Epistle of Jude

Click here for the previous book, John III.

CHAPTER 1

I thought (assumed) this was written by the Apostle Jude – one of the most forgettable apostles.  Nope.  The first line says, “brother of James” and the intro notes says that probably means he was Judas Christ, who is mentioned in passing in the gospels.  That he has to be noted in reference to his brother and that we know almost nothing else about him means he was probably a minor figure.

Actually, it’s almost certainly written by someone totally different, much, much later.  Early on, he says, “for the faith that was once for all handed down to the holy ones” and that indicates the faith was handed down from earlier generation(s) of Christians. The intro notes to the chapter in my Bible note it could’ve been written around 80 AD, which might put it in the lifetime of Judas Christ, but even my Bible’s intro notes don’t sound very sold on that idea.

As for its contents, it’s standard stuff about Jesus Christ.  Not much to see here – move along.

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

Man – almost all my thoughts on this are on its authorship, and virtually nothing on its contents.  Jeepers – even the Minor Prophets in the Old Testaments aren’t as bad as the Minor Letters in the New Testament.

And with that, the letters portion of the New Testament ends not with a bang, but with a whimper.

Click here for the beginning of the next book - Revelations.

John III

Click here for the previous book, John II.

CHAPTER 1

The Presbyter is back – and this time there is a name for the person he is writing a letter to: Gaius.  This letter isn’t about theology, but pragmatic day-to-day stuff in trying to set up a church.  Most notably, the Presbyter notes how someone named Diotrephes has completely big timed Presbyter and Gaius.  Our man P isn’t very happy with that – but there isn’t much he can do about it. There is no real hierarchy or authority beyond the local. Since Diotrephes is the big buck in his lick, he can big time whoever he damn well pleases.  I’m sure the Catholic Church sees this story as a major cautionary tale.

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

I’ll say this much – among the really dinky and forgettable books at the end of the Bible, it’s probably my favorite.  It deals with humans, and that’s what draws me in.

Click here for the next book, the Epistle of Jude.

John II

Click here for the previous Bible book, John I.

CHAPTER 1

We’re nearing the end of the letters section. 

The introductory notes give me a much-needed moment of hilarity.  It notes how the next two letters (John 2 and 3) are almost the exact same length – and that could easily be due to the limited amount of writing space on papyrus.  That isn’t meant as a joke, but for some reason it just tickled me pink.  It makes so much practical sense!  And you often forget about the practical limitations and necessities required for Bible writing back in the day.

Both John 2 and 3 have a similar style.  Both letters have an author calling himself The Presbyter.  He never identifies himself as John – just the Presbyter.  This one is written to “the chosen lady” and her children.  We have no idea who that could be.

As for the letter itself, I didn’t much out of it.  He denounces deceivers and backsliders.  That’s about it.

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

It’s 13 verses long.  How does that merit any concluding thoughts?

Click here for John III.

John I

Click here for the previous book, Peter II.

CHAPTER 1

Well, let’s see.  This one is believed to be written by the guy who wrote the fourth gospel due to some similarities in theological thought.  Yeah, but this Bible’s opening notes tell me that this could easily have been written in response to that gospel, as part of a debate over its meaning.  Oh, goody.  That was my least favorite gospel.  And I’m still sick of the letters.  (Good news for me: this is the last letter more than one chapter long.  Bad news for me: there are three more one-chapter letters to go).

This one starts off with a poem and then gives us generic theology like “God is light.”  Wonderful.  But the Bible engages me when it deals with humans, not solely with the heavens.

CHAPTER 2

This makes Christ out to be the Holy Lawyer in the sky.  This letter notes, “But if anyone does sin, we have an Advocate with the Farther, Jesus Christ the righteous one.”  So God will plead our case before his dad.  That’s nice. 

The chapter also refers to antichrists (verse 18: “Children, it is the last hour and just as you heard that the antichrist was coming, so now many antichrists have appeared.” I do believe that is the first time we’ve seen that word in the Bible. We see it again a littler later: “Whoever denies the Father and the Son, this is the antichrist.”  That’s a pretty broad definition of antichrist.  Usually people now just use it to mean Satan or something, but here it’s anyone not a Christian.  That’s very much a “you’re either with us or against us” mentality.  If you’re not with Christ, you are anti-Christ. 

