1:3 Grace, when used by Paul, is more than a customary greeting. It is loaded with theological implications.
1:15 For example, here it clearly carries hints of predestination. If others, like Paul, were set apart before birth, I ask again what good it is to proselytize.
2:1 Quite a jump in the timeline here. The fact that he skips directly to his visits to Jerusalem is surely no accident, and must relate to his message to the Galatians.
2:2 And I think we get a hint of it here, in his repeated reference to the other Apostles. On the surface he is bolstering his own credentials, but in light of the context, he may well be trying to bolster theirs. He even claims to have compared his version of the gospel with theirs, just to verify what he received by inspiration.
2:6 This verse has grave implications. Does he mean to indicate that those who questioned his fitness in Acts were false apostles?
2:10 Didn't he earlier claim not to have met any of the other apostles beside James and Peter? Shall we add John here to the list, or was this not a direct meeting? And of all the things to ask him for, they only were concerned with money?
2:11 Oh, Peter. You're just a mess sometimes.
2:16 He hits this so briefly, it takes on the flavor of established theology. Certainly not a new argument to his audience.
3:2 Neither option seems very convincing . . .
3:10 Although Paul is clearly leaning toward the latter choice. This is a nice interpretation, of the Law as well. Any law, by extension, that includes a curse to those who do not follow it perfectly, by Paul's reasoning here curses those who accept it as well.
3:17 Quite a lovely argument. Paul establishes God's promise to bless the nations through Abraham as a sort of legal precedent after which the Mosaic Law was invalid, in a way.
3:25 To what extent is this true? The central hole in the argument for faith is that then no line is ever drawn.
4:1 A nice continuation of the metaphor. The Mosaic Law in this framework is just the executor of the Abrahamic Covenant, until the beneficiaries are of age.
4:10 How do the Witnesses not fixate on this scripture in their argument against the celebration of holidays? It seems that it would give more strength to their argument than all the other justifications they use combined.
4:13 Is he referring to his eyesight here? If so, in what way did it put the Galatians to the test?
4:17 although the referent of "They" here is no doubt clear to the Galatians, it is a mystery to the modern reader.
4:21 It is clear exactly what the nature of their mistake is. Will the specter of the Mosaic Law never leave?
5:3 Another convincing argument. Who would want to be held to the entire Law? Then why be held to a part of it?
5:12 A strong and fitting curse.
5:22 I am more accustomed to the translation "faith" than "faithfulness", but the NRSV usage here makes sense. After all, according to Paul, faith is a source of spirit, rather than a result of it.
6:8 And here is Paul's other quibble with the Galatians: that they are behaving physically, which is not independent of their silly subscription to circumcision.
6:12 a connection that does not escape Paul, of course.
6:15 The Witness' proscription of blood transfusions really has no solid Biblical basis, as far as I can tell, but I have always considered it rather a good idea from their perspective. It serves to separate them from others, to distinguish them in a way that reminds them of their identity. From a organizational, if not from a theological standpoint, it's a good idea. But Paul here is cautioning against such physical determinations. It is indeed a fleshly concern, whether one receives blood or not, and as such should be beneath those whose spirits are sufficiently advanced.
Sunday, June 12, 2011
Saturday, June 04, 2011
Liveblogging the Bible: 2nd Corinthians
In my convalescence, I wonder if it possible to finish the project I began years ago . . .
1:1 I wonder what part Timothy played in the composition of this epistle. I would say he was an amanuensis, except that Sosthenes in 1 Cor. had the same mention, and was not the scribe.
1:10 Except that He will manifestly not rescue Paul indefinitely . . .
1:12 a suitable boast--rather than boast of his gifts of wisdom, prophecy, tongues, Apostlehood, and the like, he boasts merely of his frankness.
2:1 In what way would his visit have been painful?
2:5 Evidently there was some antagonism toward Paul on his last visit . . .
2:7 I feel left out of the import here, but the principle is clear: as in his previous letter, he insists that the virtuous path os to let oneself be wronged rather than to insist on one's rights
3:5 Yet he did indeed claim his own authority for certain suggestions in his first letter.
3:7, 12 Paul would probably not write this way to the Hebrews. "The Ministry of Death" is certainly a harsh word for the Mosaic Law.
3:18 But is this mirror darkened, as in 1 Cor 13? So far Paul has struck an entirely different tone and message from his first letter.
4:4 Paul opens a dangerous line of reasoning here. In his first letter 8:2 he proclaims that if one claims to understand, he does not really. Here he says that one who does not understand is being pruposefully prevented from such understanding. Damned if you do, so to speak . . .
4:18 This lends weight to the argument that Paul's affliction was related to his sight.
5:13 Perhaps this rather confusing chapter falls into the former category--being in an ecstatic state, so to speak, while his first letter was firmly in the latter, more scrutable category.
5:16 Yes, this letter certainly has the flavor of a transformation of Paul's perspective. When he knew Christ from a human point of view, he believed a certain way, that understanding was the goal. Now, in his age and blindness, he is considerably more metaphysical--almost visionary.
6:11 Again Paul falls back on his frankness, which endears me to him. Frankness is among my favorite virtues, and among the most underappreciated I think..
6:14 This also seems to represent an evolution of Paul's belief as found in 1 Cor 7:12, although the two are reconcilable in a way.
6:16-18 It's times like this that I miss the New World Translation's habit of glossing all seeming quotations, for I would love to know Paul's source here. Often it is not to be found anywhere in the Bible as received.
