Sunday, December 3, 2017

Advent 2017-1 For the past several years, when Christmas rolls around, I have dug into my old sermons for material worthy of being reprised. I don’t even care if I am reading the same stuff exactly as before—Christmas is a time of ritual, and nostalgia, and tradition—traditions where the same precious words are repeated once more, like familiar tunes that never stop singing a new song. In The Screwtape Letters, C.S. Lewis spoke of the rhythmic succession of Holy days of feast and fast, under the general subject of Man's need for variety in unity; he said that the return to an immemorial theme was an archetypal aspect of Human spiritual anatomy, and helped put him in touch with the divine. Indeed, the symbologies, associated with feast days, evoke a particularized mind state that is able to find the universal in the individual. Thus, with a particularized image in mind, we begin with something from 2011: Advent--a time of preparation. I think it has taken me this long--62 years--to come to appreciate these little seasonal reminders the church has given us, to help us remain mindful. Each season seems to carry a unique message, and all these individual seasonal messages add up to a yearly calendar that helps us keep sharp our sensitivities to things it might be easy to start taking for granted--a remindful calendar-- a remember to pay attention calendar. The time of preparation dramatizes the ritual of birth and death that is played out every single day, and reminds us to be ready. The Christ may come at any time, but we must be ready. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: "Advent is a season observed in many Western Christian churches as a time of expectant waiting and preparation for the celebration of the Nativity of Jesus at Christmas. The term is an anglicized version of the Latin word adventus, meaning "coming". Advent is the beginning of the Western liturgical year and commences on Advent Sunday. The Eastern churches' equivalent of Advent is called the Nativity Fast, but it differs in both length and observances and does not begin the church year, which starts instead on September 1. At least in the Roman Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, Moravian, Presbyterian and Methodist calendars, Advent starts on the fourth Sunday before December 25, which is the Sunday between November 27 and December 3 inclusive. Latin adventus is the translation of the Greek word parousia, commonly used to refer to the Second Coming of Christ. For Christians, the season of Advent anticipates the coming of Christ from two different perspectives. The season offers the opportunity to share in the ancient longing for the coming of the Messiah, and to be alert for his Second Coming.”   What follows is a little list of things to remember in Advent written by Martin Luther: HOMILY II: THE COMING OF THE KING. FIRST SUNDAY IN ADVENT. (FROM THE GOSPEL.) 
"Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek," Matt. xxi. 5. 
"THIS is a prophecy of the Advent of Our Lord Jesus Christ, about which there are three signs. First, the dignity of Him Who is coming; secondly, the utility of His Advent; thirdly, the manner in which He came. Of the first sign we read in the Gospel, "Thy King cometh;" a merciful King; a just King; a wise King; a terrible King; an omnipotent King; an eternal King. A merciful King in sparing; a just in judging; a good in rewarding; a wise in governing; an omnipotent King in defending the good; a terrible King in punishing the evil; an eternal King in ruling eternally, and in bestowing immortality. Of the first, Isa. xvi. 5: "And in mercy shall the throne be established." Of the second, Isa. xxxiv.: "And behold, a King shall reign in justice;" Isa. xvi. 5: "And He shall sit upon it in truth in the tabernacle of David." Of the third, Ps. Ixxiii. 1: "Truly God, is good to Israel, even to such as are of a clean heart." Of the fourth, Jer. xxiii. 5: "I will raise unto David a righteous branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute justice and judgment in the earth." Of the fifth, Esth. xiii. 9: "Lord, Lord, the King Almighty, for the whole world is in Thy power." Of the seventh, Jer. x. 10: " But the Lord is the true God, He is the living God and an everlasting King ;" S. Luke i. 33: " And of His Kingdom there shall be no end." Of the seven, collectively, 2 Macc. i. 24: "O Lord, Lord, God, Creator of all things, Who art fearful, and strong, and righteous, and merciful, and the only gracious King." Wisdom in the Creator, mercy in the pitiful, goodness in the good, justice in the just, severity in the terrible, power in the powerful, eternity in the eternal. This is the King Who cometh to thee for thy profit. Here the use of the Advent is noted, for it was seven-fold as applied to the present time: First, for the illumination of the world; second, for the spoliation of Hades; third, for the reparation of Heaven; fourth, for the destruction of sin ; fifth, for the vanquishment of the devil; sixth, for the reconciliation of man with God; seventh, for the beatification of man. The Son of God did not want to be seen and found in heaven. Therefore he descended from heaven into this humility and came to us in our flesh, laid himself into the womb of his mother and into the manger and went on to the cross. This was the ladder that he placed on earth so that we might ascend to God on it. This is the way you must take. If you depart from this way and try to speculate about the glory of the Divine Majesty—without this ladder—you will invent marvelous matters that transcend your horizon, but you will do so at very great harm to yourself."   One irresistible aspect of Christmas is the fantastic side—the magical side. The following is from Advent in Fairyland, inspired by an offhand remark made in Wikipedia concerning Theosophy and angels: "It is believed by Theosophists that nature spirits, elementals (gnomes, undines, sylphs, and salamanders), and fairies can be also be observed when the third eye is activated. It is maintained by Theosophists that these less evolutionarily developed beings have never been previously incarnated as humans; they are regarded as being on a separate line of spiritual evolution called the “deva evolution”; eventually, as their souls advance as they reincarnate, it is believed they will incarnate as devas." So, according to Steiner, if you develop your third eye, you can see fairies, a kind of low-class angel. I was thinking how this fairyland is so much more visible to youngsters than it is to grown-ups; after all, what kid doesn't understand and believe in the tooth fairy, or Santa Claus? Perhaps the use of the third eye is more native to innocence than to the jaded worldly perspective. Maybe it is just this, as I heard a Waldorf teacher once declare: "All human nerve cells, in order to properly transmit chemico-electrical signals to the muscles, and so forth, are protected by a kind of insulation material called myelin sheathing. The growth of myelin sheathing around the nerves in the brains of young people being is not competed at birth; in fact it is not completely finished until, say, the age of eight or nine." This leaves the tender brains of children, in their formative years, exposed--unprotected from the subtle electromagnetic influences that radiate all around us, all the time, but which are invisible to our grown-up perceptual apparati. As we get older all our physical equipment becomes more and more stiff and inflexible, and we have to find other ways to move from one consciousness state to another, in particular, to pre-conscious states. Indeed, the spontaneous sensitivity of children to magical realities comes from their ability to freely cross over boundaries of different mind states. As my son Emlyn once said, when he was two: "I fly with the angels at night in my bed." I was thinking that the magic of Christmas involves a self-willed descent into a primitive mind state in which beings who live on the borders of our reality are more apparent, more glowing with astral resonance, and more connected to the subtle terrains of super-mundane existence. Perhaps this is a good thing, as it connects us to higher worlds; but perhaps all the sugar-plum fairies and Santa's elves are just some phenomenological trash we need to get rid of. This is of interest if we seek to "pump up the volume" (so to speak) of our holiday sensitivities by delving (a little deeper than usual) into the resonance of archetypal symbologies. Last week we talked a lot about the cycles of the sun in its yearly passage between darkness and light; we also talked about light in general, as it shines symbolically forth from candles, and Christmas tree lights, and angels, etc. We also have suggested that this time of year awakens in us ancient memories of primordial man, remembering, in us, his magical tales--we have suggested that, in the waning of the light, there is both hope for the future and a nostalgic descent into pre-conscious mind states where live the elves, and gnomes and fauns of a fairyland that long ago disappeared in the mists of time. On such residual elf, who haunts the edges of our Christmas Mind, is Santa Claus. Santa Claus is constantly paraded before our eyes at this time of year, so many of our thoughts are unavoidably diverted to him. I though it would be fun (in the best possible sense of the word) to present something on Santa Claus, and see if he is a good guy or not. Of course, the greatest Santa Claus movie of all time is Miracle on 34th St. That movie's invocation of faith, in a materialistic world, is a message that will bear repeating until the end of time. But it is not the classic Natalie Wood movie I wish to quote first, but a remake of Miracle on 34th St. with a little original speech inserted by John Hughes: "Santa Claus: I'm not just a whimsical figure who wears a charming suit and affects a jolly demeanor, you know; I'm a symbol--I'm a symbol of the human ability to suppress the selfish and hateful tendencies that rule the major part of our lives. And if you can't accept anything on faith, then you're doomed to a life dominated by doubt." Thus, even in the most popular, commercial productions in the mainstream, Santa Claus and faith are intimately linked. The question of whether you should teach your kids about Santa Claus, or not, calls into question, at a basic level, just how deeply committed you are to living a life that affirms the existence of things not seen. The Baptists insist, against all reasonable scientific proof, that the world was created in six days, and yet many of the grown-up Baptists DON'T believe in Santa Claus. Whassup wit dat? I say that these two scenarios, Creationism and Santa Claus, call forth qualities of belief that have much in common with each other. The suspension of rational constraints in favor of an impulse of the heart, an impulse of desire, and an openness to the possibilities of the miraculous, is at the root of all faithful thoughts, and is the impetus behind all faithful acts. Now, even though our sensitivity to subtle energies and identities is heightened at Christmas time, and the magic in the air promotes the entry into altered states of consciousness, we must remember that this entry is ultimately a SELF-WILLED DESCENT into a primitive mind state—it is an act of WILL. In truth we create Christmas in ourselves as we purposefully tune our personal resonance to the frequency of the time. In After Many a Summer, Aldous Huxley writes: "There must also be the recollection which seeks to transform and transcend intelligence. Many are called, but few are chosen--because few even know in what salvation consists. . . . Only a few are chosen because it is only the few who choose to hear and heed the call – they choose to be chosen." "In CHOOSING we are CHOSEN. To bear the cross assigned to us is never easy--if it were easy they would call it something else. Suffering is how we choose, or, rather, it is the suffering that validates our choice, because only by suffering is our will tempered, is our test passed. Some sacrifice is necessary; we exchange our suffering for spiritual rewards, we give up what is given us in exchange for what was ours before the world began. Thus the WILL to choose, and choose over and over again the virtuous path, is the key to being chosen." Thus a discussion of Christmas magic leads us naturally to a discussion of miracles. Clearly, the most stupendous miracle of all is the virgin birth of Jesus. This is from The Miracle of the Virgin Birth: Luke 1:46-55: “My soul magnifies the Lord, And my spirit rejoices in God my Savior; Because he has regarded the lowliness of his handmaid; For behold, henceforth all generations shall call me blessed; Because he who is mighty has done great things for me, and holy is his name; And his mercy is from generation to generation on those who fear him. He has shown might with his arm, He has scattered the proud in the conceit of their heart. He has put down the mighty from their thrones, and has exalted the lowly. He has filled the hungry with good things, and the rich he has sent away empty. He has given help to Israel, his servant, mindful of his mercy Even as he spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his posterity forever.” What dumbfounding idea, that a 13-year-old girl was given this message! We will begin this sermon with some commentary by C. S. Lewis on the subject of miracles, from his book, Miracles, and then move on to the miracle of the virgin birth: Miracles Quotes “Miracles do not, in fact, break the laws of nature.” “In Science we have been reading only the notes to a poem; in Christianity we find the poem itself.” “He is not the soul of Nature, nor any part of Nature. He inhabits eternity: He dwells in a high and holy place: heaven is His throne, not his vehicle, earth is his footstool, not his vesture. One day he will dismantle both and make a new heaven and earth. He is not to be identified even with the 'divine spark' in man. He is God and not man.” “It is a profound mistake to imagine that Christianity ever intended to dissipate the bewilderment and even the terror, the sense of our own nothingness, which come upon us when we think about the nature of things. It comes to intensify them. Without such sensations there is no religion. Many a man, brought up in the glib profession of some shallow form of Christianity, who comes through reading Astronomy to realize for the first time how majestically indifferent most reality is to man, and who perhaps abandons his religion on that account, may at that moment be