As I have written elsewhere on this blog, for Paul spirit possession (i.e. being possessed by the Messiah) was a real phenomenon for Paul. As David B. Hart says in his response to N.T. Wright on his Bible translation:
We do not want to hear Paul speak of “scripture’s obsolescence” (Romans 7:6), or say that “scripture slays” (2 Corinthians 3:6). Surely, we cry, he cannot mean that in some sense scripture has been surpassed by God’s self-revelation in the face of Christ! Except that he does, and explicitly so. One need only read what follows in 2 Corinthians, all the way to verse 18, to grasp this. ...
Source: https://afkimel.wordpress.com/2018/01/16/a-reply-to-n-t-wright/
When reading the CJB I saw many places in the footnotes where Paul would use midrash to reinterpret the Hebrew Bible. It is clear to me that Paul was not a Hebrew Fundamentalist but a Christ-follower, who believed that Christ possessed him and drove his mind, heart, and behavior. So scripture was not fundamental as far as I can tell, but was influential in proving Christ, but then Christ was the authority of interpretation.
What does that mean for today, when so many use the Bible, specifically the New Testament as a literalistic guide to knowing orthodox (right-opinioniated) dogma? When Paul himself rejected the orthodox dogma of Judaism, how can so many appeal to orthodox dogma using material by Paul that Paul himself did not intend to become scripture?
The way I see it, Paul felt indwelt by the Christ, and from there he rejected the Fundamentalist aspects of his Jewish faith and used midrash to reinterpret Hebrew Bible passages to prove Christ. His "authority" for doing so was not an appeal to scripture but an appeal to Christ (possessing him) which led him to interpret scriptures in the spirit. Paul does not even appeal to the authority of other leaders like James the Just; as Paul writes in Galatians 1:11-12 Expanded Bible (EXB):
The way I see it, Paul felt indwelt by the Christ, and from there he rejected the Fundamentalist aspects of his Jewish faith and used midrash to reinterpret Hebrew Bible passages to prove Christ. His "authority" for doing so was not an appeal to scripture but an appeal to Christ (possessing him) which led him to interpret scriptures in the spirit. Paul does not even appeal to the authority of other leaders like James the Just; as Paul writes in Galatians 1:11-12 Expanded Bible (EXB):
11 Brothers and sisters, I want you to know that the ·Good News [Gospel] I preached to you was not ·made up by human beings [devised by man; of human origin]. 12 I did not get it from ·humans [a human source; man], nor did anyone teach it to me, but ·Jesus Christ showed it to me [L by a revelation of/from/about Jesus Christ; Acts 9].
This is echoed in John 5:39-40 (EXB):
39 You ·carefully study [search; examine] the Scriptures because you think they give you eternal life. They do in fact ·tell [testify; witness] ·about me [concerning me; on my behalf], 40 but you ·refuse [do not want] to come to me to have that life.
Again and again we see that scripture is not fundamental (which is bibliolatry) but is a guide to knowing Jesus as the Messiah. The way I see it, Christ is this new consciousness that bubbles up from within the person as they treat scripture as mostly poetry (that tells of Christ) that is open to midrash, made to inspire and guide one toward Christ-like-ness.
There was no New Testament either when Paul was alive! In fact, when Paul wrote his letters and epistles there is every reason to think that he never intended them to become scripture. The appeal to scripture being "God breathed" does not work in my mind as an appeal to defend inerrancy or fundamentalism; because 2 Timothy 3 is referring to the Old Testament (that is the "all scripture" being referenced); and I don't see this passage even saying scripture is for correcting right creedal propositions. Paul didn't present a formulaic creed (as is seen today), he only emphasized trust in the good news in 1 Corinthians 15 of: Christ crucified, buried, risen, and possessing his followers so that they gain immortality. That's it!
I see 2 Timothy 3, instead saying scripture is a guide toward correcting behavioral faults and teaching one how to live ethically; as we see in 2 Timothy 3:16-17 (EXB):
16 All Scripture is ·inspired by God [breathed out by God; L God-breathed] and is useful for teaching, for ·showing people what is wrong in their lives [refuting error; rebuking], for correcting faults, and for ·teaching how to live right [training in righteousness]. 17 ·Using the Scriptures, [L …so that] ·the person who serves God [L God’s person] will be ·capable [competent], ·having all that is needed [fully equipped] to do every good work.
Besides, "the three known as the Pastoral epistles (1 and 2 Timothy, and Titus) – have been labeled pseudepigraphical [Ehrman calls these forgeries] works by most critical scholars...." (Source). So 2 Timothy may be a forgery, or politely a "disputed epistle," that most critical scholars say is claiming to be Paul but is not!
This is why it makes more sense historically speaking, to see scripture as poetry, creating spirituality, and inner transformation; rather than using scripture to endorse creedal FORMs, set formalism, and demanded conformity. The original Christian Ekklesia did not play Bible ping pong to defend a creed (like so many do today), they were a mystic group facing execution for confessing Jesus as Lord instead of Caesar.
