Have you seen the announcement about our weekly Sunday study of Shared Stories, Rival Tellings by Robert C. Gregg in the church bulletin, or read about it in our Friday email? Maybe you are learning about it for the first time by reading this post. Well, read about what the group has been up to over the last couple weeks, then come participate yourself Sunday mornings at 9:00 am in the Everts Room downstairs at our church.
Two weeks ago they looked at the the evolution of the story of Sarah and Hagar from early Christian perspectives. The Apostle Paul radically reimagines the story in his letter to Gentile Christians in the churches of Galatia. Trying to contrast the Jerusalem of the early 50’s CE with the heavenly Jerusalem of which he dreamed, Paul turns Hagar, who had been a slave to Abraham and Sarah, as a representative of Judaism, which he viewed as enslaved to the Law of the Torah, even though Hagar was not viewed as a recipient of God’s covenant to the Jews in Genesis. On the other hand, Paul portrays Sarah, whose progeny were recipients of the Abrahamic covenant in Genesis, as free of the Law and associated with the heavenly Jerusalem which the Christians were to inherit. This reinterpretation of the story would have been highly offensive to contemporary Jews.
Five to seven years later, when Paul was writing to congregations in Rome that contained both Jewish and Gentile members, he softens his interpretation of the story to make it more palatable to Jewish readers. He does this by making a distinction between the covenant between God and Moses, which calls for adherence to the Law, and the promise made by God to Abraham before the Law had been handed down to Moses. According to Paul, Abraham’s circumcision was a seal of the righteousness that Abraham had acquired by faith in God while he was still uncircumcised. So to Paul, the key to righteousness was not adherence to the Law or participation in the act of circumcision, but the faith one has in Jesus Christ.
Last week they followed this up by examining 3rd century Christian theologian Origen’s homily entitled “On the birth of Isaac and the fact that he is weaned.” The translation used is not a direct translation from Origen’s Greek original into English. It is an English translation of a Latin translation by Tyrannius Rufinus of Origen’s Greek original. Tyrannius Rufinus (also known as Rufinus of Aquileia) was a Christian monk and theologian who was born 155 years after Origen. “Translation” is actually too strong a term; the homilies, as recorded in Latin by Rufinus, are only paraphrases of the original homilies. One scholar has charged that “Rufinus sometimes misreads the Greek text because of the haste with which he works and his insufficient mastery of the Greek language, and... he makes additions and alterations in areas of both theology and rhetoric.” But Rufinus was not trying to highjack Origen’s analysis. To the contrary, he was a great admirer and defender of Origen during a time when many believed Origen to be a heretic. Rufinus believed that many of Origen’s writings had been altered by his opponents (Origen himself had complained about this during his lifetime), and was just trying to recapture Origin’s original intent. (Origen was allegedly declared a heretic at the Second Council of Constantinople, but many scholars dispute this. He is still considered one the Fathers of the early Church, but was never made a saint.)
Does this sound interesting? Come learn more and take part in the ensuing conversations by being here at First Baptist Church in Newton (848 Beacon St. in Newton Centre) Sundays at 9:00 am. Then, if you wish, stay and join us for worship every Sunday at 10:00 am.
Two weeks ago they looked at the the evolution of the story of Sarah and Hagar from early Christian perspectives. The Apostle Paul radically reimagines the story in his letter to Gentile Christians in the churches of Galatia. Trying to contrast the Jerusalem of the early 50’s CE with the heavenly Jerusalem of which he dreamed, Paul turns Hagar, who had been a slave to Abraham and Sarah, as a representative of Judaism, which he viewed as enslaved to the Law of the Torah, even though Hagar was not viewed as a recipient of God’s covenant to the Jews in Genesis. On the other hand, Paul portrays Sarah, whose progeny were recipients of the Abrahamic covenant in Genesis, as free of the Law and associated with the heavenly Jerusalem which the Christians were to inherit. This reinterpretation of the story would have been highly offensive to contemporary Jews.
Five to seven years later, when Paul was writing to congregations in Rome that contained both Jewish and Gentile members, he softens his interpretation of the story to make it more palatable to Jewish readers. He does this by making a distinction between the covenant between God and Moses, which calls for adherence to the Law, and the promise made by God to Abraham before the Law had been handed down to Moses. According to Paul, Abraham’s circumcision was a seal of the righteousness that Abraham had acquired by faith in God while he was still uncircumcised. So to Paul, the key to righteousness was not adherence to the Law or participation in the act of circumcision, but the faith one has in Jesus Christ.
Last week they followed this up by examining 3rd century Christian theologian Origen’s homily entitled “On the birth of Isaac and the fact that he is weaned.” The translation used is not a direct translation from Origen’s Greek original into English. It is an English translation of a Latin translation by Tyrannius Rufinus of Origen’s Greek original. Tyrannius Rufinus (also known as Rufinus of Aquileia) was a Christian monk and theologian who was born 155 years after Origen. “Translation” is actually too strong a term; the homilies, as recorded in Latin by Rufinus, are only paraphrases of the original homilies. One scholar has charged that “Rufinus sometimes misreads the Greek text because of the haste with which he works and his insufficient mastery of the Greek language, and... he makes additions and alterations in areas of both theology and rhetoric.” But Rufinus was not trying to highjack Origen’s analysis. To the contrary, he was a great admirer and defender of Origen during a time when many believed Origen to be a heretic. Rufinus believed that many of Origen’s writings had been altered by his opponents (Origen himself had complained about this during his lifetime), and was just trying to recapture Origin’s original intent. (Origen was allegedly declared a heretic at the Second Council of Constantinople, but many scholars dispute this. He is still considered one the Fathers of the early Church, but was never made a saint.)
Does this sound interesting? Come learn more and take part in the ensuing conversations by being here at First Baptist Church in Newton (848 Beacon St. in Newton Centre) Sundays at 9:00 am. Then, if you wish, stay and join us for worship every Sunday at 10:00 am.
RSS Feed