having his first genuinely religious experience. . . . Christianity does not involve the belief that all things were made for man.” “Men became scientific because they expected Law in Nature, and they expected Law in Nature because they believed in a Legislator. In most modern scientists this belief has died: it will be interesting to see how long their confidence in uniformity survives it. Two significant developments have already appeared—the hypothesis of a lawless sub-nature, and the surrender of the claim that science is true. We may be living nearer than we suppose to the end of the Scientific Age.” “No philosophical theory which I have yet come across is a radical improvement on the words of Genesis, that 'In the beginning God made Heaven and Earth'. . . . If you compare it with the creation legends of other peoples--with all these delightful absurdities in which giants to be cut up and floods to be dried up are made to exist before creation--the depth and originality of this Hebrew folk tale will soon be apparent.” “For this reason, the question whether miracles occur can never be answered simply by experience. Every event which might claim to be a miracle is, in the last resort, something presented to our senses, something seen, heard, touched, smelled or tasted. And our senses are not infallible. If anything extraordinary seems to have happened, we can always say that we have been the victims of an illusion. If we hold a philosophy which excludes the supernatural, this is what we always shall say. What we learn from experience depends on the kind of philosophy we bring to experience. It is therefore useless to appeal to experience before we have settled, as well as we can, the philosophical question.” [Sidebar: In other words, if we are scanning for miracles, we will see them everywhere, right and left; if we are not scanning for miracles, will see nothing, old wine discovered in a back room, or a man arising from a coma. In Lewis' The Last Battle the myopic dwarves huddle together just inside the doors to Paradise and see nothing but eternal darkness because they believe in nothing but eternal darkness.] “As long as one is a Naturalist, ‘Nature’ is the only word for ‘Everything.’ And Everything is not a subject about which anything very interesting can be said or (save by illusion) felt. One aspect of things strikes us and we talk of the ‘peace’ of Nature; another strikes us and we talk of her cruelty. And then, because we cannot quite repress our high instinct to worship the Self-existent, we are all at sea and our moods fluctuate and Nature means to us whatever we please as the moods select and slur. But everything becomes different when we recognize that Nature is a creature, a created thing, with its own particular tang or flavour. There is no need any longer to select and slur. It is not in her, but in Something far beyond her, that all lines meet and all contrasts are explained. It is no more baffling that the creature called Nature should be both fair and cruel than that the first man you meet in the train should be a dishonest grocer and a kind husband. For she is not the Absolute; she is one of the creatures, with her good points and her bad points and her own unmistakable flavour running through them all.” ― C.S. Lewis, Miracles The introduction to a discussion of the virgin birth by referring to the general subject of miracles, implies that the virgin birth is just one of a number of events subsumed under the generic umbrella, "miracles." This may be true, but it may also be true that the virgin birth deserves a higher place in the miracle hall of fame than such trivialities as turning water into wine, or raising Lazarus from the dead, because the virgin birth is the foundation miracle, the FIRST miracle of Jesus, from which all future miracle succeed. The Virgin birth has always been of interest to me because it's one of those miracles that always seems to me to be a side issue. However, the question of the divinity of Jesus is most complex and is very open to various interpretations. The problem of the uniqueness of Jesus' Virgin Conception is that virgin births are reported in many religions, not least of all Buddhism; so the question of the unique Christ consciousness necessarily being delivered unto Man through a virgin is sort of a competition, because more than one great Saint can make that claim. One of the things I found interesting, in the research for one of my previous sermons, was what Martin Luther had to say about the virgin birth: to be sure, Jesus was a Jew, of the house of David, a house of kings--but Luther asserts that a virgin birth was necessary in order for Jesus to be untainted by the original sin of Adam, which he would necessarily have inherited from the biological blood of a human father. Therefore, the virgin birth is really a prerequisite for the personality makeup of the Perfect Man. Speaking of Abraham, Luther says, in his Sermon for the Fifth Sunday in Lent; John 8:46-59: "Then he saw and understood that Christ, born of his seed through a pure virgin, so as not to be cursed with Adam's children but to remain blessed, should suffer for the whole world, cause this to be preached, and thus overwhelm the whole world with blessing etc. This is the day of Christ, the dispensation of the Gospel, that is the light of this day, which radiates from Christ as from the sun of righteousness, and shines and enlightens the whole world." I know that this may sound blasphemous to some, but I must confess that I am completely open to the idea that, in the long history of mankind, there have been more than one virgin birth; just as I am absolutely sure that there have been more than one person who was able to perform miracles. Miracles come from God not from any single person or entity. The fact that Jesus is the focus of the divine personality, the divine consciousness, is very, very important; but it is not singular, and it is not absolutely unique. The Messiah, the Anointed One, is a focus, in mundane reality, of the infinite Personality of God; but so, to certain lesser extents, are we all. That which stands out, in the case of Jesus, is that He chose to make a sacrifice so hugely magnificent, that it empowered Him to take a place for Himself midway between Man and God. The scope of His purpose defined the scope of His all-encompassing consciousness. He could not have performed His Humanitarian purpose without donning the Mantle of God's Only Begotten Son. This is the BIG MIRACLE. The significance of the Virgin birth is not so much that it was miraculous, but that it is one of number of signs which are associated with the coming of the Messiah. We need these signs to bolster our faith, they are part of the ceremony of the miraculous--but the signs are not the source of our faith, nor are they the objects of our faith: they are merely a window dressing, which makes the whole thing prettier; in music we say, "To glorify God". The glorification of God, the tiny little miracles that reveal hints and angles of the divine consciousness to the mundane consciousness, are lovely parts of the package; but they do not change the essential fact that Jesus was chosen to perform a certain act: to perform the sacrifices and ceremonies necessary for Him to become the mediator between God and Man; a mediator which did not exist before His coming. When we consider how ancient is this planet, and how many souls have passed through the worldly initiation, it is dumbfounding to consider that God, through Jesus, for the first time, incarnated into Human form so that all succeeding generations might have direct access to the Divine in the world, in Jesus, and in themselves. Isn't it WONDERFUL! It may be that in the dark recesses of the past, other saviors brought the good news to the inhabitants of other times unremembered, but this does not diminish the significance of Jesus' coming and His magnificent sacrifice, His great TAKING OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR ORIGINAL SIN. Regardless of any scientific theories, or New Age mumbo-jumbo, the centrality of Jesus, in the evolution of Mankind toward a higher spiritual identity, is absolute! In fact, this is just about the only thing I believe in ABSOLUTELY. The following is a book review--a review that neatly summarizes the main points of the book, MYTH OF THE NATIVITY - The Virgin Birth Re-examined - By Andrew Welburn [ Floris Books ] Review Author: Pearl Goodwin [Originally appeared in 'Perspectives' Vol 77 No1] "The theme of the virgin birth has long fascinated not only theologians and scholars, but also everyone who has an open mind for the Gospel stories of Matthew and Luke. It is a fascination that arises largely out of a fundamental difficulty, particularly in our time, of imagining that Jesus of Nazareth was born outside of the basic biological principles governing conception and birth, without the participation of Joseph. So great is this problem that for many people it stands in the way of their accepting Christianity. And so steeped are we in what seem to be the unshakeable laws of nature, that it is almost impossible to imagine that a human being could be born in any way other than through the laws of nature. Only those people who can live with strong and unquestioning faith accept the possibility of the virgin birth just as it stands in the Gospel, understanding it as a miracle, beyond the laws of nature which have been in existence since God's promise to Noah after the flood. Putting aside for a moment this whole aspect of natural law, it is clear that the virgin birth has many other layers of meaning, and it is these that Andrew Welburn addresses in his latest book. He approaches the subject with what we have come to expect from him, a wide scholarship infused with spiritual imagination. For him, what makes the birth "virgin" has got less to do with the biological side than with a stream of thought that comes out of the far past. Much of the book is taken up with showing that the Gospel stories are by no means the only such events in history. In his own words "the concept of the virgin birth was associated with a new age, the new revelation, the reappearing prophet, the world's saviour, a mystical, divine child." Virgin here means that something new has come to the earth. There is a great richness of material describing instances of this, much of it taken from more hidden, "occult" literature. To mention but one, the birth of Melchisedek, who appears only very briefly in the book of Genesis, bearing bread and wine to Abraham. He brought a glimpse of heavenly heights before the necessary but more earthly religious forms of Judaism took shape. The Melchisedek of Genesis is but one of a long line bearing that name, beginning with the son of the brother of Noah, Nir, and his wife Sopanim. The story has echoes of the birth of John the Baptist to parents that are old, and also of the Matthew story, the shock of Niv when Sopanin is found to be with child. Sopanin died out of the pain of rejection - but the child is born out of the dead body and immediately can sit up and speak. There are many such stories, taken from Egyptian, Judaic and also Gnostic sources, to mention but a few. It is clear that this book has been written for a wider readership than those familiar with the work of Rudolf Steiner. Hopefully it will reach many people, for it takes the realm of spirit as serious and real within a scholarly context. So the work of Rudolf Steiner on this theme is mentioned only briefly and in an understated way. Steiner spoke about the fact that in the past, and sometimes even now, conception could take place in sleep, that is unconsciously and therefore purely, or virginally. In that state the heavenly star of the individual can unite with the biological counterpart.” [Sidebar: I did not become fully conscious, until this moment, that I have always imagined the Divine impregnation as occurring during sleep. The Zeffirelli movie, Jesus of Nazareth, depicts the angel in the Anunciation as a beam of light shining through a high window. Mary listens raptly to the angel's message, and then sleeps. Kind of like the tooth fairy.] “Natural law and spiritual law can be brought together and it is important that this should be understood. The birth of Jesus of Nazareth was not a virgin birth in the sense of there being no biological father. Jesus of Nazareth had to be a full human being, a special one certainty, but a truly human being, in order to fulfill Christ's deed of redemption. Perhaps this side needs slightly more emphasis in the book, even though Andrew Welburn comes to the same conclusion from other directions. He shows us that the Gospel story is the culmination of a great tradition stretching far back into prehistory, and that what comes as new spiritual impulse out of the heavens must always have the character of "virgin”.” This last paragraph, with its implication that Jesus' incarnation may not have been a purely spiritual virgin birth, but, rather, had a very natural biological component, fits in with what I have said many times: that I don't need a miracle to demonstrate the miraculous. Whether you clothe the miraculous in the jargon of the New Science, or in the backward Baptist Creationist attitude doesn't matter. The miraculous is in how, through Jesus, the spirit of God seeps into every fiber of Man's essential being; just as, in the proposition that the creation of the world took place in six days, or in the case of Jesus' raising Lazarus from the dead, I do not need these miracles to be literally true for them to be spiritually true. There is no distinction in my mind between that which is physically true and that which is spiritually true; that spiritual truths lean over into the physical is part and parcel of the whole multi-dimensionality of existence. As to the the question of the literal truth of the virgin birth, I have to say, once again, I don't really care. What I do care about is this: the coming of Jesus into the world was prepared by so many natural signs and events, that three wise men, from way out of town, were able to read the stars and find the baby in a manger, delivered to Man in what can only be described as a miraculous way. Next week we will talk about the Three Wise Men. Let us pray: Jesus, Your ways and means are so beyond our powers of comprehension, that our boggled minds shiver to pieces before their immensity. Deliver the flavor of your miraculous birth through the signs of the season, and give us a taste of that understanding which we know will be ours, after a time, in higher places. Amen.