I think modern Christians fail to realize just how radical the early Pauline groups were. They gathered together with every attendee participating (acting if they were literally limbs on Jesus' torso guided by the mind of Christ): as they sang songs, spoke in tongues, prophesied, and shared scripture to edify not establish a set creedal dogma. There was no pulpit, no pews; no pastor that led the congregation every week. The book Pagan Christianity makes this clear. The only thing that comes close to the creeds today is Philippians 2:6-11, and yet this was not even presented like a rote creed like we see today; but was sung as a hymn with poetic elements that points to scripture being used more as poetry than dogma. See The Creed (Hymn) of Philippians 2:6-11 (Posted by Marg | May 1, 2010). When this is combined with 1 Corinthians 15: 1-4, we see that all that is entailed in being a Christian is (to paraphrase Paul): believing that the Logos became flesh, died for our mistakes and became Lord (not Cesar), and rose again as a life giving spirit (divine breath) granting immortality to those who pledge allegiance (Greek: "pistis") to Christ as Lord (in opposition to Caesar).
Today one does not risk sedition for confessing Jesus as Lord and the whole politics of this good news Paul is declaring is lost on modern readers. We are not under Roman subjugation and freedom of religion is not taken away like it was for Christians. Christians are not being crucified for being Christians like they were for a time by Rome. So the radicality of the early Christ movement is lost on our modern age. We don't think in terms of spirit possession like Paul did, that's just too chaotic most would say. People also see that that is how cults spring up; as every new cult contains a leader claiming to be possessed by Christ (that is what Joseph Smith's revelations are). So to remedy the chaos and maintain order modern Christians rely on the Roman Emperor Constantine, who established order Roman style within the church (which made it pagan according to the book Pagan Christianity). So from an early movement of Jewish Mystics like Paul and Jesus came Constantine Christianity, full of Forms, formulae, and conformity.
Thus, most Christians don't really trust that Christ will guide the Ekklesia. They trust the intellect and works of the intellect to exegete with orthodox hermeneutics (and other big intellectual words). So instead of the spirit opening their minds to the poetic inspiration of scripture, and focusing one's inner spiritual enlightenment, and progressive transformation; most Christians use the Bible the same way they use a car manual or the rules of a board game ("No, no, no, you can't do that. It says here in rule 39, 'each player must ..."). Rather than seeing the scriptures through a poetic lens like the early Christians mostly did, and focusing on one's inner spirituality (awakening from above), and working toward continual transformation; too many Christians today, feeling bored I think (Rome is not threatening execution), and lacking true conviction of spirit possession, have turned to Platonic Forms, formulas, and conformity to provide existential security and mental certainty. Yet original Christianity, as I see it, was not about mental certainty, but bodily conviction of Christ in you, feeling one with the Divine (Theosis), and working toward virtue ethics toward the aim of Christ-like-ness (see Colossians 3:10; Galatians 4:19; and The Sermon on the Mount and Human Flourishing: A Theological Commentary by Jonathan T. Pennington).
Instead of the Ekklesia being an intimate group of those seeking to model the character of Christ with a Christ-consciousness; most of the churches today have turned the early Ekklesia into a corporation or fast food religion: place your order quick and easy and get your free ticket number and sit in the pew and await and listen to the message on the big screen advertising more product. Soon your fast plate of heaven will come, for a price. Then leave with the business logo on the wrapper and plastic cup as marketing. And don't forget to argue with your fellow fast-food-ers that your "intellectual" choice is the orthodox (rightiest opinion) of the true fast food joints, all others are heretics (choose wrongly) and they suck and will give you food poisoning (or other talk of the dangers of other views).
The solution to the fear of chaos on one hand and Greco-Roman order on the other, is for a 21st Century Christian to balance mind and heart (which I have tried to do on this website). The path forward I think, is to balance the early church's mystic ways with modern science which I have done on this site; and focus on developing a Christ-consciousness, and turning to the scripture as poetry to inspire us to live toward continual transformation into Christ-like-ness. For me it is that simple.
There was no New Testament either when Paul was alive! In fact, when Paul wrote his letters and epistles there is every reason to think that he never intended them to become scripture. The appeal to scripture being "God breathed" does not work in my mind as an appeal to defend inerrancy or fundamentalism; because 2 Timothy 3 is referring to the Old Testament (that is the "all scripture" being referenced); and I don't see this passage even saying scripture is for correcting right creedal propositions. Paul didn't present a formulaic creed (as is seen today), he only emphasized trust in the good news in 1 Corinthians 15 of: Christ crucified, buried, risen, and possessing his followers so that they gain immortality. That's it!
I see 2 Timothy 3, instead saying scripture is a guide toward correcting behavioral faults and teaching one how to live ethically; as we see in 2 Timothy 3:16-17 (EXB):
16 All Scripture is ·inspired by God [breathed out by God; L God-breathed] and is useful for teaching, for ·showing people what is wrong in their lives [refuting error; rebuking], for correcting faults, and for ·teaching how to live right [training in righteousness]. 17 ·Using the Scriptures, [L …so that] ·the person who serves God [L God’s person] will be ·capable [competent], ·having all that is needed [fully equipped] to do every good work.
