We have the impression that Paul and Peter had agreed on a division of labour: Paul preached to the Gentiles and Peter the Jews. This impression is wrong because Peter was sent by God to preach in the house of Cornelius, a Roman centurion even before Paul began his missionary journeys (Acts 10). In fact, Paul preached to the Jews as well. It was only after the Jews rejected him that Paul turned to the Gentiles. Therefore, such a clear-cut division is not warranted.
Similarly, we have the impression that the church in Jerusalem was a purely Jewish Christian church whereas the churches surrounding the Mediterranean Sea must have been purely Gentile churches in the sense that all the members were Gentiles. Again, this impression is unwarranted. First of all, when I read the epistles of Paul to the Gentile churches, I am always puzzled by his quoting of the Jewish scriptures. I wonder if the Gentiles knew anything about these sacred texts. Put it in another way, how much authority did the Jewish scriptures enjoy in the hearts of the Gentile members of the churches to which Paul wrote? The only reasonable explanation is that most churches Paul established and wrote to were mixed. They must have both Jews and Gentiles as their members. The situation in Rome was definitely a mixed one because Rome was the heart of the Empire. Rome must have been a cosmopolitan city in which peoples of different nationalities mixed and did their business. The church in Rome must have Jewish Christians. However, their proportion is difficult to determine.
Return to the Epistle of the Romans, the following verse makes sense.
Which (the gospel) he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures (Romans 1:2).
The readers of this letter must have some knowledge of the Jewish culture, knowing that there were holy scriptures as well as prophets. Yet, they were converted from Judaism to Christianity. The situation might not be too impossible. Weren't Jesus' disciples Jews?
What is so important about these prophets and scriptures? As an ex-Pharisee, Paul himself must be very knowledgeable about the Jewish scriptures. Moreover, after the Damascus experience, Paul must have arrived at a newer understanding of the scriptures he had known. He was able to see the fulfillment of the prophecies in the Jewish scriptures, i.e. the Old Testament. The New Testament has its roots planted in the Old Testament.
"... holy scriptures" is a translation of γραφαῖς ἁγίαις, which literally means "holy writings". What does that mean to us, modern readers? Writings which in themselves are holy or writings which make the readers holy, or both?
Modern people tend to dismiss myths and magic. They think that it is superstitious to believe that words/writings possess supernatural powers beyond the ordinary functions of transmitting messages. We have lost the sense of awe which gripped the minds of ancient Israelites. In Genesis, God created the known universe with His Words alone. He did not rely on other materials. He simply called into existence all the things in the cosmo. Modern men may simply dismiss it as a myth. Perhaps they should think twice. Maybe God's words are truly powerful. It is only they who have lost touch with the powers/potentials of words/writings. Maybe our hearts have been so hardened that we refuse to be touched and be transformed. The possibility be sanctification is still there.
Worst still, throughout history, there have been people who even tried to mutilate the Bible to box it into their conceptions of God, their theology. Instead of humbly admitting their ignorance and limited intellect in understanding God's grand plan, some theologians simply removed some books from the canon. For example, Marcion was one such heretic. He rejected the "blood-thirsty" Yahweh in the Jewish scriptures because this Yahweh was totally different from the merciful Father Jesus preached. He rejected the whole of Old Testament and did not regard it as God inspired. Martin Luther wanted to root out the theological basis of selling indulgences. So he removed from the Old Testament 7 books (or parts of a book) which only have Greek texts but not Hebrew texts. Actually, the only "offending" book was 2 Maccabees in which only one "offending" verse was found. The other six books are disqualified simply because like 2 Maccabees, they happened to be written in Greek only. These theologians had forgotten Paul's teachings or rather, they selectively chose Paul's teachings which suited their agenda and ignored the bigger picture.
In conclusion, according to Paul, the holy scriptures, i.e. the Old Testament, are closely related to the New Testament. They are inseparable and they shed light on each other so that we have a better understanding of the grand design of God.
Dear Lord, You are the master of human history. You are eternal, yet You enter into our history in order to bring us new life. We thank you. May Your will be done on earth and in our history as in heaven. Amen.
No comments:
Post a Comment