2010 March Clothesline

Greetings to all on 12 MAR 2010

Word for the Day
Mamzer – a Jewish bastard, for example, one parent not a Jew.

Quote for the Day
Our ecclesiology should be shaped by our mission, not vice-versa.
Leonard Sweet Note: Ecclesiology is the way we do church

Extra Quote for the Day
Most men lead lives of quiet desperation and go to the grave with the song still in them.
Henry David Thoreau

Thought for the Day
A few weeks ago, our house church was asked to read through Acts. Something that caught my attention was Luke’s portrayal of Paul. When I was just a kid in my tribe, most men said they identified more with Peter; I think they secretly wished they were more like Paul. Perhaps we were more like Paul than we thought; it’s just that he was not as perfect as we had imagined.

What was Luke’s connection with Saul? We know that Luke was a physician. [COL 4.14] Several versions state that he was “my (Paul’s) beloved physician,” which has led some scholars to conclude that Luke traveled with Paul as his personal doctor. We know that Paul had some kind of chronic ailment. Luke may have even received medical training in Tarsus; it was known for having the finest medical school of that time. An extension of this theory is that he and Paul may have known each other from their school days. [1] Of course, this is pure speculation. We do know from the “we” passages in Acts that Luke was a frequent companion of Paul.

Let’s begin with Saul on the road to Damascus. His question, “Who are you, Lord?” has always intrigued me. Allow me to suggest that Saul had already been having an internal debate about the validity of the Messiah. Perhaps the blinding light was just the final nudge that he needed to cement his decision. We cannot begin to imagine what a life-changing event was Saul’s conversion. He would have been shunned by all his former friends. He would have been shut out of his hometown synagogue. His family would have disowned him. And possibly the worst of all, he turned against his rabbi Gamaliel. [ACT 22.3] [2] For most of us, our “conversion” didn’t mean much more than attending the church across town instead of across the street.

Let’s jump ahead to the Jerusalem conference. What’s interesting about this encounter with the other apostles is not found in Acts but in Galatians, where Paul recounts this meeting. In chapter two, he seems to downplay the other apostles by saying that “those reputed to be pillars added nothing to my message; whatever they were makes no difference to me.” Especially notice Paul’s take-away from the Jerusalem conference, “All they asked was that we should continue to remember the poor…” [GAL 2.10] This is completely different from the decision handed down by James regarding abstinence from immorality, strangled meat, blood and food offered to idols. Notice that three of the four were to cater to the Jewish Christians. The prohibition against immorality appears to have just been added for good measure; it seems out of place.

Next, we find Saul having Timothy circumcised because they would be associating with Jewish people. You see, Timothy was a mamzer, so it was necessary to circumcise him in order to be accepted into the synagogues. [ACT 16.1] Interestingly, Paul was equally adamant about not circumcising Titus in order to placate the Jews. [GAL 2.1-5] Perhaps both of his parents were goyim (Gentile); we are not told. It seems that Paul was very pragmatic in adapting to circumstances. Perhaps he would have agreed with Leonard Sweet’s quote. In fact, Paul describes himself in chameleon-like terms, “I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.” [1COR 9.22b]

Here are a few other traits that I noticed about Paul: Paul had the heart of a warrior. [ACT 17.2] [3] Paul was stubborn. [ACT 16.37] He became annoyed at bad behavior. [ACT 16.18] He went from place to place, apparently only staying long enough to establish the church, and then he was off to his next mission. I think most of us guys can identify with someone like Paul. We like to swoop in and build or repair something and then head on to the next task. Paul often left others behind to take care of the details.

I believe he had a clearly defined goal – to go to Rome and preach to Caesar himself! He made it to Rome; we don’t know if he ever met Caesar. [ACT 19.21, 25.12] I’m afraid that at this point Paul isn’t like most of us. He was a man on a mission and would let nothing deter him from that. Not even pain and suffering or the threat of death. Too many men are just operating out of the survival mode. Our biggest goal is next weekend or perhaps landing that perfect job, although making no plans to obtain it. Maybe it’s just surviving until retirement; that would describe me.

Don’t you think that the reason men love action films is because we see our dream life vicariously played out in those roles? Granted, few of us are true warriors but most of us long for a “large” life and yet settle for small lives instead. Maybe Thoreau had us pegged correctly.

May God Bless
Mike Toole
Lori Moores, ed.

1. Found at http://www.zianet.com/maxey/reflx431.htm

2. Found at http://biblescholarforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=48 According to Photius, Gamaliel became a talmid (disciple) and was baptized by John and Peter along with his son and Nicodemus.

3. This comes from the fact that Paul did not give up; he kept arguing (fighting) with anyone who would listen.