What Paul meant

st_paul4St Paul is revered by some and reviled by others. Depending on your theological position, he was responsible for opening up the true message of the gospel for both Jew and gentile or the man who made the single biggest contribution to masking or watering down the true essence of the teaching of Christ and replacing it with rules and requirements. I have to say that I find Paul an enigma, and it is not heard to see why  Garry Willis opens his afterword in his interesting book- What Paul Meant with a quote from Bernard Shaw  who “thought the world would have been better off if Paul had not lived”. Willis argues that it is Paul’s writings written roughly two decades after the death of  Jesus, and not the gospels, which stand closer to Jesus than any of the other words in the New Testament and that Paul meant was not something other than or contrary to what Jesus meant, but that we can best find out the latter by studying the former.  The Gospels, coming later, try to make sense of a history that already contained the conflicts Paul reveals to us. Willis’s book challenges our thoughts on Paul and if you read it you must be ready to have all sorts of cherished preconceptions exhilaratingly stripped away in his descriptions of how the early Jesus movement emerged. Willis suggests that for too many Paul has come down the ages as bad news because; “Religion took over the legacy of Paul as it did that of Jesus- because they both opposed it. They said that the worship of God is a matter of interior love, not based on external observances, on temples or churches, or hierarchies or priesthoods…they were radical egalitarians, though in ways that delved below and soared above conventional politics. They were on the side of the poor and saw through the rich. They saw only two basic moral duties, love of God and love of the neighbour. Both were liberators, not imprisoners so they were imprisoned. So they were killed. Paul meant what Jesus meant, that love is the only law. Paul’s message to us is not one of guilt and dark constraint. It is this: Whatever things are true, whatever honourable, whatever making for the right, whatever lovable, whatever admirable- if there is any virtue, any thing of high esteem- think on these. All you have learned, have taken from tradition, have listened to, have observed in me, act on these, and the God who brings peace will be yours (Phil4:8-9).”

Now that’s something we could all do with isn’t it?

Advertisements

2 Comments

Filed under bible, Christianity, church, Jesus, religion, St paul, theology

2 responses to “What Paul meant

  1. Rudolph H. Weingartner

    The author of the book you are discussing is Garry Wills–not Willis. No wonder that Paul is misread.

  2. Clint

    And their are a number of trolls who have no idea that it’s common convention to refer to an author by her/his last name when discussing her/his work. No wonder that Paul is misread.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s