12-Jan-2012 - Christology And The Letters to Timothy

Visted 1 times

Consider this post along the lines of my post from yesterday on The Acts of the Trinity. As a Baptist from childhood, we have it programmed into our hard-drive that the Letters to Timothy and Titus are the lone authority in determining Baptist ecclesiology, the structure of our churches, and the nature of who our male pastor should look like. Monster beats studio pink diamond headphone If I could set apart the gender issue for a second (because, if you may be well aware I reject the exclusion of women from pulpits), I would like to consider what happens when we put these letters (Scripture) in a closed box, and claim to have the final interpretation on these texts. Jesus the Messiah is said to be the center of many Christians’ biblical interpretation, yes? If His life, death, and resurrection is the very content of the Gospel, and the Gospel is what the New Testament authors are all about, then would it not be suffice to say that the Pastoral Letters ARE NOT all about us, and how we handle our affairs? The other possible option would be to reject the Letter of Timothy all together, with verses like 1st Timothy 2:12 that have been used to silence women, studio Chicago White Sox Violet headphone from monster and 1st Timothy 6:1-2 where human enslavement remains uncontested. As a Christian trying to live faithfully, I remain very skeptical of both of our alternatives here: either the love it and shove it position or just scrapping it does not work for me for a few reasons. Bible scholar and Liberation theologian Elsa Tamez argues that if we reject 1st Timothy, “it becomes impossible to consider important and interesting aspects of this letter: it’s proclamation of universal salvation (4:10); its critique of riches and wealth (6:17-19); its reference to wealthy women (2:9); and especially its identification of the desire for money as a root of all evils (6:9)” (Global Bible Commentary, page 509). Tamez argues that the author of 1st Timothy is rejecting the Graeco-Roman patronage system, which favored the rich over the poor, within the church. The women “Paul” targets in 1st Timothy 2 may have been well to do women who could afford jewelry and get their hair-braided (2:2). I had to pause after reading this possible take on 1st Timothy 2, because for a few years I have heard egalitarians claim that these women may have been teachers of gnosticism, as if that was the only possibility. Of course, avoiding class considerations would distract us from discussing Timothy as a letter all about us, us us, the church church church rather than Christ, the Son of YHWH, the God of the Widows and Orphans. If indeed all of Scripture is God-breathed dr dre beats studio Kobe Bryant headphone (2nd Timothy 3:16), who does this God desire to give life, and how? Would that not be a more appropriate and concrete question (rather than keeping on with the abstract debate over inerrancy)? I submit that the teaching of the letters to Timothy have less and less to do with our ego-centric apologies for the our demoninations’ existences and have much more to do with who and how God has chosen the poor, elderly widows over the rich, young ones (1st Timothy 5:5-6;9). The Election of the Poor is not by anything that they have done by their own means; it is only through the “one mediator between God and humankind, Christ Jesus himself human, who gave himself a ransom for all.” (1st Timothy 2:5)

Comments (0)Post Comment View Whole Blog

12-Jan-2012 - Christology And The Letters to Timothy

Visted 2 times

Consider this post along the lines of my post from yesterday on The Acts of the Trinity. As a Baptist from childhood, we have it programmed into our hard-drive that the Letters to Timothy and Titus are the lone authority in determining Baptist ecclesiology, the structure of our churches, and the nature of who our male pastor should look like. If I could set apart Studio limited edition white diamond headphone from monster the gender issue for a second (because, if you may be well aware I reject the exclusion of women from pulpits), I would like to consider what happens when we put these letters (Scripture) in a closed box, and claim to have the final interpretation on these texts. Jesus the Messiah is said to be the center of many Christians’ biblical interpretation, yes? If His life, death, and resurrection is the very content of the Gospel, and the Gospel is what the New Testament authors are all about, then would it not be suffice to say that the Pastoral Letters ARE NOT all about us, and how we handle our affairs? The other possible option would be to reject the Letter of Timothy all together, with verses like 1st Timothy 2:12 that have been used to silence women, and 1st Timothy 6:1-2 where human enslavement remains uncontested. As a Christian trying to live faithfully, I remain very skeptical of both of our alternatives here: either the love it and shove it position or just scrapping it does not work for me for a few reasons. Bible scholar and Liberation theologian Elsa Tamez argues that if we reject 1st Timothy, “it becomes impossible to consider important and interesting aspects of this letter: it’s proclamation of universal salvation (4:10); its critique of riches and wealth (6:17-19); its reference to wealthy women (2:9); and especially its identification of the desire for money as a root of all evils (6:9)” (Global Bible Commentary, page 509). Tamez argues that the author of 1st Timothy is rejecting the Graeco-Roman patronage system, which favored the rich over the poor, within the church. The women “Paul” targets in 1st Timothy 2 may have been well to do women who could afford jewelry and get their hair-braided (2:2). I had to pause after reading this possible take on 1st Timothy 2, because beats by dre studio graffiti headphone for a few years I have heard egalitarians claim that these women may have been teachers of gnosticism, as if that was the only possibility. Of course, avoiding class considerations would distract us from discussing Timothy as a letter all about us, us us, the church church church rather than Christ, the Son of YHWH, the God of the Widows and Orphans. If indeed all of Scripture is God-breathed (2nd Timothy 3:16), who does this God desire to give life, and how? Would that not be a more appropriate and concrete question (rather monster beats studio limited edition headphone grey than keeping on with the abstract debate over inerrancy)? I submit that the teaching of the letters to Timothy have less and less to do with our ego-centric apologies for the our demoninations’ existences and have much more to do with who and how God has chosen the poor, elderly widows over the rich, young ones (1st Timothy 5:5-6;9). The Election of the Poor is not by anything that they have done by their own means; it is only through the “one mediator between God and humankind, Christ Jesus himself human, who gave himself a ransom for all.” (1st Timothy 2:5)

Comments (0)Post Comment View Whole Blog