Besides, "the three known as the Pastoral epistles (1 and 2 Timothy, and Titus) – have been labeled pseudepigraphical [Ehrman calls these forgeries] works by most critical scholars...." (Source). So 2 Timothy may be a forgery, or politely a "disputed epistle," that most critical scholars say is claiming to be Paul but is not!
This is why it makes more sense historically speaking, to see scripture as poetry, creating spirituality, and inner transformation; rather than using scripture to endorse creedal FORMs, set formalism, and demanded conformity. The original Christian Ekklesia did not play Bible ping pong to defend a creed (like so many do today), they were a mystic group facing execution for confessing Jesus as Lord instead of Caesar.
I think modern Christians fail to realize just how radical the early Pauline groups were. They gathered together with every attendee participating (acting if they were literally limbs on Jesus' torso guided by the mind of Christ): as they sang songs, spoke in tongues, prophesied, and shared scripture to edify not establish a set creedal dogma. There was no pulpit, no pews; no pastor that led the congregation every week. The book Pagan Christianity makes this clear. The only thing that comes close to the creeds today is Philippians 2:6-11, and yet this was not even presented like a rote creed like we see today; but was sung as a hymn with poetic elements that points to scripture being used more as poetry than dogma. See The Creed (Hymn) of Philippians 2:6-11 (Posted by Marg | May 1, 2010). When this is combined with 1 Corinthians 15: 1-4, we see that all that is entailed in being a Christian is (to paraphrase Paul): believing that the Logos became flesh, died for our mistakes and became Lord (not Cesar), and rose again as a life giving spirit (divine breath) granting immortality to those who pledge allegiance (Greek: "pistis") to Christ as Lord (in opposition to Caesar).
Today one does not risk sedition for confessing Jesus as Lord and the whole politics of this good news Paul is declaring is lost on modern readers. We are not under Roman subjugation and freedom of religion is not taken away like it was for Christians. Christians are not being crucified for being Christians like they were for a time by Rome. So the radicality of the early Christ movement is lost on our modern age. We don't think in terms of spirit possession like Paul did, that's just too chaotic most would say. People also see that that is how cults spring up; as every new cult contains a leader claiming to be possessed by Christ (that is what Joseph Smith's revelations are). So to remedy the chaos and maintain order modern Christians rely on the Roman Emperor Constantine, who established order Roman style within the church (which made it pagan according to the book Pagan Christianity). So from an early movement of Jewish Mystics like Paul and Jesus came Constantine Christianity, full of Forms, formulae, and conformity.
Thus, most Christians don't really trust that Christ will guide the Ekklesia. They trust the intellect and works of the intellect to exegete with orthodox hermeneutics (and other big intellectual words). So instead of the spirit opening their minds to the poetic inspiration of scripture, and focusing one's inner spiritual enlightenment, and progressive transformation; most Christians use the Bible the same way they use a car manual or the rules of a board game ("No, no, no, you can't do that. It says here in rule 39, 'each player must ..."). Rather than seeing the scriptures through a poetic lens like the early Christians mostly did, and focusing on one's inner spirituality (awakening from above), and working toward continual transformation; too many Christians today, feeling bored I think (Rome is not threatening execution), and lacking true conviction of spirit possession, have turned to Platonic Forms, formulas, and conformity to provide existential security and mental certainty. Yet original Christianity, as I see it, was not about mental certainty, but bodily conviction of Christ in you, feeling one with the Divine (Theosis), and working toward virtue ethics toward the aim of Christ-like-ness (see Colossians 3:10; Galatians 4:19; and The Sermon on the Mount and Human Flourishing: A Theological Commentary by Jonathan T. Pennington).
Instead of the Ekklesia being an intimate group of those seeking to model the character of Christ with a Christ-consciousness; most of the churches today have turned the early Ekklesia into a corporation or fast food religion: place your order quick and easy and get your free ticket number and sit in the pew and await and listen to the message on the big screen advertising more product. Soon your fast plate of heaven will come, for a price. Then leave with the business logo on the wrapper and plastic cup as marketing. And don't forget to argue with your fellow fast-food-ers that your "intellectual" choice is the orthodox (rightiest opinion) of the true fast food joints, all others are heretics (choose wrongly) and they suck and will give you food poisoning (or other talk of the dangers of other views).
The solution to the fear of chaos on one hand and Greco-Roman order on the other, is for a 21st Century Christian to balance mind and heart (which I have tried to do on this website). The path forward I think, is to balance the early church's mystic ways with modern science which I have done on this site; and focus on developing a Christ-consciousness, and turning to the scripture as poetry to inspire us to live toward continual transformation into Christ-like-ness. For me it is that simple.