Advent 2017-1


For the past several years, when Christmas rolls around, I have dug into my old sermons for material worthy of being reprised. I don’t even care if I am reading the same stuff exactly as before—Christmas is a time of ritual, and nostalgia, and tradition—traditions where the same precious words are repeated once more, like familiar tunes that never stop singing a new song. 

In The Screwtape Letters, C.S. Lewis spoke of the rhythmic succession of Holy days of feast and fast, under the general subject of Man's need for variety in unity; he said that the return to an immemorial theme was an archetypal aspect of Human spiritual anatomy, and helped put him in touch with the divine. Indeed, the symbologies, associated with feast days, evoke a particularized mind state that is able to find the universal in the individual. 

Thus, with a particularized image in mind, we begin with something from 2011:

Advent--a time of preparation. I think it has taken me this long--62 years--to come to appreciate these little seasonal reminders the church has given us, to help us remain mindful. Each season seems to carry a unique message, and all these individual seasonal messages add up to a yearly calendar that helps us keep sharp our sensitivities to things it might be easy to start taking for granted--a remindful calendar-- a remember to pay attention calendar.

The time of preparation dramatizes the ritual of birth and death that is played out every single day, and reminds us to be ready. The Christ may come at any time, but we must be ready.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
"Advent is a season observed in many Western Christian churches as a time of expectant waiting and preparation for the celebration of the Nativity of Jesus at Christmas. The term is an anglicized version of the Latin word adventus, meaning "coming".

Advent is the beginning of the Western liturgical year and commences on Advent Sunday. The Eastern churches' equivalent of Advent is called the Nativity Fast, but it differs in both length and observances and does not begin the church year, which starts instead on September 1. At least in the Roman Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, Moravian, Presbyterian and Methodist calendars, Advent starts on the fourth Sunday before December 25, which is the Sunday between November 27 and December 3 inclusive.

Latin adventus is the translation of the Greek word parousia, commonly used to refer to the Second Coming of Christ. For Christians, the season of Advent anticipates the coming of Christ from two different perspectives. The season offers the opportunity to share in the ancient longing for the coming of the Messiah, and to be alert for his Second Coming.”

What follows is a little list of things to remember in Advent written by Martin Luther:
 HOMILY II: THE COMING OF THE KING.
FIRST SUNDAY IN ADVENT. (FROM THE GOSPEL.)

"Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek," Matt. xxi. 5.

"THIS is a prophecy of the Advent of Our Lord Jesus Christ, about which there are three signs. First, the dignity of Him Who is coming; secondly, the utility of His Advent; thirdly, the manner in which He came. Of the first sign we read in the Gospel, "Thy King cometh;" a merciful King; a just King; a wise King; a terrible King; an omnipotent King; an eternal King. A merciful King in sparing; a just in judging; a good in rewarding; a wise in governing; an omnipotent King in defending the good; a terrible King in punishing the evil; an eternal King in ruling eternally, and in bestowing immortality. 

Of the first, Isa. xvi. 5: 
"And in mercy shall the throne be established." 
Of the second, Isa. xxxiv.: 
"And behold, a King shall reign in justice;" 

Isa. xvi. 5: 
"And He shall sit upon it in truth in the tabernacle of David." 
Of the third, Ps. Ixxiii. 1: 
"Truly God, is good to Israel, even to such as are of a clean heart." 
Of the fourth, Jer. xxiii. 5: 
"I will raise unto David a righteous branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute justice and judgment in the earth." 
Of the fifth, Esth. xiii. 9: 
"Lord, Lord, the King Almighty, for the whole world is in Thy power." 
Of the seventh, Jer. x. 10: 
" But the Lord is the true God, He is the living God and an everlasting King ;" 
S. Luke i. 33: 
" And of His Kingdom there shall be no end." 
Of the seven, collectively, 2 Macc. i. 24: 
"O Lord, Lord, God, Creator of all things, 
Who art fearful, and strong, and righteous, and merciful, and the only gracious King." 

Wisdom in the Creator, mercy in the pitiful, goodness in the good, justice in the just, severity in the terrible, power in the powerful, eternity in the eternal. This is the King Who cometh to thee for thy profit. Here the use of the Advent is noted, for it was seven-fold as applied to the present time: First, for the illumination of the world; second, for the spoliation of Hades; third, for the reparation of Heaven; fourth, for the destruction of sin ; fifth, for the vanquishment of the devil; sixth, for the reconciliation of man with God; seventh, for the beatification of man.

The Son of God did not want to be seen and found in heaven. Therefore he descended from heaven into this humility and came to us in our flesh, laid himself into the womb of his mother and into the manger and went on to the cross. This was the ladder that he placed on earth so that we might ascend to God on it. This is the way you must take. If you depart from this way and try to speculate about the glory of the Divine Majesty—without this ladder—you will invent marvelous matters that transcend your horizon, but you will do so at very great harm to yourself."


One irresistible aspect of Christmas is the fantastic side—the magical side. The following is from Advent in Fairyland, inspired by an offhand remark made in Wikipedia concerning Theosophy and angels: 

"It is believed by Theosophists that nature spirits, elementals (gnomes, undines, sylphs, and salamanders), and fairies can be also be observed when the third eye is activated. It is maintained by Theosophists that these less evolutionarily developed beings have never been previously incarnated as humans; they are regarded as being on a separate line of spiritual evolution called the “deva evolution”; eventually, as their souls advance as they reincarnate, it is believed they will incarnate as devas."

So, according to Steiner, if you develop your third eye, you can see fairies, a kind of low-class angel. I was thinking how this fairyland is so much more visible to youngsters than it is to grown-ups; after all, what kid doesn't understand and believe in the tooth fairy, or Santa Claus? Perhaps the use of the third eye is more native to innocence than to the jaded worldly perspective. Maybe it is just this, as I heard a Waldorf teacher once declare: 

"All human nerve cells, in order to properly transmit chemico-electrical signals to the muscles, and so forth, are protected by a kind of insulation material called myelin sheathing. The growth of myelin sheathing around the nerves in the brains of young people being is not competed at birth; in fact it is not completely finished until, say, the age of eight or nine." 

This leaves the tender brains of children, in their formative years, exposed--unprotected from the subtle electromagnetic influences that radiate all around us, all the time, but which are invisible to our grown-up perceptual apparati. As we get older all our physical equipment becomes more and more stiff and inflexible, and we have to find other ways to move from one consciousness state to another, in particular, to pre-conscious states. Indeed, the spontaneous sensitivity of children to magical realities comes from their ability to freely cross over boundaries of different mind states. As my son Emlyn once said, when he was two: "I fly with the angels at night in my bed."

I was thinking that the magic of Christmas involves a self-willed descent into a primitive mind state in which beings who live on the borders of our reality are more apparent, more glowing with astral resonance, and more connected to the subtle terrains of super-mundane existence. Perhaps this is a good thing, as it connects us to higher worlds; but perhaps all the sugar-plum fairies and Santa's elves are just some phenomenological trash we need to get rid of. 

This is of interest if we seek to "pump up the volume" (so to speak) of our holiday sensitivities by delving (a little deeper than usual) into the resonance of archetypal symbologies. Last week we talked a lot about the cycles of the sun in its yearly passage between darkness and light; we also talked about light in general, as it shines symbolically forth from candles, and Christmas tree lights, and angels, etc. We also have suggested that this time of year awakens in us ancient memories of primordial man, remembering, in us, his magical tales--we have suggested that, in the waning of the light, there is both hope for the future and a nostalgic descent into pre-conscious mind states where live the elves, and gnomes and fauns of a fairyland that long ago disappeared in the mists of time.

On such residual elf, who haunts the edges of our Christmas Mind, is Santa Claus. Santa Claus is constantly paraded before our eyes at this time of year, so many of our thoughts are unavoidably diverted to him. I though it would be fun (in the best possible sense of the word) to present something on Santa Claus, and see if he is a good guy or not.

Of course, the greatest Santa Claus movie of all time is Miracle on 34th St. That movie's invocation of faith, in a materialistic world, is a message that will bear repeating until the end of time. But it is not the classic Natalie Wood movie I wish to quote first, but a remake of Miracle on 34th St. with a little original speech inserted by John Hughes:

"Santa Claus: I'm not just a whimsical figure who wears a charming suit and affects a jolly demeanor, you know; I'm a symbol--I'm a symbol of the human ability to suppress the selfish and hateful tendencies that rule the major part of our lives. And if you can't accept anything on faith, then you're doomed to a life dominated by doubt."

Thus, even in the most popular, commercial productions in the mainstream, Santa Claus and faith are intimately linked. The question of whether you should teach your kids about Santa Claus, or not, calls into question, at a basic level, just how deeply committed you are to living a life that affirms the existence of things not seen. The Baptists insist, against all reasonable scientific proof, that the world was created in six days, and yet many of the grown-up Baptists DON'T believe in Santa Claus. Whassup wit dat? I say that these two scenarios, Creationism and Santa Claus, call forth qualities of belief that have much in common with each other. The suspension of rational constraints in favor of an impulse of the heart, an impulse of desire, and an openness to the possibilities of the miraculous, is at the root of all faithful thoughts, and is the impetus behind all faithful acts.

Now, even though our sensitivity to subtle energies and identities is heightened at Christmas time, and the magic in the air promotes the entry into altered states of consciousness, we must remember that this entry is ultimately a SELF-WILLED DESCENT into a primitive mind state—it is an act of WILL. In truth we create Christmas in ourselves as we purposefully tune our personal resonance to the frequency of the time.

In After Many a Summer, Aldous Huxley writes:

"There must also be the recollection which seeks to transform and transcend intelligence. Many are called, but few are chosen--because few even know in what salvation consists. . . . Only a few are chosen because it is only the few who choose to hear and heed the call – they choose to be chosen." 

"In CHOOSING we are CHOSEN.

To bear the cross assigned to us is never easy--if it were easy they would call it something else. Suffering is how we choose, or, rather, it is the suffering that validates our choice, because only by suffering is our will tempered, is our test passed. Some sacrifice is necessary; we exchange our suffering for spiritual rewards, we give up what is given us in exchange for what was ours before the world began.

Thus the WILL to choose, and choose over and over again the virtuous path, is the key to being chosen."

Thus a discussion of Christmas magic leads us naturally to a discussion of miracles. Clearly, the most stupendous miracle of all is the virgin birth of Jesus. This is from  The Miracle of the Virgin Birth:

Luke 1:46-55:
“My soul magnifies the Lord, 
And my spirit rejoices in God my Savior; 
Because he has regarded the lowliness of his handmaid; 
For behold, henceforth all generations shall call me blessed; 
Because he who is mighty has done great things for me, and holy is his name;
And his mercy is from generation to generation on those who fear him. 
He has shown might with his arm, 
He has scattered the proud in the conceit of their heart.
He has put down the mighty from their thrones, and has exalted the lowly. He has filled the hungry with good things, and the rich he has sent away empty.
He has given help to Israel, his servant, mindful of his mercy 
Even as he spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his posterity forever.”

