The Pseudo-Apocalypse of Saint Paul

This is taken from The Writings of St. Paul. Excerpts are presented, and the brackets indicate my own thoughts, likely alluding to intertextual echoes. The writing takes place from Saint Paul's POV, so any 'I' is indicative of his "own" voice.
"CH22. And I [Paul] looked around upon that land, and I saw a river flowing with milk and honey [a typical description of the holy land; Ex. 3:8; Deut. 6:3], and there were tress planted by the bank of that river, full of fruit...

"And then he took me up from that place where I saw these things and behold, a river [Acheron, a river of Hades] and its waters were much whiter than milk, and I said to the angel, 'What is this?" And he said to me, 'This is the Acherusian Lake where is the City of Christ, but not every man is permitted to enter that city; for this is the journey which leads to God, and if anyone is a fornicator and impious, and is converted and shall repent and bear fruits worthy of repentance, at first when he has gone out of the body, he is brought and worships God..."

The implication is likely drawn from the eschatological denouement in Revelation 21-22. Apparently salvation is possible post-mortem in this pseudo-apocalyptic writing.

"CH33. When I heard this, I wept and groaned [contrast with John of Patmos, who never weeps over those who suffer in his literature, Meeks/Fitzgerald] over the human race. The angel answered and said to me, 'Why do you weep? Are you more merciful than God? For though God is good, he knows that there are punishments, and he patiently bears with the human race, allowing each one to do his own will in the time in which he dwells on the earth...'"

"Ch37. And I saw another multitude of pits in the same place, and in the midst of it a river full of a multitude of men and women, and worms consumed them [Isaiah 66:24; Sirach 7:17, 10:11, 19:3; Judith 16:17]. But I lamented, and sighing asked the angel and said, 'Sir, who are these?' And he said to me, 'These are those who exacted interest on interest and trusted in their riches [Prov. 11:28; The Book of Tobit; Sir. 5:1; Matt. 25:31-46] and did not hope in God that he was their helper [possibly a reference to Gen. 2:18].'

The punishment of fire and worms and the 'pit' are firmly indebted to the First Testament and even maybe Second Temple Judaism.

"And I saw other men and women covered with dust, and their countenance was like blood, and they were in a pit of pitch [often a reference to final destruction i.e. Isaiah 34:9; 2 Esdras 2:9] and sulfur running in a fiery river, and I asked, 'Sir, who are these?' And he said to me, 'These are they who committed the iniquity of Sodom and Gomorrah [interestingly, another post-NT reference in the third century where Sodom is indicted for the sin of homosexuality], the male with the male, for which reason they unceasingly pay the penalties.'

The writer is certainly in turn with various biblical texts involving death and destruction, co-opting them for his own message of taking us through a manifest pit of shame and torture.

"And their infants addressed the Lord God and the angels who were set over the punishments [of the mothers and fathers who defiled the image of God; Gen. 1:26-27], saying, 'Avenge us of our parents, for they defiled the image of God, having the name of God but not observing his precepts; they gave us for food to dogs and to be trodden on by swine; others they threw into the river." But the infants were handed over to the angels of Tartarus who were set over the punishments, that they might lead them to a spacious place of mercy; but their fathers and mothers were tortured in a perpetual punishment."

Interestingly, the infants are not bound by the sin of their parents. In fact, it seems to suggest the opposite. The view of original sin has likely not come about, as Augustine isn't here yet. Very interesting and very different it seems from what the New Testament teaches on this topic.

The finale is God finally coming down to the hellish place at the behest of Paul and the wailing of everyone there. He is moved by their repentance and offers them a "night and a day of refreshment forever."

Apparently Saint Paul has inspired greater fan fiction than Dante.

--Nick

Translated by J.K. Elliott, The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford: Clarendon, 1993). Cited in W.A. Meeks and J.F. Fitzgerald, The Writings of St. Paul.