7:8 Ah, here seems to be the crux of this letter: they do not seem to have responded well to his first one--which I loved.
7:11 Funny, I don't remember his rebukes being quite so sound as to warrant this gnaching of the teeth.
8:7 Haha a classic guilt trip. . .
8:16 I am beginning to be intrigued by this Titus fellow. I look forward to reading the book named for him.
9:1 A code word for what nowadays goes by "stewardship", but which might as well be called "finances".
10:1 Is he still going on about this?
10:10 I find this ill at odds with my conception of Paul, whom I imagine to have been a powerful public speaker, as well as a writer. How else could he have accomplished all he did? Is it possible that he faded later in life, and it is this physically unimposing Paul that writes now?
11:6 This is a terribly disingenuous statement of Paul to make. He was surely well-trained in speech at the Sanhedrin.
11:14 Again, this is at odds with 1 Cor 8:2. Is it possible that Paul has been by this point disabused of an earlier notion, and realizes that things are not as flowery as he imagined?
11:33 Paul may be excused for getting a bit carried away here, for his anxiety over the Corinthian congregation is palpable. There must have been somebody quite charismatic undercutting him for him to react this way.
12:2 Hold on a minute: what is the world does he mean by this? The third heaven? Is there a hierarchy? Was there an unrecorded assumption of some sort? Is he referring to Christ? The timing doesn't match up for that. This hints at a Metaphysical goldmine . . .
12:7 A goldmine that Paul is content merely to hint at though . . .
And he leaves it at that. I would love to be a fly on the wall when he did arrive--no doubt he diffused a tense meeting with that delightful blend of humility and frankness that I would so love to imitate.
1:1 I wonder what part Timothy played in the composition of this epistle. I would say he was an amanuensis, except that Sosthenes in 1 Cor. had the same mention, and was not the scribe.
1:10 Except that He will manifestly not rescue Paul indefinitely . . .
1:12 a suitable boast--rather than boast of his gifts of wisdom, prophecy, tongues, Apostlehood, and the like, he boasts merely of his frankness.
2:1 In what way would his visit have been painful?
2:5 Evidently there was some antagonism toward Paul on his last visit . . .
2:7 I feel left out of the import here, but the principle is clear: as in his previous letter, he insists that the virtuous path os to let oneself be wronged rather than to insist on one's rights
3:5 Yet he did indeed claim his own authority for certain suggestions in his first letter.
3:7, 12 Paul would probably not write this way to the Hebrews. "The Ministry of Death" is certainly a harsh word for the Mosaic Law.
3:18 But is this mirror darkened, as in 1 Cor 13? So far Paul has struck an entirely different tone and message from his first letter.
4:4 Paul opens a dangerous line of reasoning here. In his first letter 8:2 he proclaims that if one claims to understand, he does not really. Here he says that one who does not understand is being pruposefully prevented from such understanding. Damned if you do, so to speak . . .
4:18 This lends weight to the argument that Paul's affliction was related to his sight.
5:13 Perhaps this rather confusing chapter falls into the former category--being in an ecstatic state, so to speak, while his first letter was firmly in the latter, more scrutable category.
5:16 Yes, this letter certainly has the flavor of a transformation of Paul's perspective. When he knew Christ from a human point of view, he believed a certain way, that understanding was the goal. Now, in his age and blindness, he is considerably more metaphysical--almost visionary.
6:11 Again Paul falls back on his frankness, which endears me to him. Frankness is among my favorite virtues, and among the most underappreciated I think..
6:14 This also seems to represent an evolution of Paul's belief as found in 1 Cor 7:12, although the two are reconcilable in a way.
6:16-18 It's times like this that I miss the New World Translation's habit of glossing all seeming quotations, for I would love to know Paul's source here. Often it is not to be found anywhere in the Bible as received.
7:8 Ah, here seems to be the crux of this letter: they do not seem to have responded well to his first one--which I loved.
7:11 Funny, I don't remember his rebukes being quite so sound as to warrant this gnaching of the teeth.
8:7 Haha a classic guilt trip. . .
8:16 I am beginning to be intrigued by this Titus fellow. I look forward to reading the book named for him.
9:1 A code word for what nowadays goes by "stewardship", but which might as well be called "finances".
10:1 Is he still going on about this?
10:10 I find this ill at odds with my conception of Paul, whom I imagine to have been a powerful public speaker, as well as a writer. How else could he have accomplished all he did? Is it possible that he faded later in life, and it is this physically unimposing Paul that writes now?
11:6 This is a terribly disingenuous statement of Paul to make. He was surely well-trained in speech at the Sanhedrin.
11:14 Again, this is at odds with 1 Cor 8:2. Is it possible that Paul has been by this point disabused of an earlier notion, and realizes that things are not as flowery as he imagined?
11:33 Paul may be excused for getting a bit carried away here, for his anxiety over the Corinthian congregation is palpable. There must have been somebody quite charismatic undercutting him for him to react this way.
12:2 Hold on a minute: what is the world does he mean by this? The third heaven? Is there a hierarchy? Was there an unrecorded assumption of some sort? Is he referring to Christ? The timing doesn't match up for that. This hints at a Metaphysical goldmine . . .
12:7 A goldmine that Paul is content merely to hint at though . . .
And he leaves it at that. I would love to be a fly on the wall when he did arrive--no doubt he diffused a tense meeting with that delightful blend of humility and frankness that I would so love to imitate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)