What dumbfounding idea, that a 13-year-old girl was given this message!

We will begin this sermon with some commentary by C. S. Lewis on the subject of miracles, from his book, Miracles, and then move on to the miracle of the virgin birth:

Miracles Quotes
“Miracles do not, in fact, break the laws of nature.” 

“In Science we have been reading only the notes to a poem; in Christianity we find the poem itself.” 

“He is not the soul of Nature, nor any part of Nature. He inhabits eternity: He dwells in a high and holy place: heaven is His throne, not his vehicle, earth is his footstool, not his vesture. One day he will dismantle both and make a new heaven and earth. He is not to be identified even with the 'divine spark' in man. He is God and not man.” 

“It is a profound mistake to imagine that Christianity ever intended to dissipate the bewilderment and even the terror, the sense of our own nothingness, which come upon us when we think about the nature of things. It comes to intensify them. Without such sensations there is no religion. Many a man, brought up in the glib profession of some shallow form of Christianity, who comes through reading Astronomy to realize for the first time how majestically indifferent most reality is to man, and who perhaps abandons his religion on that account, may at that moment be having his first genuinely religious experience. . . . Christianity does not involve the belief that all things were made for man.” 

“Men became scientific because they expected Law in Nature, and they expected Law in Nature because they believed in a Legislator. In most modern scientists this belief has died: it will be interesting to see how long their confidence in uniformity survives it. Two significant developments have already appeared—the hypothesis of a lawless sub-nature, and the surrender of the claim that science is true. We may be living nearer than we suppose to the end of the Scientific Age.” 

“No philosophical theory which I have yet come across is a radical improvement on the words of Genesis, that 'In the beginning God made Heaven and Earth'. . . . If you compare it with the creation legends of other peoples--with all these delightful absurdities in which giants to be cut up and floods to be dried up are made to exist before creation--the depth and originality of this Hebrew folk tale will soon be apparent.” 

“For this reason, the question whether miracles occur can never be answered simply by experience. Every event which might claim to be a miracle is, in the last resort, something presented to our senses, something seen, heard, touched, smelled or tasted. And our senses are not infallible. If anything extraordinary seems to have happened, we can always say that we have been the victims of an illusion. If we hold a philosophy which excludes the supernatural, this is what we always shall say. What we learn from experience depends on the kind of philosophy we bring to experience. It is therefore useless to appeal to experience before we have settled, as well as we can, the philosophical question.” 

[Sidebar: In other words, if we are scanning for miracles, we will see them everywhere, right and left; if we are not scanning for miracles, will see nothing, old wine discovered in a back room, or a man arising from a coma. In Lewis' The Last Battle the myopic dwarves huddle together just inside the doors to Paradise and see nothing but eternal darkness because they believe in nothing but eternal darkness.]

“As long as one is a Naturalist, ‘Nature’ is the only word for ‘Everything.’ And Everything is not a subject about which anything very interesting can be said or (save by illusion) felt. One aspect of things strikes us and we talk of the ‘peace’ of Nature; another strikes us and we talk of her cruelty. And then, because we cannot quite repress our high instinct to worship the Self-existent, we are all at sea and our moods fluctuate and Nature means to us whatever we please as the moods select and slur. But everything becomes different when we recognize that Nature is a creature, a created thing, with its own particular tang or flavour. There is no need any longer to select and slur. It is not in her, but in Something far beyond her, that all lines meet and all contrasts are explained. It is no more baffling that the creature called Nature should be both fair and cruel than that the first man you meet in the train should be a dishonest grocer and a kind husband. For she is not the Absolute; she is one of the creatures, with her good points and her bad points and her own unmistakable flavour running through them all.” 
― C.S. Lewis, Miracles

The introduction to a discussion of the virgin birth by referring to the general subject of miracles, implies that the virgin birth is just one of a number of events subsumed under the generic umbrella, "miracles." This may be true, but it may also be true that the virgin birth deserves a higher place in the miracle hall of fame than such trivialities as turning water into wine, or raising Lazarus from the dead, because the virgin birth is the foundation miracle, the FIRST miracle of Jesus, from which all future miracle succeed.

The Virgin birth has always been of interest to me because it's one of those miracles that always seems to me to be a side issue. However, the question of the divinity of Jesus is most complex and is very open to various interpretations. The problem of the uniqueness of Jesus' Virgin Conception is that virgin births are reported in many religions, not least of all Buddhism; so the question of the unique Christ consciousness necessarily being delivered unto Man through a virgin is sort of a competition, because more than one great Saint can make that claim.

One of the things I found interesting, in the research for one of my previous sermons, was what Martin Luther had to say about the virgin birth: to be sure, Jesus was a Jew, of the house of David, a house of kings--but Luther asserts that a virgin birth was necessary in order for Jesus to be untainted by the original sin of Adam, which he would necessarily have inherited from the biological blood of a human father. Therefore, the virgin birth is really a prerequisite for the personality makeup of the Perfect Man. Speaking of Abraham, Luther says, in his Sermon for the Fifth Sunday in Lent; John 8:46-59:

"Then he saw and understood that Christ, born of his seed through a pure virgin, so as not to be cursed with Adam's children but to remain blessed, should suffer for the whole world, cause this to be preached, and thus overwhelm the whole world with blessing etc. This is the day of Christ, the dispensation of the Gospel, that is the light of this day, which radiates from Christ as from the sun of righteousness, and shines and enlightens the whole world."

I know that this may sound blasphemous to some, but I must confess that I am completely open to the idea that, in the long history of mankind, there have been more than one virgin birth; just as I am absolutely sure that there have been more than one person who was able to perform miracles. Miracles come from God not from any single person or entity. The fact that Jesus is the focus of the divine personality, the divine consciousness, is very, very important; but it is not singular, and it is not absolutely unique. 

The Messiah, the Anointed One, is a focus, in mundane reality, of the infinite Personality of God; but so, to certain lesser extents, are we all. That which stands out, in the case of Jesus, is that He chose to make a sacrifice so hugely magnificent, that it empowered Him to take a place for Himself midway between Man and God. The scope of His purpose defined the scope of His all-encompassing consciousness. He could not have performed His Humanitarian purpose without donning the Mantle of God's Only Begotten Son. This is the BIG MIRACLE.

The significance of the Virgin birth is not so much that it was miraculous, but that it is one of number of signs which are associated with the coming of the Messiah. We need these signs to bolster our faith, they are part of the ceremony of the miraculous--but the signs are not the source of our faith, nor are they the objects of our faith: they are merely a window dressing, which makes the whole thing prettier; in music we say, "To glorify God". The glorification of God, the tiny little miracles that reveal hints and angles of the divine consciousness to the mundane consciousness, are lovely parts of the package; but they do not change the essential fact that Jesus was chosen to perform a certain act: to perform the sacrifices and ceremonies necessary for Him to become the mediator between God and Man; a mediator which did not exist before His coming.

When we consider how ancient is this planet, and how many souls have passed through the worldly initiation, it is dumbfounding to consider that God, through Jesus,  for the first time, incarnated into Human form so that all succeeding generations might have direct access to the Divine in the world, in Jesus, and in themselves. Isn't it WONDERFUL! It may be that in the dark recesses of the past, other saviors brought the good news to the inhabitants of other times unremembered, but this does not diminish the significance of Jesus' coming and His magnificent sacrifice, His great TAKING OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR ORIGINAL SIN. Regardless of any scientific theories, or New Age mumbo-jumbo, the centrality of Jesus, in the evolution of Mankind toward a higher spiritual identity, is absolute! In fact, this is just about the only thing I believe in ABSOLUTELY.

The following is a book review--a review that neatly summarizes the main points of the book, MYTH OF THE NATIVITY - The Virgin Birth Re-examined - By Andrew Welburn [ Floris Books ]
Review Author: Pearl Goodwin [Originally appeared in 'Perspectives' Vol 77 No1]
"The theme of the virgin birth has long fascinated not only theologians and scholars, but also everyone who has an open mind for the Gospel stories of Matthew and Luke. It is a fascination that arises largely out of a fundamental difficulty, particularly in our time, of imagining that Jesus of Nazareth was born outside of the basic biological principles governing conception and birth, without the participation of Joseph. So great is this problem that for many people it stands in the way of their accepting Christianity. And so steeped are we in what seem to be the unshakeable laws of nature, that it is almost impossible to imagine that a human being could be born in any way other than through the laws of nature. Only those people who can live with strong and unquestioning faith accept the possibility of the virgin birth just as it stands in the Gospel, understanding it as a miracle, beyond the laws of nature which have been in existence since God's promise to Noah after the flood.


Putting aside for a moment this whole aspect of natural law, it is clear that the virgin birth has many other layers of meaning, and it is these that Andrew Welburn addresses in his latest book. He approaches the subject with what we have come to expect from him, a wide scholarship infused with spiritual imagination. For him, what makes the birth "virgin" has got less to do with the biological side than with a stream of thought that comes out of the far past. Much of the book is taken up with showing that the Gospel stories are by no means the only such events in history. In his own words "the concept of the virgin birth was associated with a new age, the new revelation, the reappearing prophet, the world's saviour, a mystical, divine child." Virgin here means that something new has come to the earth. There is a great richness of material describing instances of this, much of it taken from more hidden, "occult" literature. To mention but one, the birth of Melchisedek, who appears only very briefly in the book of Genesis, bearing bread and wine to Abraham. He brought a glimpse of heavenly heights before the necessary but more earthly religious forms of Judaism took shape. The Melchisedek of Genesis is but one of a long line bearing that name, beginning with the son of the brother of Noah, Nir, and his wife Sopanim. The story has echoes of the birth of John the Baptist to parents that are old, and also of the Matthew story, the shock of Niv when Sopanin is found to be with child. Sopanin died out of the pain of rejection - but the child is born out of the dead body and immediately can sit up and speak. There are many such stories, taken from Egyptian, Judaic and also Gnostic sources, to mention but a few.
It is clear that this book has been written for a wider readership than those familiar with the work of Rudolf Steiner. Hopefully it will reach many people, for it takes the realm of spirit as serious and real within a scholarly context. So the work of Rudolf Steiner on this theme is mentioned only briefly and in an understated way. Steiner spoke about the fact that in the past, and sometimes even now, conception could take place in sleep, that is unconsciously and therefore purely, or virginally. In that state the heavenly star of the individual can unite with the biological counterpart.” 

[Sidebar: I did not become fully conscious, until this moment, that I have always imagined the Divine impregnation as occurring during sleep. The Zeffirelli movie, Jesus of Nazareth, depicts the angel in the Anunciation as a beam of light shining through a high window. Mary listens raptly to the angel's message, and then sleeps. Kind of like the tooth fairy.]

“Natural law and spiritual law can be brought together and it is important that this should be understood. The birth of Jesus of Nazareth was not a virgin birth in the sense of there being no biological father. Jesus of Nazareth had to be a full human being, a special one certainty, but a truly human being, in order to fulfill Christ's deed of redemption. Perhaps this side needs slightly more emphasis in the book, even though Andrew Welburn comes to the same conclusion from other directions. He shows us that the Gospel story is the culmination of a great tradition stretching far back into prehistory, and that what comes as new spiritual impulse out of the heavens must always have the character of "virgin”.”