John Wesley on The Love of God and Doctrinal Summaries (Part II)

For part one of this brief miniseries, enjoy it here. Onto the next sequence.

Q. 4. What is faith?
A. Faith, in general, is a divine supernatural [evidence, manifestation] of things not seen i.e. of past, future, or spiritual things. 'Tis a spiritual sight of God and the things of God (this is Wesley's standard definition, rarely deviated from). Therefore, repentance is a low-species of faith, i.e. a supernatural sense of an offended God. Justifying faith is a supernatural inward sense of sight of God in Christ reconciling the world unto himself. First, a sinner is convinced by the Holy Ghost: "Christ loved me and gave himself for me." This is that faith by which he is justified, or pardoned, the moment he receives it. Immediately the same Spirit bears witness, "Thou art pardoned, thou hast redemption in his blood." And this is saving faith, whereby the love of God is shed abroad his heart.

Q. 5. Have all true Christians this faith? May not a man be justified and not know it?
A. That all true Christians have this faith, even such a faith as implies an assurance of God's love, appears from Rom. 8:15, Eph. 4:32, 2 Cor. 13:5, Heb. 8:10, 1 Jn. 4:10 and 19 (this is a corrected text, that was mis-written). And that no man can be justified and not know it appears farther from the very nature of things -- for faith after repentance is ease after pain, rest after toil, light after darkness -- and from the immediate as well as distant fruits.

Q. 6. But may not a man go to heaven without it?
A. It doth not appear from Holy Writ that a man who hears the gospel can (Au. Mark 16:16)[Oddly, he doesn't cite this as a likely interpolation], whatever a heathen may do (Au. Rom. 2:14).

I've heard claims that Wesley was an inclusivist. This seems unlikely given the answer to question number 5. Of course, I could be misreading this text.

--Nick

This is adapted and copied from John Wesley: A Library of Protestant Thought (pgs137).

John Chrysostom on Woman

John Chrysostom (347-407) on the subject, singling out Junia.

How is this? A woman is honoured and proclaimed victorious! Again are we men put to shame. Or rather, we are not put to shame only, but have even an honour conferred upon us. For an honour we have, in that there are such women amongst us, but we are put to shame, in that we men are left so far behind them. But if we come to know whence it comes, that they are so adorned, we too shall speedily overtake them.

For the women of those days were more spirited than lions, sharing with the Apostles their labours for the Gospel’s sake. In this way they went traveling with them, and also performed all other ministries.

And indeed to be apostles at all is a great thing. But to be even amongst these of note, just consider what a great encomium this is! But they were of note owing to their works, to their achievements. Oh! How great is the devotion of this woman, that she should even be counted worthy of the appellation of apostle! But even here he does not stop…For after glory such as his in kind and degree, he sets others before himself, and does not hide from us the fact of his coming after them, nor ashamed of confessing this.

--Nick

Karl Barth, the Church as the Reconciling Christ

"The question of truth, with which theology is concerned throughout, is the question as to the agreement of the Church's distinctive talk about God with the being of the church. The criterion of past, future and therefore present Christian utterance is thus the being of the Church, namely, Jesus Christ, God in His gracious revealing and reconciling address to man.

Does Christian utterance derive from Him?

Does it lead to Him?

Is it comfortable in Him?

None of these questions can be put apart, but each is to be put independently and with all possible force."

Karl Barth, "Church Dogmatics" I.1 pg4.

Origen on "The Last Enemy, that is Death"

It is on this account, moreover, that the last enemy, who is called death, is said to be destroyed: in order, namely, that there may be no longer any sadness when there is no death nor diversity when there is no enemy. For the destruction of the last enemy must be understood in this way, not that its substance which was made by God shall perish, but that the hostile purpose and will which proceeded not from God but from itself will come to an end. It will be destroyed, therefore, not in the sense of ceasing to exist, but of being no longer an enemy and no longer death. For to the Almighty nothing is impossible6, nor is anything beyond the reach of cure by its Maker; for it was on this account that he made all things, that they might exist, and those things which were made in order to exist cannot cease to exist.

