; again a radical idea since there was no such thing in the relationships between men and women, even in marriage. Paul said divorce can be not only equally applied, but can be based on spirituality:

“Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord: A wife is not to depart from her husband. But even if she does depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband. And a husband is not to divorce his wife.
But to the rest I, not the Lord, say: If any brother has a wife who does not believe, and she is willing to live with him, let him not divorce her. And a woman who has a husband who does not believe, if he is willing to live with her, let her not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband; otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are holy. But if the unbeliever departs, let him depart; a brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases. But God has called us to peace. For how do you know, O wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, O husband, whether you will save your wife?” Corinthians 7:10-16

Paul in his letters, advocated more equality between men and women, both in public and in marriage, not less. In polytheistic pagan times women were for sex and breeding, to be tossed out, discarded, at the whim of the man.

Before people like York and others venture into the realm of using religion, and especially Christianity, to insult and demean, perhaps they should know a little bit about what they’re talking about.  

Leslie Bennetts, a contributing editor at Vanity Fair magazine and author of the book The Feminine Mistake: Are We Giving Up Too Much?

"A woman who pursues an entire career she hates the idea of, just because her husband told her to, is not a woman who should be occupying the Oval Office--or anything remotely near it."

"Given the insistence of Christian theology on male supremacy, female candidates who put that religion front and center in their campaigns should be required to explain what that means in terms of how they would govern, if elected."

Bennetts obviously knows nothing of Christian Theology or History. If she did, she wouldn’t make such an ignorant statement. Anti Christian bigotry is to be expected of people like York and Bennetts, though I’m always amazed at the misogyny of Leftist women.  

When Sarah Palin said she read C S Lewis, that he was one of her favorite writers, some commentators went off on how she read children’s books, implying that was the limit of her intellectual growth. York, Chris Wallace, and others that say the submission question was valid, wallow in similar ignorance.  

Apostle Paul: His Life and Writings From an Ancient, Not Modern Perspective

The writings of the Apostle Paul are the dividing point between the pagan world and the modern world. I have met many saying the pagan world is more desirable than the modern western world. These same people claim to be about equality, anti-slavery, women’s freedom, and a whole host of other behaviors they hold dear.

None of those things existed in the pagan world. It was a brutal world of slavery, pedophilia, rape as acceptable behavior, no romantic love, no individual liberty for the common man, and women’s only purpose was sexual gratification and to have babies. The babies had to be healthy, and of the gender desired, or were left outside the city to die.

In a book by Sarah Ruden, Paul Among the People, The Apostle Reinterpreted and Reimagined in His Own Time, Ruden uses the literature of the time to recreate the world that existed at the time he wrote. I had, like many Christians, some problems with some things he wrote, especially about homosexuality, women, and marriage. I came away with a much better understanding of the times and his writing.

Our view of history is usually tempocentric, looking back in time through our modern sensibilities.

When Paul was writing about homosexuality, he was writing about something quite different from the consensual sex we think of now. To the ancient mind, there really was no identification of homosexual persons, and what Paul was addressing was heterosexual persons engaging in homosexual sex. Most of the world’s population were slaves, and what Paul saw happening were men engaging in sex with little boys. Ruden, who reads and translates the ancient writers in their own language, writes that such behavior was perfectly acceptable, but not among the Jews. Masculinity was shown by sexually exploiting little boys. When Paul writes about homosexuality, this is what his concern was; the rape and exploitation, the de-humanizing of others.

Women were barely recognized as human; really there was no word at that time of the equivalent of ‘woman’. There were just terms for them according to class or status, such as ‘female slave’, ‘lady’, ‘matron’. Paul seems to adhere to this when he writes that women should be covered and not speak in the church. Women at the time were not to speak in public assemblies, and a truer translation of what Paul wrote, is from the Greek word “ekkleisa”, which is a male only public assembly. Paul also wrote that women prayed and prophesied in these gatherings. In the pagan world that simply wasn’t allowed; that it was allowed in the early church is revolutionary. He wrote too that women should be veiled, and this is seen as demeaning though our modern eyes. What it meant then was the distinction between a married or widowed woman (veiled) and a slave or prostitute (unveiled). Ruden points out Paul's wanting all Christian women to be covered made them all equal, regardless of their past or status.

Paul revolutionized romantic love and marriage. His writings broke the barrier down regarding arranged marriage; essentially sexual enslavement. Once again, like he did with homosexual pedophilia, this was about equality and breaking the bonds of slavery. He did the same with adultery. He uses the word “porneia” for sexual immorality. In marriage, he writes, sexual activity outside marriage, for both the man and the woman, is an act to be loathed. He was about relationships, that becoming one flesh, happiness could be achieved, and spiritual life could expand beyond anything conceived before. Love is selfless, something not even on the radar before Paul.