This last paragraph, with its implication that Jesus' incarnation may not have been a purely spiritual virgin birth, but, rather, had a very natural biological component, fits in with what I have said many times: that I don't need a miracle to demonstrate the miraculous. Whether you clothe the miraculous in the jargon of the New Science, or in the backward Baptist Creationist attitude doesn't matter. The miraculous is in how, through Jesus, the spirit of God seeps into every fiber of Man's essential being; just as, in the proposition that the creation of the world took place in six days, or in the case of Jesus' raising Lazarus from the dead, I do not need these miracles to be literally true for them to be spiritually true. There is no distinction in my mind between that which is physically true and that which is spiritually true; that spiritual truths lean over into the physical is part and parcel of the whole multi-dimensionality of existence. As to the the question of the literal truth of the virgin birth, I have to say, once again, I don't really care.

What I do care about is this: the coming of Jesus into the world was prepared by so many natural signs and events, that three wise men, from way out of town, were able to read the stars and find the baby in a manger, delivered to Man in what can only be described as a miraculous way. Next week we will talk about  the Three Wise Men. 

Let us pray: Jesus, Your ways and means are so beyond our powers of comprehension, that our boggled minds shiver to pieces before their immensity. Deliver the flavor of your miraculous birth through the signs of the season, and give us a taste of that understanding which we know will be ours, after a time, in higher places. Amen.




Sunday, November 12, 2017

Sermon 16A -- 2 Timothy Chapter 1-1

Sermon 16A -- 2 Timothy Chapter 1-1


Last week we presented a review of the career of the Apostle Paul. We heard reports of his many travels and of his ultimate martyrdom at the hands of Nero. Today we offer the first of a two-part examination of the first chapter of 2nd Timothy. 2nd Timothy is the last of the letters we have from Paul, written shortly before he was beheaded. The theme of the letter is commitment. Today we will begin with establishing context for the letter, then we will get into a discussion of the Faith Vs Good Works controversy:

From Wikipedia we read:
“The date of 2nd Timothy is shortly before Paul’s death. In many respects, this epistle is his last will and testament. In our view, Paul died in the summer of 64 CE. He had already gone through a preliminary trial, and the outcome was not promising. This letter should be dated within weeks of Paul’s actual death, for Paul’s request that Timothy try to come before winter would hardly have been uttered in the spring, and could not have been written in the late autumn.
Like several of the letters of Paul, there is some doubt as to who actually wrote 2nd Timothy. Three main reasons have been advanced by those who question Paul's authorship of 1st Timothy, 2nd Timothy, and Titus—also known as the Pastoral Epistles.
  • First, they have found a difference in these letters' vocabulary, style, and theology from Paul's acknowledged writings. Defenders of the authenticity say that they were probably written in the name and with the authority of the Apostle by one of his companions, to whom he distinctly explained what had to be written, or to whom he gave a written summary of the points to be developed, and that when the letters were finished, Paul read them through, approved them, and signed them.”


[Sidebar: This is not a trivial point: we read practically the same words when we introduced the letter to the Hebrews—noting differences in vocabulary, style, and theology, between Paul’s acknowledged works and Hebrews; we also noted that Paul’s students were known for paraphrasing expressions originated by him, with subtle variants as to style and content. Thus, more than any of the Synoptic Gospels, the writings of Paul were, by in large, produced by a committee—a committee whose various points of view created a perspective that was both slightly self-contradictory on the one hand, and gloriously amalgamated on the other.

Back to Wikipedia:]
  • “Second, some believe there is a difficulty in fitting them into Paul's biography as we have it. They, like Colossians and Ephesians, were written from prison but suppose Paul's release and travel thereafter. 
  • Third, 2nd Thessalonians, like Colossians, is questioned by some on stylistic grounds, with some noting, among other peculiarities, a dependence on 1st Thessalonians—yet a distinctiveness in language from the Pauline corpus. This, again, is explainable by the possibility that Paul requested one of his companions to write the letter for him under his dictation.” 

Whenever we have undertaken to examine ancient texts, the identity of the author always comes into question. The authorship of these documents is very important to many people—apparently they think that God speaks through people that they have heard of, but not through nameless figures from a distant past; many people think it is more important to know who wrote something, than to know what it is that what they wrote means. Indeed, it is a miracle that as much well-preserved material from this period has survived as it has, because of the wholesale destruction of entire libraries, (as in the case of the destruction of the library in Alexandria in 30 BC), that took place whenever a conquering people, with its beliefs, replaced a conquered people. Furthermore, we have seen that authorship of many ancient texts may be claimed by several anonymous writers. Nevertheless, many people still need the authority of legitimate authorship in order to put their faith unreservedly in the written words--words that supposedly came from God anyway. 

[Sidebar:  
“The Royal Library of Alexandria or Ancient Library of Alexandria in Alexandria, Egypt, was one of the largest and most significant libraries of the ancient world. It was dedicated to the Muses, the nine goddesses of the arts. It flourished under the patronage of the Ptolemaic dynasty and functioned as a major center of scholarship from its construction in the 3rd century BC until the Roman conquest of Egypt in 48 BC, with collections of works, lecture halls, meeting rooms, and gardens. The library was part of a larger research institution called the Musaeum of Alexandria, where many of the most famous thinkers of the ancient world studied.


The library was created by Ptolemy I Soter, who was a Macedonian general and the successor of Alexander the Great.  Most of the books were kept as papyrus scrolls. It is unknown precisely how many such scrolls were housed at any given time, but estimates range from 40,000 to 400,000 at its height.

Arguably, this library is most famous for having been burned down resulting in the loss of many scrolls and books; its destruction has become a symbol for the loss of cultural knowledge. Sources differ on who was responsible for its destruction and when it occurred. The library may in truth have suffered several fires over many years. Possible occasions for the partial or complete destruction of the Library of Alexandria include a fire set by the army of Julius Caesar in 48 BC and an attack by Aurelian in the 270s AD.”

I love the fact that all these subtly contradictory texts all add up to the same spiritual truth, and we must praise God for our good fortune that so many of these texts escaped destruction in the various purges that have plagued our social history. If anything, the controversy surrounding the legitimacy of these texts (texts that were either unknown, or were rejected by the Nicene Council of 325) adds to our appreciation of the texts that were ultimately accepted by the Church Fathers. All of the various interpretations of ancient writing yield contradictory doctrinal items, but we MUST remember that the bottom line remains the same—and this bottom line resonates in the depths of the inarticulate Cloud of Unknowing.

Now we will go through Chapter 1 of 2nd Timothy line by line, guided by this summary provided by Wikipedia:
II. Argument
After a brief salutation to Timothy, Paul commences the body of this his final epistle. The body of the letter begins with personal encouragement. 
“1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, according to the promise of life which is in Christ Jesus,
1:2 To Timothy, my dearly beloved son: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord.”

Paul begins by encouraging Timothy in light of his own desperate situation. He offers thanks for Timothy, expressing a desire to see him once more and reminding him to “fan into flame the gift of God” because “God did not give us a spirit of timidity”.
“1:3 I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers with pure conscience, that without ceasing I have remembrance of thee in my prayers night and day;
1:4 Greatly desiring to see thee, being mindful of thy tears, that I may be filled with joy;
1:5 When I call to remembrance the unfeigned faith that is in thee, which dwelt first in thy grandmother Lois, and thy mother Eunice; and I am persuaded that in thee also.
1:6 Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands.
1:7 For God hath not given us the spirit of timidity; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.”


This naturally transitions into Paul’s own courage as an example for Timothy to follow:

“1:8 Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me his prisoner: but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the gospel according to the power of God;”


[Sidebar: There is a point here that deserves comment: it is hinted at in one of the commentaries below that Paul’s incarceration was considered shameful, as in the sentence, “Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me his prisoner.” We moderns have seen so many movies and TV shows where the noble underdog is unjustly accused, that we automatically assume that being held by the bad guys is a good thing. Apparently this was not so in Paul’s day; in fact, much of what I have read recently indicates that many of Paul’s contemporaries did not unanimously believe him to be the hero that we now believe him to be; what seems to us to be unjustly shameful, must have appeared to most of the people back then as JUSTLY shameful. Paul was controversial even in his own day; thus, his imprisonment was not universally considered to be unjust. Who knew?
Going on:] 
“1:9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

1:10 But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:”

This is the first clear-cut declaration, in the book, of the “Salvation through Faith Alone” doctrine. The Apostle Paul must have had a deeply personal relationship with Jesus to put so much stock in His saving Grace; notice the Word was given to Paul “before the world began”. More on this below.

Going on, Paul claims the role of teacher, and upholds his sufferings as the authority through which He transmits his Divine Knowledge:

“1:11 Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles.
1:12 For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day.”
[Sidebar: That last sentence is quoted in one of my favorite hymns. I have only recently contemplated its meaning: what is it that Paul has committed unto Him? Clearly it is Paul’s suffering for the Good News, and the good works he has performed in Jesus’ name that are recorded in THE BOOK, and which constitute his personal restitution for Adam’s original sin. We perceive that these expenditures of Paul’s life energies will be recorded in the book and be repaid on THAT DAY—the day of resurrection and entry into Heaven. Thus, as Jesus will hold Paul accountable for his efforts and will reward him accordingly, we must admit two contradictions:
1. The law of Karma is clearly referenced here; Paul is saying that everything he has done for Jesus will pay him dividends in the afterlife—fair is fair, what goes around comes around. However, karma and the law were done away with through the sacrifice of Jesus-- thus Paul’s belief in his ultimate reward because of his works contradicts a basic premise of Jesus’ teaching.
2. Therefore, since Paul expects to be rewarded in Heaven for his belief AND his ACTIONS, we have an example of “Salvation through Faith and Good Works”, NOT “Salvation through Faith alone”.

These contradictions do not bother me—I have always maintained that the somewhat hostile disagreements, between people who believe in salvation through faith and those who believe in salvation through good works, was pretty dumb; as I have mentioned before, working from the inner to the outer was the path to salvation favored by Jesus, but working from the outer to the inner is also a powerful technique for enhancing spirit consciousness; it is hard to think that Jesus disagrees with this, since He was the master of Good Works. 


To reconcile this contradiction I have sometimes thought that possibly there is a natural progression here: first inner Faith leading to outer Works; and yet I must admit that very often external works, initially performed for their own sake have a beneficial effect on the soul. Back/forth, male/female, particle/wave —everything is connected and the ordering of events of a spiritual nature must always take place outside of time. This dichotomous problem of inner vs. outer bears on the argument of predestination vs. freewill, and is resolved by the same concept: OUTSIDE TIME.

As we have heard before, William Blake had a radical interpretation of the Inner/Outer dichotomy:

“One of Blake’s most famous works is The Marriage of Heaven and Hell, where he brings together things traditionally seen as opposites: subject and object, inner and outer, soul and body. Thus, where both the orthodox Church and orthodox Science sought to demonize and downgrade the body – for being sinful, bestial, mortal or (worst of all) mechanical – Blake declares it to be the source of divinity in the world, and the embodiment of Imagination itself: “The Eternal Body of Man is The Imagination, that is, God himself, The Divine Body” (from Laocoön, Blake’s extraordinary piece of graffiti art, 200 years before Jean-Michel Basquiat or Banksy!). As he explained:
1. Man has no Body distinct from his Soul; for that call’d Body is a portion of Soul discern’d by the five Senses, the chief inlets of Soul in this age.
2. Energy is the only life, and is from the Body; and Reason is the bound or outward circumference of Energy.
3. Energy is Eternal Delight.