Origen, On First Principles, being Koetschau's Text of the De Principiis Translated into English. Chapter 6, Pgs250-51

Origen's Apokatastasis

"The restoration of all beings (apokatastasis) is the most important concept in Origen’s philosophy, and the touchstone by which he judges all other theories. His concept of universal restoration is based on equally strong Scriptural and Hellenistic philosophical grounds and is not original, as it can be traced back to Heraclitus, who stated that “the beginning and end are common” (Fragment B 103, tr. J. Barnes 1987, p. 115). Considering that Origen’s later opponents based their charges of heresy largely on this aspect of his teaching, it is surprising to see how well-grounded in scripture this doctrine really is. Origen’s main biblical proof-text is 1 Corinthians 15:25-28, especially verse 28, which speaks of the time “when all things shall be subdued unto him [Christ], then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all” (KJV, my emphasis). This scriptural notion of God being “all in all” (panta en pasin) is a strong theological support for his theory of apokatastasis. There are, of course, numerous other passages in scripture that contradict this notion, but we must remember that Origen’s strength resided in his philosophical ability to use reason and dialectic in support of humane doctrines, not in the ability to use scripture in support of dogmatical and anti-humanistic arguments. Origen imagined salvation not in terms of the saved rejoicing in heaven and the damned suffering in hell, but as a reunion of all souls with God."

Source.

--Nick

Origen, Homilies & Hermeneutics

"While he was not the first Christian to write commentaries on the books of the Bible, the scope of his achievements in this area was unmatched in the ancient Church. His are not the earliest Christian homilies preserved, but the size of the corpus of his homilies makes them the earliest that can be studied in breadth and depth. They reveal him as an accomplished preacher of the Bible and a concerned pastor of the Church. He seems, moreover, to have been the first Christian to conceptualize the hermeneutical process. He devotes a large portion of the fourth book of On First Principles to how the Bible should be interpreted. This issue is also raised in his homilies.5 His approach to the Bible prevailed in the Church among both his followers and his antagonists for centuries. Beryl Smalley has said, "To write a history of Origenist influence on the west would be tantamount to writing a history of western exegesis.6"

Origen, "Homilies on Genesis and Exodus." Page 2.

5. See, for examples, Ex. Hom. 5.1.
6. The Study of the Bible in the Middles Ages, 2nd ed. 1952 (reprint ed. Notre Dame, In., 1964), 14.

"Christian Leaders are Powerhouses on Twitter"

Quite interesting.

Amy O'Leary:

Why are some tweets more popular than others? 

When a Twitter staff member set out to answer that question 10 months ago, he thought the answer would emerge among posts from N.B.A. players, politicians or actors. Instead, he found a mystery: a set of messages that were ricocheting around Twitter, being forwarded and responded to at a rate that was off the charts. 

“They were punching way above their weight,” said Robin Sloan, who discovered the anomaly but did not recognize the names behind the tweets. 

Joyce Meyer, Max Lucado and Andy Stanley were not well known inside Twitter’s offices. But they had all built loyal ranks of followers well beyond their social networks — they were evangelical Christian leaders whose inspirational messages of God’s love perform about 30 times as well as Twitter messages from pop culture powerhouses like Lady Gaga. 

Fifteen percent of adult Internet users in the United States are on Twitter, and about half of those use the network every day, according to a report published this week by the Pew Research Center. But Twitter is always looking for ways to add new users. And so, with this new insight, the company sent a senior executive, Claire Díaz-Ortiz, on a mission:

To bring more religious leaders into the Twitter fold. 

 

“We had looked at different groups, like C.E.O.’s and high-level executives, thinking, oh, do we need to spend more time with them?” she said. “And then this religion thing popped up.” 

For the entire article, click HERE. 

--Nick