,
22 tweets,
4 min read
Read on Twitter
Prompted by the post below, many have asked for an explanation of what Gal. 3:28 and Col. 3:11 actually mean in their historical context and in relation to the current race, given that I reject James White's "exegesis."
alsoacarpenter.com/2019/02/25/gal…
A (long) thread:
alsoacarpenter.com/2019/02/25/gal…
A (long) thread:
2/ In the Book of Romans alone, we see that the gospel is the power of God to save both Jews and Gentiles (1:16), that God will judge both impartially on the last day (2:7-11), that both are likewise condemned as sinners without any special rights (3:9), that both are to be ...
3/ saved by faith (4:16-17), that true Israel includes both Jew and Gentile (9:24), and that “there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him” (Rom. 10:12-13).
4/ In short, Gentiles are to be saved as Gentiles; because the Old Covenant was preparatory for the New, requiring Gentiles to become Jews was a repudiation of the meaning and purpose of Israel itself; there is no more distinction in the eschatological age of Christ and ...
5/ His Spirit; the middle wall of partition was broken down at the Cross (Eph. 2:14).
But the New Testament also makes clear the seeming intractability of this divide—within the Church itself. Though Peter had already been told, “What God has made clean, do not call common” ...
But the New Testament also makes clear the seeming intractability of this divide—within the Church itself. Though Peter had already been told, “What God has made clean, do not call common” ...
6/ ... (Acts 10:15), we nevertheless read that, “before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party” (Gal. 2:12).
7/ We also read in Acts 6 that “a complaint by the Hellenists arose against the Hebrews because their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution” (v. 1). And we know that the Jerusalem council—the first synod, we might say—was organized to deal with the ...
8/ ... Judaizers’ claims against the Gentiles.
So, if all that Paul had said in Romans was true, how could that continued disunity still exist? The answer is obvious: there had been hundreds of years of division by group, by genos, by ethnos, and by phule.
So, if all that Paul had said in Romans was true, how could that continued disunity still exist? The answer is obvious: there had been hundreds of years of division by group, by genos, by ethnos, and by phule.
9/ Further, there had been generations of misinterpretation and abuse of the covenantal distinction instituted by God. The sad fact is that the 1stCentury Jews had warped a religion intended to be a blessing to every nation and tribe into an ethnically exclusive source of ...
10/ ... privilege and boasting: “we have Abraham as our father” (Jn. 8:39). As such, Gentiles were considered dogs, with whom the Jews had no dealings (Jn. 4:9). The Jewish leaders had not only fenced the Law of God, adding requirements and traditions not contained therein, ...
11/ ... but they even fenced their ethnic heritage, making it a basis for acceptance before God and a rejection of the “other.” And this friction continued into the Church itself, because it was (and is) a corruption of the redemptive-historical plan for Israel and the nations.
12/ Here is where the regional history of a people, culture, and society is so important (and why in our own context, we have to discuss race). Without the historical context, Peter was committing no greater crime than just preferring to hang out with those whom he was most ...
13/ ... comfortable. And without this centuries old context, the neglect of Hellenist widows might be viewed as just a statistical anomaly. To be clear, if we do not include in our understanding of this conflict the collision of different people groups, with centuries of ...
14/ ... differing history and centuries of regional privilege and prejudice, then we can make no sense of the post-Resurrection Jew/Gentile problem at all. If we attempt to interpret and understand these events without the socio-historical context, we start from illicit ...
15/ ... neutral ground which inevitably obscures part of the very import of their presence in the Biblical canon.
What we see in the NT canon is a church that was definitively unified in Christ yet nevertheless fractured by centuries of religious, cultural, and ethnic divide.
What we see in the NT canon is a church that was definitively unified in Christ yet nevertheless fractured by centuries of religious, cultural, and ethnic divide.
16/ And we see the Apostles addressing this divide in their quest to bring lived unity out of the existing spiritual unity in Christ. And we see this done, most importantly, not by ignoring the divide or simply re-iterating the existing definitive unity.
17/ Nor do we see them denying or even downplaying the very real, very existential, history of distinctions.
No, what we see is them making structural changes in Acts 6 to address ethnic inequities.
No, what we see is them making structural changes in Acts 6 to address ethnic inequities.
18/ We see Paul confronting Peter to his face for whom he decided to eat with. We see the Jerusalem Council overturning the claims of the Judaizers and giving instructions to Gentiles for the sake of lived unity. And throughout the Pauline corpus, we see him addressing ...
19/ ... Jews in one way and Gentiles in another, “Now I am speaking to you Gentiles” (Rom. 11:13), “You who call yourselves Jews” (Rom. 2:17). We even see him arguing that Gentiles owe a share in their physical resources to the impoverished Jews in Jerusalem (Rom. 15:17).
20/ Within the very contexts of arguing for no distinction as to gospel, judgement, guilt, redemption, and unity in Christ, Paul nonetheless recognizes the distinction of peoples, with different incarnated histories and cultures (religious and otherwise), as well as the ...
21/ ... differing relationships and contexts they find themselves in. And finally, we see the example of the Apostle as he leads the way toward lived unity, declaring his willingness to become a Jew to the Jews and a Gentile to Gentiles, that he might give offense to none ...
