For me, it has been an interesting and enlightening way to read the scriptures, not focusing on the popular interpretation but really looking at the words, the contemporary period and the various roles of all the characters in the story. Of course, not everyone will see what I see in a text and that is okay. It is not about being right or wrong but about a text inspiring and speaking to the reader. In the past, with our community, much time has been spent teaching about how to disagree in a way that invites dialogue rather than causes conflict. Quite simple really, rather than say “I think you are wrong” or “I don’t agree with you”, perhaps comment “That’s an interesting way of interpreting the passage, I’ve always read it this way. What do you think?” That is just one quick example but there are many other ways to invite dialogue, to validate and enrich each other.
So back to the texts for today, as I read the gospel and the epistle passages, both talked about Jesus. I was immediately engaged by how very different the two passages were — what contrasting pictures of Jesus they paint!
The earliest of the two readings is 1 Corinthians 15: 1-11, which was penned about 53-54 CE. This passage contains a high and concise Christology. The way the text reads it feels credal, as if the author of Corinthians was reciting a developed statement with a focus on death of Jesus and resurrection of Christ. The purpose of the text is to encourage the recipients of the letter to continue in the beliefs they had previously embraced. As I read, I was intrigued by the credal statement and the complexity of that doctrine which had developed over a relatively short time — just about fifty years. For me, today, that would be like looking back to the seventies. On one hand so many developments have happened in that half-century. I met Andy, got married, gave birth to three wonderful children, fostered more than a hundred others, moved to a foreign country, gained three lovely daughters-in-law and three grandchildren — and that is just with family! What about developments in technology, transportation, human rights, etc.? It has been a momentous, action packed fifty years. Yet on the other hand, the time has gone so fast, the seventies seem like yesterday. A poignant reminder of how short life really is.
Of course, I realize that some reading this would not even have been born in the seventies, nevertheless have probably listen to seventies music and heard older relatives reminiscing about those days. When I think over this similar time period, it really grounds for me the reality of a fifty-year time span. It does make me aware of how quickly this complex Christology developed.
I have long embraced the thought that the gospels were written to balance the teaching found in the epistles. Not to correct or to change but to balance — to add another side of the story of the Christ. Although fanciful, I can almost imagine the authors of the gospels reading the Christology contained within some of the letters and wanting to balance it with the story of Jesus’ time on earth. Gospel of Luke was penned maybe thirty-years after Corinthians. It is not really a stretch to think that there was concern that the story of Jesus, birth, miracles, healings would be lost to the new generation. What a different view of Christ we would have if the gospels had never been written.
Actually, there are a number of theories about the dating of Luke, but all put it significantly later than Corinthians. Most commonly ascribed to is that it was written somewhere between. 80-90 CE. However, some scholars argue for a date as late as 110 CE while, less popularly, prefer a pre-70 date. Most think the text was revised well into the 2nd Century.
It would bring contemporary readers (or hearers) back to the simplicity of the stories of the gospel. It would ensure the miracles, feedings, healings, teaching, non-violence, etc were not forgotten.
As I read the gospel text in Luke (5:1-11) it is such a simple tale. Jesus was standing on the shore and got into the boat belonging to Simon. He then told him to row out further and cast his nets in the deeper water. Simon answered that they had worked all night and caught nothing but nevertheless followed the instruction. He caught so many fish the nets began to break, and he had to get help to land the catch. Then Jesus told him he would be catching people from now onwards.
Of course, the story in itself is quite complex when one spends time with it. It should be noted that even within the story there is a nod to the divinity of the Christ, the Messiah— a miracle happened such that it caused Simon, James and John to forsake their careers, families and friends to follow. The Christ was being revealed.
Another complexity that always intrigues me is why the synoptics placed this story as part of the calling of the disciples and Gospel of John placed it as a post-resurrection story — but I’ve blogged about that before so not for today.
Today, as I ponder the text I focus on the reminder of the humanness and simplicity of the story — Jesus interacting with ordinary people, Jesus fulfilling their physical needs and Jesus calling them to be more than they ever thougt they could be.
So, the complexity of the Pauline Christology or the simplicity of a story about the humanness of Jesus? I think both are needed. They balance each other and balance is good.