Another provocative take on Inner vs Outer appears in The Divine Within: Selected Writings on Enlightenment by Aldous Huxley:
 “Take the piano teacher, for example. He always says, Relax, relax. But how can you relax while your fingers are rushing over the keys? Yet they have to relax. The singing teacher and the golf pro say exactly the same thing. And in the realm of spiritual exercises we find that the person who teaches mental prayer does too. We have somehow to combine relaxation with activity…
The personal conscious self being a kind of small island in the midst of an enormous area of consciousness — what has to be relaxed is the personal self, the self that tries too hard, that thinks it knows what is what, that uses language. This has to be relaxed in order that the multiple powers at work within the deeper and wider self may come through and function as they should. In all psychophysical skills we have this curious fact of the law of reversed effort: the harder we try, the worse we do the thing.”

Another ramification of the Inner/Outer paradox appears in the writing of Carl Jung:
“For Jung, synchronicity is not a surprising coincidence of two outer events. It is a coincidence of inner and outer events. In addition, the coincidence is necessarily meaningful in the sense that it serves to advance the process of psychological development Jung called Individuation. Synchronicity is also necessarily acausal in the sense that the inner experience is not an efficient cause of the outer experience, or vice versa. As a result, synchronicity phenomena are by their nature inherently spontaneous and unpredictable, placing them squarely outside the scope of repeatable scientific study by means of controlled experiment.

Because the phenomenon of synchronicity involves an acausal coordination of the inner and outer worlds in a meaningful way, Jung viewed it as not exclusively a psychological or physical phenomenon, but as a "psychoid" phenomenon, meaning that it somehow essentially involves both psyche and matter. Thus, Jung interpreted synchronicity to imply the existence of a profound level of reality prior to any distinction between psyche and matter. In other words, phenomena of synchronicity represent a manifestation of psychoid structures present in the depths of a transcendental unitary reality Jung called the Unus mundus.”

I am particularly attracted to the expression, “transcendental unitary reality”, a “profound level of reality prior to any distinction between psyche and matter”. Thus, our discussion of the inner vs the outer really becomes moot when we ascend up the ladder of spirit consciousness beyond any semblance of duality. I have wondered many times about the void we seem to be engulfed by in sleep, and have been persuaded that that black world we enter is not absence of consciousness, but a higher consciousness that seems not to exist because our literal consciousness can find no expressions to describe it. As Jung says, a UNITY obtains at the higher level, and the paradoxes of material reality, that so confound us here, are simply diffracted radiations of the same sacred universal light. Thus, dreams (personal myths) and mythology (public dreams) simply constitute discrete elements of a consciousness continuum rising to an ever-more-focused identity, culminating in the level of consciousness we call GOD.

David Bohm, the great physicist who wrote Wholeness and the Implicate Order, has insisted that for every explicate order there is an underlying implicate order
"I would say that in my scientific and philosophical work, my main concern has been with understanding the nature of reality in general and of consciousness in particular as a coherent whole, which is never static or complete but which is an unending process of movement and unfoldment...."
Recently I have been reading Swedenborg’s Heavenly Secrets, and I found these wonderful paragraphs concerning the relationship between Inner and Outer; he begins by discussing the character of an “image”:

“What the people of the earliest church meant when they spoke of the Lord’s image involves more than can be put into words. People have no idea whatever that the Lord governs them through angels and spirits, or that at least two spirits and two angels accompany each of them. The spirits create a link with the world of spirits, and the angels create one with heaven. 

We cannot possibly live without a channel of communication open to the world of spirits through spirits and to heaven through angels (and in this way to the Lord through heaven). Our life depends totally on such a connection. If the spirits and angels withdrew from us, we would be destroyed in a second.

As far as an image is concerned, it is not the likeness of another thing but is after a likeness of it, which explains the wording “Let us make a human in our image, after our likeness.” A person with a spiritual character is an image, but a person with a heavenly character is a likeness or exact copy.” 

Now, here is where he gets into the Inner vs. Outer question:

“Genesis 1 deals with the spiritual person, Genesis 2 with the heavenly person. The Lord calls the person of spiritual character (or an “image”) a child of light, as he does in John: Those who walk in the dark do not know where they are heading. As long as you have the light, believe in the light, in order to be children of light. (John 12:35, 36) He also calls such a person a friend: You are my friends if you do whatever I command you. (John 15:14, 15)


 But the person of heavenly character (or a “likeness”) he calls God’s child in John: As many as did accept him, to them he gave the power to be God’s children, to those believing in his name, who had their birth not from blood or from the flesh’s will or from a man’s will but from God. (John 1:12, 13

As long as we are spiritual, we rule the outer self first and from this the inner, as illustrated here in Genesis 1:26

“and they will rule over the fish of the sea and over the bird in the heavens, and over the beast, and over all the earth, and over every creeping animal that creeps on the earth.” 

When we become heavenly, though, and do good because we love to, we rule the inner self first and from it the outer. The Lord describes this as being true of himself; and as it is true of him, it is also true of the heavenly type of person, who is a likeness of him.”

Here, we get into the main subject of the book which is about revealing symbologies hidden in the text of the Old Testament:
  
“In this passage, animals receive the first mention, next the bird, then the fish of the sea, because the heavenly person proceeds from love, which belongs to the will. Things are different with the spiritual person, for whom the fish and birds come first and the animals follow; fish and birds are associated with the intellect, which concerns itself with faith. 

Genesis 1:27

“And God created the human in his image; in God’s image he created them.” 

Image comes up twice in this verse because faith, which belongs to the intellect, is called his image, but love, which belongs to the will, is called God’s image. Love comes second in the spiritual person but first in the heavenly person.” 


Here we have presented a technique for spiritual advancement, similar to those recommended in other ancient texts—a step-by-step progression from one discrete level to another.

“While we are being reborn and learning to concern ourselves with the spirit, we are in constant battle (which is why the Lord’s church is described as militant). 
Up to this point our cravings have controlled us, because our whole being is cobbled together out of nothing but those cravings and the distorted ideas they spawn. We cannot rid ourselves of those longings and distortions instantaneously during regeneration; to do so would destroy us completely, since we have not yet acquired another way of life. Consequently, evil spirits are left with us for a long time to trigger our appetites, which then break down in countless different ways, and break down so thoroughly that the Lord can turn them into something good. This is the way we reform. 


If the Lord were not protecting us every moment, every split second, we would be wiped out instantly. Hatred against any aspect of love for the Lord or faith in him dominates the world of spirits, and the hatred is so deadly that it defies description. I can testify to the truth of this absolutely. For several years now I have visited the next world and the spirits there, though remaining in my body, and the evil ones (the worst, in fact) have crowded around me, sometimes numbering in the thousands. They have been allowed to spew out their venom and harass me in every possible way, but still they were unable to hurt a single hair on my head, so closely did the Lord guard me.


All these years of experience have taught me a great deal about the nature of the world of spirits and about the conflict that those who are being reborn inevitably suffer if they are to win the happiness of eternal life. No one, however, can learn enough from a general description to develop an unshakable belief in this information, so the details, with the Lord’s divine mercy, must come in what follows.

Genesis 1:31

“And God saw all that he had done and, yes, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.” 

This time it says very good but previously it said simply good, because now the components of faith combine with those of love to make one entity. A marriage between spiritual and heavenly things has taken place. 



In sum, they see spiritual and heavenly realities in the Word, completely separate from the words and names.”

In a crowd of wonderful expressions, the crowning words are left for the very end:
“In sum, they see spiritual and heavenly realities in the Word, completely separate from the words and names.”

In this short sentence the Saving Power of Jesus is proclaimed! How so? you say. In this way: the words and names, mentioned in the text, refer to the LAW, from which Jesus gave us our freedom. Thus, by reminding us, at last, that no single word of our doctrine may ever be said to be true, but only the spirit of these things. How does all this tie in with the inner/outer dichotomy? Like this: the inner/outer conflict depends on self-images reflected onto the screen of consciousness; only through the opposition of charged poles can such repulsion take place; thus, by defusing the IMAGE, by denying the power of words to summarize it, we achieve spiritual freedom in the Cloud of Unknowing.
There is much to ponder here. 

To reprise this material:
  1. We heard that 2nd Timothy is Paul’s last will and testament, making this letter a crucial summation of all that Paul thought was most important;
  2. We heard Paul thanking his forefathers and friends for their support throughout his trials;
  3. We paid homage to Him ”Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began”;
  4. We talked a lot about the different between the LAW of Karma, and faith alone.
  5. Finally, we talked about the role that the inner IMAGE plays in articulating heavenly ideas and carnal actions.

Let us pray:
Jesus, You see us trying to expand our consciousnesses to embrace the Divine Image. Bless our efforts, and protect us from false images. Amen.





Sunday, October 22, 2017

Sermon 15 -- 2 Timothy: Introduction

Sermon 15 -- 2 Timothy: Introduction


My last two sermon series, the book of Hebrews and the Gospel of Philip, were deeply indebted to the Apostle Paul; Hebrews, was almost certainly NOT written by Paul, but was based on his teachings, and the Gospel of Philip was written around the same time as the letters of Paul, (maybe a little later), and develops Gnostic concepts that were widely circulated among the early Christians if not that often written down (or at least preserved). Thus am I drawn irresistibly toward the writings of Paul himself. The suggestion to explore 2nd Timothy came to me in meditation, and I did not know why--but the minute I started working on it, I discovered an important reason I would have been led to this book: 2nd Timothy is understood to be Paul’s last letter, and is considered by some to be his last will and testament. Thus, as I approach death, I am instructed to learn from Paul the things that he thought were ultimately the most important. 

It is not possible to attribute precise dates to events that are known to have happened in the ancient world, but the year Paul was executed in Rome, (decapitated by Nero), is thought to have been in the summer of 64 CE, and 2nd Timothy seems to have been written shortly before that. Dates as late as 68 CE have also been suggested. Be that as it may, whenever it was written, 2nd Timothy stands out as a blazingly brilliant summary of the teachings of Paul, and I welcome it into to my fund of spiritual testaments.

As you may remember, I began my ministry at the Basin Bible Church by reviewing in detail all four synoptic gospels. The natural thing would have been to continue on, chronologically, into the New Testament with Acts and Romans, etc.; but, since the early days of my career as a professing Christian, I have always had a problem with Paul—I have never liked his dogmatic formulations, and I have felt, often enough, that what he says directly contradicts some of the sayings of Jesus. I readily forgave him his loyalty to the LAW, because I always knew that, as a Jew, Paul had to incorporate elements of his contemporary social morality into his doctrine; but I have found that Paul’s down-to-earth missionary strategy was not always perfectly harmonious with Jesus’ more radical approach to social behavior. 

