Why did my young preacher friend have to show me that verse? I spend a great deal of time and study defending the Gospel that Paul preached...telling folks that if all we had was the four gospels we would not have a ghost of a chance in developing a faith for this age. Paul had a unique calling to study, discern and reveal the good news to the gentiles, and he did a spot on job.
In recent decades however, with the rise of feminism and expose of biblicism Paul's practical sections have come under fire as being dated, confusing, and down right obtuse. I have agreed with some of that, but still contend that if you contextualize and place first century ideas in their place he still comes out strong.
Why did my young preacher chose to proof text with I Cor. 16:22. "If anyone does not love the Lord, let him be accursed". NASB Really, Paul, after all that love talk did you have to end so hatefully? And, please help me....is accursed better or worse that cursed? Is it like a double dog dare?
Sheesh!
This is the kind of proof text that will not win friends and influence people....and frankly the attitude is what makes me really hate religion. I really hope Paul can rise above that kind of sniping and let nothing unsavory escape his lips....because I just do not want to curse those who do not love God, I would rather co exist with them, or ignore them or pray for them hopefully, but I just am not up to cursing other people.
1 comment:
Many folks hate to admit how much culture played in the writing of the scriptures. Reading some of Paul's letters gives us an in depth look at the culture and how much it (and Judaism) affected him. And really, Paul was human like all of us and wrote with that kind of fallibility. (i.e. there are no popes).
Post a Comment