CHAPTER 3

This chapter is pretty overblown.  Peter (or whoever wrote it) keeps overstating things rather badly.  For instance, “Whoever sins belongs to the devil.”  Oh.  By the way – who doesn’t sin?  Do you go around casting the first stone all the time, pal? 

Actually, that example points out another theme in this chapter – repeated references to the devil.  This is one reason I really doubt Peter wrote this.  Jesus almost never spoke of the devil, but there is plenty of devil talk here.  It goes with the anti-Christ talk last chapter.  There is a strong sense of being under siege here.

CHAPTER 4

Remember how this letter is supposed written by Apostle John because much of its theology is reminiscent of the fourth gospel?  Well, that’s never more obvious than in this line: “God send his only Son into the world so that we might have life through him.”  That reminds me of probably the most famous line in the fourth gospel: John 3:16: “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him might not perish but have eternal life.”  It’s not word-for-word the same, but it is the same theology.

CHAPTER 5

Not much happens here.  Just typical Jesus talk.  Actually, here’s a thought.  The writer gives us another statement about how we have eternal life through Christ – does that mean there is no hell?  If we have eternal life through Christ, that indicates there is NO eternal life without Christ.  So you don’t go to hell – you just rot.  Maybe I’m missing something, but that does strike me as a legitimate interpretation of this theology. 

Remember – while there is tons of overlap with our ideas of Christ and Christianity and the ideas of the early church – it’s not exactly the same thing.

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

There are some points I can comment on, but I miss the Paul letters.  Those had a line of thought I could follow all throughout.  Maybe it’s just my limitations as a reader, but I have a lot of trouble doing that with these later letters. 

The most distinctive thing in this letter is the interest in the devil and antichrists. 

Click here for John II.

Peter II

Click here for the previous book, Peter I.

CHAPTER 1

I’m really getting sick of these letters.  I guess I should look at the bright side – I’ve done a much better job plowing through this part than last time I read the Bible.  In 1998, I did a good job going through the gospels and Acts of the Apostles – and then read all the rest of it in one day.  I could read so much because I retained virtually nothing (and utterly nothing aside from Revelations).  I read over, rather than reading.

That’s starting to happen here again.  Looks, these letters are too short to make any really impressive theological points.  And what points they make usually just sound like echoes of what came in the earlier, longer (and better) Bible letters.  Oh, and most of these later letters (all of them?) weren’t read by their purported authors.  Anyway you slice it, I have trouble caring.

Anyhow, this guy really tries to sell us on the fact hat he’s Peter, which is different from the first letters.  He even claims to have heard God’s voice cry out, “This is my Son, my beloved, with whom I am well pleased.”  Wait – didn’t that happen when Jesus was baptized, which would’ve been before meeting Peter?  Eh, maybe God said it again when they had the big meeting with Moses and Elijah. 

CHAPTER 2

Clearly, this guy is familiar with the more famous stories from Genesis, as he refers to several of them.  He also denounces false teachers – repeatedly.

Another line I never knew came from the Bible: “The dog returns to its own vomit.”  You got to admit, it doesn’t sound like the Bible.  It makes sense, but sounds more like something Don Rickles would say than St. Peter. 

CHAPTER 3

OK, we actually get a really important theological point in this chapter – one that saves a lot of the earlier points that otherwise wouldn’t work and allows them to work.  This chapter solves a central theological dilemma that allows the church to survive some of the most odd sounding statements that have littered the New Testament so far.

Many times the Christians have told us that the end of times is near.   Jesus proclaimed the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand.  Paul said that this world is already passing away.  Their words indicated that we should expect the Second Coming any day now.  Surely, by the year 2014 AD the old world would be dead and gone.

Obviously, this world is still here.  But you have the most important early figures in the church – including Jesus Christ himself – saying things that indicate the opposite.  So how do you explain them?  How do you square that circle?  Surely, you don’t want to say that the Son of God was fallible. 

No, you answer all of this with Peter II: 3:8: “But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years and a thousand years like one day.” 