Recently, my attitude has mellowed somewhat; nowadays I am more tolerant of this aspect of Paul’s belief system. I have had to remember that his job was to consolidate the churches of the ancient world under one over-arching doctrine that could bind groups of disparate temperaments together, directed toward a single purpose—changing the world. I acknowledge that this was a daunting job, and that, especially with a bunch of Jews who were used to following a plethora of strict laws and restrictions, the freedom preached by Jesus might have been too much for some literal-minded people to handle; too much freedom gives the insecure mind room to wander and lose focus; Paul insists on strict adherence to his version of the truth. Additionally, I have become aware of the mystical side of Paul, which, before my survey of the Gnostic Gospels, was pretty invisible to me.
So, here we go. This sermon series will begin with a Wikipedia summary of the life of Paul, and his missionary travels, with some extra commentary on the intellectual climate of his time. Next week we will delve into the first chapter of the book:

“Paul the Apostle
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Paul the Apostle (Latin: Paulus; Greek: Παλος, translit. Paulos; c. 5 – c. 67), commonly known as Saint Paul and also known by his native name Saul of Tarsus (Hebrew: שאול התרסי‎, translit. Sha'ul ha-Tarsi‎; Greek: Σαλος Ταρσεύς, translit. Saulos Tarseus), was an apostle (though not one of the Twelve Apostles) who taught the gospel of the Christ to the first century world.

Paul is generally considered one of the most important figures of the Apostolic Age and in the mid-30s to the mid-50s AD he founded several churches in Asia Minor and Europe. He took advantage of his status as both a Jew and a Roman citizen to minister to both Jewish and Roman audiences. According to writings in the New Testament and prior to his conversion, Paul was dedicated to persecuting the early disciples of Jesus in the area of Jerusalem. (He was present at the martyrdom of St. Stephen). In the narrative of the Acts of the Apostles (often referred to simply as Acts), Paul was traveling on the road from Jerusalem to Damascus on a mission to "arrest them and bring them back to Jerusalem" when the resurrected Jesus appeared to him in a great light. He was struck blind, but after three days his sight was restored by Ananias of Damascus and Paul began to preach that Jesus of Nazareth is the Jewish Messiah and the Son of God.

Fourteen of the twenty-seven books in the New Testament have traditionally been attributed to Paul. Seven of the epistles are undisputed by scholars as being authentic, with varying degrees of argument about the remainder. Pauline authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews is not asserted in the Epistle itself and was already doubted in the 2nd and 3rd centuries. It was almost unquestioningly accepted from the 5th to the 16th centuries that Paul was the author of Hebrews  but that view is now almost universally rejected by scholars. The other six are believed by some scholars to have come from followers writing in his name, using material from Paul's surviving letters and letters written by him that no longer survive. 

Paul's influence on Christian thought and practice has been characterized as being as "profound as it is pervasive", among that of many other apostles and missionaries involved in the spread of the Christian faith. Augustine of Hippo developed Paul's idea that salvation is based on faith and not "works of the law". Martin Luther's interpretation of Paul's writings influenced Luther's doctrine of sola fide.”
[Sidebar:
Sola fide, also historically known as the doctrine of justification by faith alone, is a Christian theological doctrine that distinguishes most Protestant denominations from Catholicism, Orthodox Christianity, and some in the Restoration Movement.”
Back to Wikipedia:]
“It has been popularly assumed that Saul's name was changed when he converted from Judaism to Christianity, but that is not the case. His Jewish name was "Saul" (Hebrew: שָׁאוּל, Modern Sha'ul, Tiberian Šāʼûl; "asked for, prayed for, borrowed"), perhaps after the biblical King Saul, a fellow Benjamite and the first king of Israel. According to the Book of Acts, he inherited Roman citizenship from his father. As a Roman citizen, he also bore the Latin name of "Paul"—in biblical Greek: Παλος (Paulos), and in Latin: Paulus. It was quite usual for the Jews of that time to have two names, one Hebrew, the other Latin or Greek.

Jesus called him "Saul, Saul" in "the Hebrew tongue" in the book of Acts, when he had the vision which led to his conversion on the Road to Damascus. Later, in a vision to Ananias of Damascus, "the Lord" referred to him as "Saul, of Tarsus". When Ananias came to restore his sight, he called him "Brother Saul".

In Acts 13:9, Saul is called "Paul" for the first time on the island of Cyprus—much later than the time of his conversion. The author (Luke) indicates that the names were interchangeable: "Saul, who also is called Paul." He thereafter refers to him as Paul, apparently Paul's preference since he is called Paul in all other Bible books where he is mentioned, including those that he authored. Adopting his Roman name was typical of Paul's missionary style. His method was to put people at their ease and to approach them with his message in a language and style to which they could relate, as in 1 Cor 9:19–23.

1 Corinthians 9:19-23 
19Though I am free and belong to no one, I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. 20To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 21To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law. 22To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all people so that by all possible means I might save some. 23I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.”

Geography relevant to Paul's life, stretching from Jerusalem to Rome:

Paul was likely born between the years of 5 BC and 5 AD. The Book of Acts indicates that Paul was a Roman citizen by birth, more affirmatively describing his father as such, but some scholars have taken issue with the evidence presented by the text.

He was from a devout Jewish family in the city of Tarsus–one of the largest trade centers on the Mediterranean coast. It had been in existence several hundred years prior to his birth. It was renowned for its university. During the time of Alexander the Great, who died in 323 BC, Tarsus was the most influential city in Asia Minor

Paul referred to himself as being "of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee". The family had a history of religious piety. Apparently the family lineage had been very attached to Pharisaic traditions and observances for generations. Acts says that he was in the tent-making profession. This was to become an initial connection with Priscilla and Aquila with whom he would partner in tent-making and later become very important teammates as fellow missionaries. 

While he was still fairly young, he was sent to Jerusalem to receive his education at the school of Gamaliel, one of the most noted rabbis in history. The Hillel school was noted for giving its students a balanced education, likely giving Paul broad exposure to classical literature, philosophy, and ethics.” 

[Sidebar: At the moment I am reading the Taylor Caldwell fictional biography of Luke (Dear and Glorious Physician), and have noticed that Gamaliel is mentioned as one of Luke’s teachers in Alexandria. This connection is important enough, but the comment that Paul was exposed to the classical literature and philosophy of the Greeks, is even more important. As we will see below, the philosophy of Plato appears in more than one place in Paul’s theology.

Back to Wikipedia:]

“Nothing more is known of his background until he takes an active part in the martyrdom of Stephen. Paul confesses that "beyond measure" he persecuted the church of God prior to his conversion. Although we know from his biography and from Acts that Paul could speak Hebrew, modern scholarship suggests that Koine Greek was his first language.

In his letters, Paul drew heavily on his knowledge of Stoic philosophy, using Stoic terms and metaphors to assist his new Gentile converts in their understanding of the revealed word of God. He also owed much to his training in the law and the prophets, utilizing this knowledge to convince his Jewish countrymen of the unity of past Old Testament prophecy and covenants with the fulfilling of these in Jesus Christ. His wide spectrum of experiences and education gave the "Apostle to the Gentiles" the tools which he later would use to effectively spread the Gospel and to establish the church in the Roman Empire.”

[Sidebar--Wikipedia on stoicism: 
Stoicism is a school of Hellenistic philosophy that flourished throughout the Roman and Greek world until the 3rd century AD. Stoicism is predominantly a philosophy of personal ethics which is informed by its system of logic and its views on the natural world. According to its teachings, as social beings, the path to happiness for humans is found in accepting this moment as it presents itself, by not allowing ourselves to be controlled by our desire for pleasure or our fear of pain, by using our minds to understand the world around us and to do our part in nature's plan, and by working together and treating others in a fair and just manner.

It was founded in Athens by Zeno of Citium in the early 3rd century BC. The Stoics taught that emotions resulted in errors of judgment which were destructive, due to the active relationship between cosmic determinism and human freedom, and the belief that it is virtuous to maintain a will (called prohairesis) that is in accord with nature. Because of this, the Stoics presented their philosophy as a way of life (lex divina), and they thought that the best indication of an individual's philosophy was not what a person said but how a person behaved. To live a good life, one had to understand the rules of the natural order since they taught that everything was rooted in nature.”]

[Sidebar:
The idea that “the best indication of an individual's philosophy was not what a person said but how a person behaved.” is in contradistinction with the idea that “salvation is based on faith and not "works of the law". Thus, we can see that, when Paul converted to Jesus’ new preference of Faith over Works, he had to abandon not only the Jewish fierce fidelity to the LAW, but also the Greek rationalism he had learned at the Hillel University. Moreover, from this it may be seen that the Wave/Particle dichotomy that continues to complicate spiritual knowledge today with its logical contradictions, was in full force even 2000 years ago, when Paul was seeking to carve a new religion out of the ancient traditions.

Back to Stoicism:]
“Later Stoics—such as Seneca and Epictetus—emphasized that, because "virtue is sufficient for happiness", a sage was immune to misfortune. This belief is similar to the meaning of the phrase "stoic calm", though the phrase does not include the "radical ethical" Stoic views that only a sage can be considered truly free, and that all moral corruptions are equally vicious.”

[Sidebar: Note the expression, "stoic calm"; I cannot help recalling the material we reviewed in The Gospel of Philip about the “CALM” of the Bridal Chamber. The appearance of the concept of “stoic calm”, (which equates with the Eastern concepts of “equanimity”, “bliss”, and “nirvana”), just goes to show that the essence of Christianity is linked to even more ancient, so-called “pagan” concepts of spiritual reality. Maybe God wasn’t born yesterday.

The following summary of Paul’s self-estimation and doctrine is of interest, especially the comments down the page on Paul’s before-and-after beliefs:
“Paul described himself as 
    • o a servant of Jesus Christ;
    • o having experienced an unforeseen, sudden, startling change, due to all-powerful grace—not the fruit of his reasoning or thoughts; 
    • o having seen Christ as did the other apostles when Christ appeared to him as he appeared to Peter, to James, to the Twelve, after his Resurrection; 
    • o called to be an apostle;
    • o set apart for the gospel of God.

Paul described Jesus as having been promised by God beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures;
    • o being the true messiah and the Son of God;
    • o having biological lineage from David ("according to the flesh");
    • o having been declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead;
    • o being Jesus Christ our Lord;
    • o the One through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations, "including you who are called to belong to Jesus Christ".
    • Jesus 
      • lives in heaven;
      • is God's Son;
      • would soon return.
[Here are the before-and-after remarks:]
    • The Cross 
    • he now believed Jesus' death was a voluntary sacrifice that reconciled sinners with God. 
    • The Law 
    • he now believed the law only reveals the extent of people's enslavement to the power of sin—a power that must be broken by Christ. 
    • Gentiles 
    • he had believed Gentiles were outside the covenant that God made with Israel;
    • he now believed Gentiles and Jews were united as the people of God in Christ Jesus. 
    • Circumcision 
    • had believed circumcision was the rite through which males became part of Israel, an exclusive community of God's chosen people; 
    • he now believed that neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but that the new creation is what counts in the sight of God, and that this new creation is a work of Christ in the life of believers, making them part of the church, an inclusive community of Jews and Gentiles reconciled with God through faith. 
    • Persecution 
    • had believed his violent persecution of the church to be an indication of his zeal for his religion; 
    • he now believed Jewish hostility toward the church was sinful opposition that would incur God's wrath;
    • he believed he was halted by Christ when his fury was at its height; It was "through zeal" that he persecuted the Church, and he obtained mercy because he had "acted ignorantly in unbelief".


