I'm a bit late to the conversation because hey I've been busy, but this is something I'm chewing on, and maybe if you add your thoughts you can help me gain more comprehension.
I'm gone from the white Evangelical church space and de-associating myself from the various aspects that have affected my worldview, such as the place of structure & hierarchy, the meaning of discipleship and obedience, and the meaning of "Scripture."
Right now I'm puzzling on how I handle Paul. You know the guy.
I'm not one to say "Oh, Paul set up a different religion than Jesus that is like the Burger King franchise across the street from the mom n pop struggling QuikBurger." Frankly, it's not because of a bias I have for Paul, but because I don't know enough.
So when I think of Paul's writings - when I think of "Scripture" - I'm wondering how a deconstructed faith-follower deals with the writings that shaped the church through the ages. How do I handle them? How do I deal with the directions that have been used as weapons of control in history, and that seem to be harsh, unloving, domineering, and validating oppression? MAYBE in their times they were liberating, or maybe they were interpreted less harshly, or maybe they were among the many forms of constructing the faith that were given privilege but not supremacy. So MAYBE it's less about forcing a 1st CE world view on us and more about showing the shape of the church _then_ to provide us with some ideas about the shape of the church _now_, both across time and place as a community of people to build life together and to build the kin-dom of God-in-human-form Jesus in the world of restorative justice and reconciliation. (One thing Paul did to influence me is to write _very long sentences_. Blame him, not me. I'm just following his footsteps. :) )
Anyway, this is probably not a well-form question. I'm just in that place where I'm struggling to define the question, and I hope it is enough information for you to figure out what the heck I'm asking.
I think Paul spoke in ways that drew people from the particular to the universal. He speaks in ways that often appear to us to affirm a status quo, and that is largely because we now live in a world that is shaped by a new status quo that was different from his own. For instance "wives respect your husbands" seems to affirm a status quo because it did. All wives were expected to do exactly that. "Husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the church... and gave up himself for her..." only seems to affirm a status quo for us because we now expect (at least facially) husbands to sacrifice for their wives... but that's actually a NEW expectation.
We often shortchange ourselves by expecting Paul's writings to be timeless.
Also, I know that it's possible that the idea of questioning "Scripture" can lead a lot of people in the white Evangelical spaces to react in ways that are not a sign of happiness, but I've stopped worrying about what people think about the questions because I think they don't want to ask the questions lest their formed ideas be shaken, perhaps to the point of collapse.
Coming from a tradition that emphasized fear of God, and His anger, rather than His love ("We are to fear and love God...") I believed I was not only always being judged harshly, I applied that same judgement to others. Accepting that God loves me has freed me to be more loving to others. Where did Christians get the belief we are to be God's agents of wrath/judgment rather than His love?
I think a lot of people came by it honestly and innocently. There are times when we try to protect people we love and care about and end up presenting the wrong message in the process. Imagine raising a daughter to make sure she doesn't dress or behave a certain way *so that she does not become a victim*. When we do that, we are unwittingly taking the blame away from victimizers.
In a similar way, encouraging people to live a certain way can sometimes turn into something that takes our focus away from where it ought to be.
I think Christians got to the point of being the agents of judgement/wrath by genuinely desiring to protect people from evil while losing track of God's grace for our imperfections and the very power of love to overcome evil.
I'm a bit late to the conversation because hey I've been busy, but this is something I'm chewing on, and maybe if you add your thoughts you can help me gain more comprehension.
I'm gone from the white Evangelical church space and de-associating myself from the various aspects that have affected my worldview, such as the place of structure & hierarchy, the meaning of discipleship and obedience, and the meaning of "Scripture."
Right now I'm puzzling on how I handle Paul. You know the guy.
I'm not one to say "Oh, Paul set up a different religion than Jesus that is like the Burger King franchise across the street from the mom n pop struggling QuikBurger." Frankly, it's not because of a bias I have for Paul, but because I don't know enough.
So when I think of Paul's writings - when I think of "Scripture" - I'm wondering how a deconstructed faith-follower deals with the writings that shaped the church through the ages. How do I handle them? How do I deal with the directions that have been used as weapons of control in history, and that seem to be harsh, unloving, domineering, and validating oppression? MAYBE in their times they were liberating, or maybe they were interpreted less harshly, or maybe they were among the many forms of constructing the faith that were given privilege but not supremacy. So MAYBE it's less about forcing a 1st CE world view on us and more about showing the shape of the church _then_ to provide us with some ideas about the shape of the church _now_, both across time and place as a community of people to build life together and to build the kin-dom of God-in-human-form Jesus in the world of restorative justice and reconciliation. (One thing Paul did to influence me is to write _very long sentences_. Blame him, not me. I'm just following his footsteps. :) )
Anyway, this is probably not a well-form question. I'm just in that place where I'm struggling to define the question, and I hope it is enough information for you to figure out what the heck I'm asking.
I think Paul spoke in ways that drew people from the particular to the universal. He speaks in ways that often appear to us to affirm a status quo, and that is largely because we now live in a world that is shaped by a new status quo that was different from his own. For instance "wives respect your husbands" seems to affirm a status quo because it did. All wives were expected to do exactly that. "Husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the church... and gave up himself for her..." only seems to affirm a status quo for us because we now expect (at least facially) husbands to sacrifice for their wives... but that's actually a NEW expectation.
We often shortchange ourselves by expecting Paul's writings to be timeless.
That's simply not how "inspiration" works.
Also, I know that it's possible that the idea of questioning "Scripture" can lead a lot of people in the white Evangelical spaces to react in ways that are not a sign of happiness, but I've stopped worrying about what people think about the questions because I think they don't want to ask the questions lest their formed ideas be shaken, perhaps to the point of collapse.
Coming from a tradition that emphasized fear of God, and His anger, rather than His love ("We are to fear and love God...") I believed I was not only always being judged harshly, I applied that same judgement to others. Accepting that God loves me has freed me to be more loving to others. Where did Christians get the belief we are to be God's agents of wrath/judgment rather than His love?
I think a lot of people came by it honestly and innocently. There are times when we try to protect people we love and care about and end up presenting the wrong message in the process. Imagine raising a daughter to make sure she doesn't dress or behave a certain way *so that she does not become a victim*. When we do that, we are unwittingly taking the blame away from victimizers.
In a similar way, encouraging people to live a certain way can sometimes turn into something that takes our focus away from where it ought to be.
I think Christians got to the point of being the agents of judgement/wrath by genuinely desiring to protect people from evil while losing track of God's grace for our imperfections and the very power of love to overcome evil.