You declare that God works on Holy Time, and not Daylight Savings Judean Time.  It is a cop out – but a magnificent one.  What – are you going to say that God can’t have a concept of time beyond ours?  Of course he can – he’s God!  But, at the very least, it means you can deduct a few points from Christ’s score for less than ideal communication skills when he was around.

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

No, it’s not much of a letter.  But I do get a kick out of the Bible’s greatest cop out of them all.

Click here for the next book, John I.

Peter I.

Click here for the previous book, Epistle of James.

CHAPTER 1

Modern scholars doubt Peter wrote this.  They find it unlikely that Peter would write a letter to Gentiles during Paul’s time of activity, and there isn’t much of a window for Peter to send the letter out otherwise.  It’s also written by someone educated in Greek, which is unlikely for a Jewish fisherman, though it could be a scribe.  However, it also quotes the Greek version of the Old Testament and shows signs of being written after Roman persecution has begun. 

The notion that the letter came from Peter came from the late second century, so it evolved after Peter’s death. 

In terms of the letter itself, I didn’t get much from this one.  He supports baptism, calls for reverence, and mutual love.  He mentions Jesus Christ plenty of times, but there isn’t much sense that the letter-writer used to hang out with him.  Jesus doesn’t come off like a flesh and blood figure – just the God we pray to.

CHAPTER 2

Peter tells us of the importance of ethics, and then discusses how to be a Christian in a hostile world.  It is things like this that make people think the letter was written in the later first century AD, after persecutions are underway.  Peter (or whoever wrote this) points at the example of Jesus Christ.  He was persecuted – killed even – but handled it with grace and class.  

For the 27^th time or so, the Bible tells us that if you’re a slave, but a good slave.  I guess the Christians figured they were taking enough grief for their religious beliefs without trying to engineer a social revolution. 

CHAPTER 3

Aside from telling slaves to be good slaves, wives should be submissive to their husbands.  I wonder if the guy that wrote this letter is also the guy that wrote some of those Paul letters that Paul didn’t really write. You get a similar theme of social order.

CHAPTER 4

He calls for people to engage in charity and treat people well.  Oh, and he warns that persecution is coming: “Beloved, do not be surprised that a trial by fire is occurring among you.”   Yeah, he might know because it’s already on.

CHAPTER 5

The last chapter is a weird one, because it’s some generic advice to presbyters, who are the officially appointed leaders of the community.  That sounds like something that would’ve developed later on.  They had leaders in Jerusalem, but Peter is writing to people in Paul’s territory.  It’s not clear they had leaders.  Letters like Corinthians indicate that they didn’t.

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

Meh.  It’s just another of them short letters that doesn’t leave much of a mark.  

Click here for Peter II.

Epistle of James

Click here for the previous book, Hebrews.

CHAPTER 1

OK, this letter is attributed to James Christ, brother of Jesus Christ and leader of the Jerusalem sect of early Christians.  I’ve read different accounts to the authenticity of this letter.  Bart Ehrman blasts it, noting that literacy was pretty uncommon back then and the Christ family came from a small village in a rural part of north Judah – none of which makes us think that James would’ve been literate.  Also – and as this Bible’s introduction notes – it is written by someone with a very strong command of Greek.  So it likely wasn’t anyone from Judah at all. 

Aye, but this Bible also notes James could’ve had a secretary or scribe write it.  Also, James Tabor in “Paul and Jesus” clearly believes it is an actual James letter – though he doesn’t really explain it, just assumes it.  He mostly bases his opinion on the theology of the letter.  It is far from the theology of Paul, and reading Acts and all that – James and Paul did have a different theology. Also, he noted that when the New Testament was assembled centuries later, some church leaders didn’t want to include this – not due to concern over authorship, but due to concern over theology.  They opted to put it in figuring, “Hey, if Jesus’s brother wrote it….” 

It begins by James calling himself, “A slave of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ.”  That formulation never sounds good, no matter how many times I hear it.  Mostly, it calls for morality.  People are to avoid all temptations. 

There is one really good line here: “Be doers of the word and not hearers only.”  It also points to a key difference in focus here with the Paul letters: a greater emphasis on actions.  Paul wasn’t indifferent to actions, of course, but his primary focus was on faith.  In this letter, it’s works.  That matters if you think back to Acts and the Paul letters and what the difference in faith versus action and ignoring the law versus following the law. In fact, along these lines, James even refers to “the perfect law.”   For Paul, laws weren’t perfect – faith was.  We saw in Acts that James cared more about observing the law, and that fits in with what we read here.