There is much in this rich book, and I highly recommend it if you’re at all interested in understanding ancient times and Paul’s epistles. (It’s in my Amazon widget of recommended books in the right hand column.)  What did Paul mean when writing about submitting to government authorities, when at the same time was spending so much time in jail because of his so often rebelling against the State? Ruden addresses a lot of issues that are seemingly at odds with what we think of when we think of Christianity. This book increased my knowledge and my faith.        

Looking to the Ancient Past

The Didache are a compilation of writings from about 90 CE to 110 CE, very close to the times of the writings of the New Testament. They contain the worship practices and beliefs of the earliest Christians that have been conveyed through time, and have been attacked since the Church's beginning.

From the Didache:

You shall not commit murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not commit pederasty, you shall not commit fornication, you shall not steal, you shall not practice magic, you shall not practice witchcraft, you shall not murder a child by abortion nor kill that which is begotten.

But often shall you come together, seeking the things which are befitting to your souls: for the whole time of your faith will not profit you, if you be not made perfect in the last time...

But every Lord’s day gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let no one that is at variance with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned...

Now concerning the Eucharist, thus give thanks. First, concerning the cup: We thank you, our Father, for the holy vine of David Your servant, which You made known to us through Jesus Your Servant; to You be the glory for ever. And concerning the broken bread: We thank You, our Father, for the life and knowledge which You made known to us through Jesus Your Servant; to You be the glory for ever. Even as this broken bread was scattered over the hills, and was gathered together and became one, so let Your Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into Your kingdom; for Yours is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ for ever. But let no one eat or drink of your Eucharist, but they who have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for concerning this also the Lord has said, Give not that which is holy to the dogs.

I have written earlier here on the Eucharist, and that the sacredness of it I think is being diminished. One of the things that prompted me to write that blog is that a dog was given holy bread at Communion, and here in the Didache, "Give not that which is holy to the dogs". This is a most holy rite and its holiness and sacredness must be maintained.



Sometimes we need to get back to basics, and these ancient writings do that and are a great addition to the study of Scripture. Another recommendations are Eusebius's "The History of the Church", and for a better understanding of the letters of the Apostle Paul and his culture, "Paul Among the People" by Sarah Ruden.

Character of the New Man- Some Thoughts Entering the New Year

Looking to the coming year I don't see good things coming. I'm mostly an optimist and know things in the end of conflict will mostly end up okay. Right now though I see economic disaster because we have an anti-business president and political party in power. Those same people are dismissive of Judaic-Christian principles and values, and that does huge damage to the culture. With that in mind, I'll still have to fight them. I love my Faith, and I love Liberty, and both are threatened. I've moved a long way from where I was in my 20's and 30's when my line was, 'you're born, you suffer, you die'. Now I'm a religious man, and belief in God and Savior informs what I do. Apostle Paul wrote:

"Because you are God’s chosen ones, holy and beloved, clothe yourselves with heartfelt mercy, with kindness, humility, meekness, and patience. Bear with one another; forgive whatever grievances you have against one another. Forgive as the Lord has forgiven you. Over all these virtues put on love, which binds the rest together and makes them perfect. Christ’s peace must reign in your hearts, since as members of the one body you have been called to that peace. Dedicate yourselves to thankfulness. Let the word of Christ, rich as it is, dwell in you. In wisdom made perfect, instruct and admonish one another. Sing gratefully to God from your hearts in psalms, hymns, and inspired songs." Colossians 3:12

As a society we've put these values to rest. I see no mercy and kindness, just incessant attacks by the State and it's supporters in politics and the Jurassic press. Rush Limbaugh goes to the hospital and those people cheer and hope he dies. Sarah Palin, a mother that has stayed married and raised a family with her husband, has loving parents, got involved in her community and effected good change, is hated and vilified in the most vile ways. What kind of culture is it that promotes the suffering of others?

I don't want to chronicle all the ills our country is suffering. All I can do is know and practice the best I can the values Paul says we as Christians must live, expressed from our hearts. We can only influence the small circle around us...be the stone in the small calm pond that sends out ripples. The waters are turbulent now, so we must use bigger stones of kindness, meekness, humility and patience. That's very tough, because the people in power now, politics and press and popular culture see those as weakness and gives them the right to force their ideology of command and control on the rest of us.

I pray for myself that I can, this coming year, be meek (I'll need to write about what that means later, it's not what most people think it is), kind, patient, with love in my heart. It's hard, especially now, because Christians are under assault, as are people that want the freedom to make their own life choices without the intervention of the State.

This year for me, more Bible study, lots and lots of praise, lots and lots of worship, lots and lots of singing praises, and sharing as much Love as I can, and express Thankfulness.