Thy seed shall inherit the Gentiles, and make the desolate cities to be inhabited

 

 

 

 

The Caribbees were wont to geld their children,

on purpose to fat and eat them.

-- John Locke

The funny thing about Acts 1 is how there are about 120 "disciples" of Jesus after the "ascension", but only 2 are candidates to replace Judas because only they were witnesses to the baptism of John and to the resurrection

And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,)

-- Acts 1:15

Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection. And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.

-- Acts 1:21ff.

Yet Paul claims Jesus was seen resurrected by more than 500 "brethren":

After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.

-- I Corinthians 15:6f.

By the time of Acts 1, the twelve disciples of Jesus have become the (almost) twelve apostles, and the not quite disciple followers of Jesus have now been promoted as it were to full disciples.

But Acts poses far fewer "disciples", now more broadly conceived, than Paul's even more broadly conceived "brethren", who were witnesses to the resurrection.

The key to apostleship according to Acts is NOT simply the terminus ad quem of Paul (And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time -- I Corinthians 15:8), but the terminus a quo involving the ministry of the Baptist AND the terminus ad quem of the resurrection.

This is why Paul's apostleship was considered illegitimate during his lifetime. He was part of the more expansive group associated with the 500, not with the more restrictive group associated with the 120.

The deal breaker was the missing link to John the Baptist.

Him he knew not.

Paul's insistence on the "apostleship" as a gift of the Spirit (I Corinthians 12:28) is an expansive interpretation based on his own ecstatic conversion experience, which in the final analysis is the basis for his gospel and his claim to be an apostle. Everything about it hangs on his claim to have experienced "seeing" the Lord, simply the "back end" of the deal. It has absolutely nothing to do with seeing the historical Jesus from the time of Jesus' baptism at the hands of the Baptist right on through all the events to the end and witnessing his actual resurrection. Which, in fact, he utterly eschews.

Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord?

-- I Corinthians 9:1

Paul an apostle--not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead. But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

-- Galatians 1:1, 11f.

Christianity as we know it today is based entirely on this, and it is sinking sand.

The solid earth in fleeting air

Thou all things hast of nothing made,

That hang'st the solid earth in fleeting air,

Vein'd with clear springs, which ambient seas repair.

-- George Sandys (1578-1644)

After which ensues the Plague of Women Voters, founded in 1920, which rushes in to try to fill the void left by the men

And then there is the plague of leadership

'Tis the time's plague, when madmen lead the blind.

-- William Shakespeare, King Lear, Act 4, Scene 1

Bad company ruins good morals, arguably the greatest plague of life

Good or bad company is the greatest blessing or greatest plague of life.

-- Roger L'Estrange

A darling can be a plague

Sometimes my plague, sometimes my darling,

Kissing today, to-morrow snarling.

-- Matthew Prior

Timothy Dalrymple of Christianity Today calls on Christians to pay reparations to black people

Here.

It's absurd on its face, and for many reasons, the most interesting to me being the way Dalrymple falls into the trap of depersonalizing Jesus' call to individual repentance and restitution and mistaking it for a social program. 

This is the magazine, remember, which opposed the dropping of THE BOMB to end WWII.

You remember Tim, by the way. He thinks Mormons, who still give safe harbor to polygamists, excel at family values.

He's also been rather too curious about competitors' web traffic statistics. You might say he's seemed a little too interested in that, jealous even.

And now it's time for Christians, who've done nothing wrong, to pay black people, who were never wronged.

Tim doesn't tell you that Black Lives Matter wants more than reparations. It wants redistribution of wealth.

Maybe that doesn't bother Tim. Maybe he thinks that's what Jesus wanted. If he does he should come right out and say that Jesus was a communist.

I'm sure evangelicals everywhere would find that quite interesting.

At any rate, the Tim Dalrymples of the world are clueless. They sell this as if the mayhem will stop if we make just one more gesture, when what's needed is a firm, loud shout of NO!

Reparations won't stop the mayhem. They will only encourage more.

It's editorials like this which further cement my decision long ago to leave the fever swamp American Christianity has become.

Whatever I've become, at least I'm not nuts.