Oh – and aside from that opening line, Jesus Christ is never mentioned.  Interesting – and get used to it.  Jesus rarely rates a mention here.

CHAPTER 2

James has a theme of economic class here.  He begins this chapter by telling us that it makes no difference how much money a person has; they are all the same in the eyes of Christ. (For those keeping score, for the second straight chapter you get a Christ reference in the first verse, and then never again for the entire chapter). 

In fact, James goes on to point out in an extended segment that the poor are OK.  After all, God chose those are poor in the world to be rich in faith.  This sentiment goes along with some of Christ’s sayings.  So while James isn’t mentioning his brother much by name, he is covering some similar points.  This is in stark contrast to Paul, who constantly mentioned Christ, but pretty much never covered Christ’s teachings.  Last Supper, death, and resurrection – those are the only things Jesus did that Paul really seemed to care about.  You didn’t really get much of a theme about class status from Paul.

James sounds a lot like his brother when he declares, “For the judgment is merciless to one who has not shown mercy, mercy triumphs over judgment.” 

While James does have a segment on faith, he also notes the importance of the law, letting people not to become a transgressor of the law.  While there is common ground with Paul, it is a different take on Christian theology.  As he also notes, “For just as a body without a spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.” So follow the Law gang, got it?

Oh, and he calls people “you ignoramus” if they demand proof.  You need faith.

CHAPTER 3

Jesus Christ doesn’t rate a single mention in this chapter.  If anything, James goes out of his way to praise Dale Carnegie.  Of course he doesn’t mention the author of “How to Win Friends and Influence People” by name, but the approach is praised.  This chapter is mostly on the importance of being a good public speaker.  James tells us, “If anyone does not fall short in speech, he is a perfect man.”  Paul has previously called himself a poor speaker, but with all those sermons, I assume that Jesus could talk.

James notes, “Consider how small a fire can set a huge forest ablaze.  The tongue is also a fire.”  The irony is that Christianity has much of its enduring appeal and theology from the pen, not the tongue – through things like this. 

But think – though Christ isn’t mentioned by name, the value being promoted here is his public speaking ability.  But there is nothing about him dying on the cross.  James Christ has a very different notion of what made his brother important than Paul did.  For James, Jesus was about morals and public speaking, not dying and being reborn.

CHATPER 4

Again, James goes an entire chapter without mentioning Jesus Christ.  He hasn’t done so since the first verse of Chapter 2 (unless I missed something). 

He denounces passions.  They cause war and cloud the mind.  He has a nice bit saying, “You ask but do not receive, because you ask wrongly, to spend it on your passions. Adulterers!  Do you not know that to be a lover of the world means enmity with God?” 

That leads to his next point: “Submit yourselves to God.”  That sounds very much like a notion Muslims would agree with.

Muslims maybe, but the way James means it, I doubt Paul would like.  For once James tells people to submit to God, it becomes clear that also means submitting yourself to God’s laws.  “If you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law, but a judge.  There is one lawgiver and judge who is able to save or to destroy.  Who then are you to judge your neighbor?”  Paul completely judges the law and finds it wanting. In his case, it’s because he believes he’s received the word directly from God.  But James clearly backs the law – while Paul was indifferent to it.

This backs up the case for James being the real author of this letter (or dictating it to a secretary).  Acts of the Apostles made James a supporter of the law, and he comes off like one here as well.

CHAPTER 5

Again, I don’t see any mentions of Jesus Christ.

What you do get are some ferocious attacks on the rich.  Hey guys – you get can’t it with you!  You wicked chumps!  You saw some class-based stuff in Christ’s sermons, so it makes sense that his brother would have a similar message. 

He promotes prayer and that ends the letter.

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

It’s a good book and interesting.  It doesn’t flow as well as Paul’s letters, though.

It’s an interesting question if James actually wrote it.  Based on facts of the matter, I find it unlikely he wrote.  But based on what I know of theology and the disputes between James and Paul – well, at the very least I can see why people thought James wrote this.

Click here for the next book - Peter I.