    • The Last Days 
    • had believed God's messiah would put an end to the old age of evil and initiate a new age of righteousness;
    • he now believed this would happen in stages that had begun with the resurrection of Jesus, but the old age would continue until Jesus returns.

Paul is critical both theologically and empirically of claims of moral or lineal superiority of Jews while conversely strongly sustaining the notion of a special place for the Children of Israel.

After his conversion, Paul went to Damascus, where Acts 9 states he was healed of his blindness and baptized by Ananias of Damascus. Paul says that it was in Damascus that he barely escaped death. Paul also says that he then went first to Arabia, and then came back to Damascus. Paul's trip to Arabia is not mentioned anywhere else in the Bible, and some suppose he actually traveled to Mount Sinai for meditations in the desert. 

Paul asserted that he received the Gospel not from man, but directly by "the revelation of Jesus Christ". He claimed almost total independence from the Jerusalem community, but agreed with it on the nature and content of the gospel. He appeared eager to bring material support to Jerusalem from the various growing Gentile churches that he started. In his writings, Paul used the persecutions he endured to avow proximity and union with Jesus and as a validation of his teaching.”
What follows is a place-to-place travelogue of Paul’s three missionary journeys:
“First missionary journey
The author of Acts arranges Paul's travels into three separate journeys. The first journey, led initially by Barnabas, took Paul from Antioch to Cyprus then into southern Asia Minor (Anatolia), and finally returning to Antioch. In Cyprus, Paul rebukes and blinds Elymas the magician who was criticizing their teachings. From this point on, Paul is described as the leader of the group.

Interval at Antioch
Antioch served as a major Christian center for Paul's evangelism, and he remained there for "a long time with the disciples" at the conclusion of his first journey. The exact duration of Paul's stay in Antioch is unknown, with estimates ranging from nine months to as long as eight years.

Incident at Antioch
Despite the agreement achieved at the Council of Jerusalem concerning circumcision, Paul recounts how he later publicly confronted Peter in a dispute sometimes called the "Incident at Antioch", over Peter's reluctance to share a meal with Gentile Christians in Antioch because they did not strictly adhere to Jewish customs. 

Writing later of the incident, Paul recounts, "I opposed [Peter] to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong", and says he told Peter, "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?" 

Second missionary journey
Paul left for his second missionary journey from Jerusalem, in late Autumn 49, after the meeting of the Council of Jerusalem where the circumcision question was debated. On their trip around the Mediterranean sea, Paul and his companion Barnabas stopped in Antioch where they had a sharp argument about taking John Mark with them on their trips. The book of Acts said that John Mark had left them in a previous trip and gone home. Unable to resolve the dispute, Paul and Barnabas decided to separate; Barnabas took John Mark with him, while Silas joined Paul.

Paul and Silas initially visited Tarsus (Paul's birthplace), Derbe and Lystra. In Lystra, they met Timothy, a disciple who was spoken well of, and decided to take him with them. The Church kept growing, adding believers, and strengthening in faith daily.

In Philippi, Paul cast a spirit of divination out of a servant girl, whose masters were then unhappy about the loss of income her soothsaying provided (Acts 16:16–24). They turned the city against the missionaries, and Paul and Silas were put in jail. After a miraculous earthquake, the gates of the prison fell apart and Paul and Silas could have escaped but remained; this event led to the conversion of the jailor (Acts 16:25–40). They continued traveling, going by Berea and then to Athens, where Paul preached to the Jews and God-fearing Greeks in the synagogue and to the Greek intellectuals in the Areopagus. Paul continued from Athens to Corinth.

Third missionary journey
According to Acts, Paul began his third missionary journey by travelling all around the region of Galatia and Phrygia to strengthen, teach and rebuke the believers. Paul then traveled to Ephesus, an important center of early Christianity, and stayed there for almost three years, probably working there as a tentmaker, as he had done when he stayed in Corinth. He is claimed to have performed numerous miracles, healing people and casting out demons, and he apparently organized missionary activity in other regions. Paul left Ephesus after an attack from a local silversmith resulted in a pro-Artemis riot involving most of the city. During his stay in Ephesus, Paul wrote four letters to the church in Corinth. 

Paul went through Macedonia into Achaea (Acts 20:1–2) and stayed in Greece, probably Corinth, for three months during 56–57 AD. Commentators generally agree that Paul dictated his Epistle to the Romans during this period. He then made ready to continue on to Syria, but he changed his plans and traveled back through Macedonia because of some Jews who had made a plot against him. In Romans 15:19 Paul wrote that he visited Illyricum, but he may have meant what would now be called Illyria Graeca, which was at that time a division of the Roman province of Macedonia. On their way back to Jerusalem, Paul and his companions visited other cities such as Philippi, Troas, Miletus, Rhodes, and Tyre. Paul finished his trip with a stop in Caesarea, where he and his companions stayed with Philip the Evangelist before finally arriving at Jerusalem. 
Journey from Rome to Spain
Among the writings of the early Christians, Pope Clement I said that Paul was "Herald (of the Gospel of Christ) in the West", and that "he had gone to the extremity of the west". John Chrysostom indicated that Paul preached in Spain: "For after he had been in Rome, he returned to Spain, but whether he came thence again into these parts, we know not". Cyril of Jerusalem said that Paul, "fully preached the Gospel, and instructed even imperial Rome, and carried the earnestness of his preaching as far as Spain, undergoing conflicts innumerable, and performing Signs and wonders". 

Visits to Jerusalem in Acts and the epistles
In 57, upon completion of his third missionary journey, Paul arrived in Jerusalem for his fifth and final visit with a collection of money for the local community. Acts reports that he initially was warmly received. However, Acts goes on to recount how Paul was warned by James and the elders that he was gaining a reputation for being against the Law, saying "they have been told about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or walk according to our customs". Paul underwent a purification ritual in order to give the Jews no grounds to bring accusations against him for not following their law.

After seven days in Jerusalem, some "Jews from Asia" (most likely from Roman Asia) accused Paul of defiling the temple by bringing gentiles into it. He was seized and dragged out of the temple by an angry mob. He narrowly escaped being killed by surrendering to a group of Roman centurions, who arrested him, put him in chains and took him to the tribune. 

When a plot to kill Paul on his way to an appearance before the Jews was discovered, he was transported by night to Caesarea Maritima. He was held as a prisoner there for two years, until a new governor reopened his case in 59. When the governor suggested that he be sent back to Jerusalem for further trial, Paul exercised his right as a Roman citizen to "appeal unto Caesar". Finally, Paul and his companions sailed for Rome where Paul was to stand trial for his alleged crimes. 

Acts recounts that on the way to Rome for his appeal as a Roman citizen to Caesar, Paul was shipwrecked on "Melita" (Malta), where the islanders showed him "unusual kindness" and where he was met by Publius. From Malta, he travelled to Rome via Syracuse, Rhegium and Puteoli

Two years in Rome
He finally arrived in Rome around 60, where he spent another two years under house arrest. The narrative of Acts ends with Paul preaching in Rome for two years from his rented home while awaiting trial.

The New Testament does not say when or how Paul died. The date of Paul's death is believed to have occurred after the Great Fire of Rome in July 64, but before the last year of Nero's reign, in 68.

A legend later developed that his martyrdom occurred at the Acquae Salviae, on the Via Laurentina. According to this legend, after Paul was decapitated, his severed head rebounded three times, giving rise to a source of water each time that it touched the ground, which is how the place earned the name "San Paolo alle Tre Fontane" ("St Paul at the Three Fountains"). 

Paul's letters reveal a remarkable human being: dedicated, compassionate, emotional, sometimes harsh and angry, clever and quick-witted, supple in argumentation, and above all possessing a soaring, passionate commitment to God, Jesus Christ, and his own mission. Fortunately, after his death one of his followers collected some of the letters, edited them very slightly, and published them. They constitute one of history's most remarkable personal contributions to religious thought and practice. 

Basic message
Paul's writings emphasized the crucifixion, Christ's resurrection and the Parousia or second coming of Christ.  E. P. Sanders finds three major emphases in Paul's writings: 
    • His strongest emphasis was on the death, resurrection, and lordship of Jesus Christ. He preached that one's faith in Jesus assures that person a share in Jesus' life (salvation). He saw Jesus' death as being for the believers' benefit, not a defeat. Jesus died so that believers' sins would be forgiven.
    • The resurrection of Jesus was of primary importance to Paul, as may be seen in his first letter to the Thessalonians which is the earliest surviving account of conversion to Christianity. 
    • The resurrection brought the promise of salvation to believers. Paul taught that, when Christ returned, those who had died believing in Christ as the saviour of mankind would be brought back to life, while those still alive would be "caught up in the clouds together with them to meet the Lord in the air".

Paul's theology of the gospel accelerated the separation of the messianic sect of Christians from Judaism, a development contrary to Paul's own intent. He wrote that faith in Christ was alone decisive in salvation for Jews and Gentiles alike, making the schism between the followers of Christ and mainstream Jews inevitable and permanent. He argued that Gentile converts did not need to become Jews, get circumcised, follow Jewish dietary restrictions, or otherwise observe Mosaic laws to be saved. Nevertheless, in Romans he insisted on the positive value of the Law, as a moral guide.

According to Bart Ehrman, Paul believed that Jesus would return within his lifetime. He states that Paul expected that Christians who had died in the mean time would be resurrected to share in God's kingdom, and he believed that the saved would be transformed, assuming supernatural bodies.

Paul's influence on Christian thinking arguably has been more significant than any other New Testament author. Paul declared that "Christ is the end of the law", exalted the Christian church as the body of Christ, and depicted the world outside the Church as under judgment. Paul's writings include the earliest reference to the "Lord's Supper", a rite traditionally identified as the Christian communion or Eucharist. The themes of predestination found in Western Christianity do not appear in Eastern theology. Augustine's foundational work on the gospel as a gift (grace), on morality as life in the Spirit, on predestination, and on original sin all derives from Paul, especially Romans.

Elaine Pagels, professor of religion at Princeton University and an authority on Gnosticism, declined to judge (in her book The Gnostic Paul) whether Paul was actually a Gnostic. Instead, she concentrated on how the Gnostics interpreted Paul's letters and how evidence from gnostic sources may challenge the assumption that Paul wrote his letters to combat "gnostic opponents" and to repudiate their statement that they possess secret wisdom.

Among the critics of Paul the Apostle was Thomas Jefferson, a Deist, who wrote that Paul was the "first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus." Christian anarchists, such as Leo Tolstoy and Ammon Hennacy, take a similar view. F.F. Powell argues that Paul, in his epistles, made use of many of the ideas of the Greek philosopher Plato, sometimes even using the same metaphors and language. For example, in Phaedrus, Plato has Socrates saying that the heavenly ideals are perceived as though "through a glass dimly", Paul's language closely mirrors this phrase 1 Corinthians 13.”

Thus endeth this review of Paul’s life and travels. I have found it helpful to get a firm grasp of the big picture of this great man, by following his travels on a map, so I can get a tangible feel for where he went and what he accomplished. Next time we will see what his last will and testament has to say.


Let us pray: Jesus thank you for the kind of inspiration You can give us to change our ways and light us with a passion for Your Word. Thank you for giving us a man like Paul to push us along the spiritual path by word and example. Amen.