The New Testament Along the Camino: Galatians, Ephesians, and Philippians

Reading the New Testament, there is a lot to unpack in some books and less in others. There is a lot of overlap between Paul's letters, which is unsurprising given that they were written to a dispersed community of Christians in the [relatively] immediate aftermath of the Crucifixion. So, moving forward, I will be combining my commentary on multiple books in a single post. This will both eliminate duplicative efforts and allow me to nest the individual books' teachings within the overall narrative.

Which brings me to Galatians, Ephesians, and Philippians. These letters are, to me, some of the most important in understanding how Christians should behave towards and minister to our fellow man. They also provide the biblical context for increasingly-important religious issues, such as our attitudes towards other faiths.

Let them be accursed. There is only one Gospel, and that is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Paul says this in no uncertain terms in Galatians 1:8-9, and even goes as far as to condemn an angel from heaven for preaching otherwise. Therefore, any who adds, changes, or claims the original is corrupted is not preaching the Gospel, and should be accursed in the eyes of Christians. That includes Islam and the Latter Day Saints. This is not to say that we should condemn, hate, or forsake those who have fallen into such false teachings, but we are called (through Paul) to refuse to acquiesce to or endorse, explicitly or tacitly, their teachings. The prior Pope, again, who taught that all faiths are a path to God, was Biblically incorrect. (While I do not intend or endeavour to lambast the Catholic Church in these writings, as I read the New Testament, I have time and again encountered instances of where Catholic doctrine does not align with what the Bible says, and I feel duty-bound as a Christian, writer, and explorer of faiths to hold our Christian leaders accountable for their incorrect teachings.)

Jews, Greeks and Gentiles. Paul and Peter were both Jews, but one persecuted the other in the name of the Jewish law. While these two men were once opposed to one another, they ultimately came together to spread the Gospel. Paul, not only a sinner but a persecutor, called for Jews to acknowledge that they do not have superiority over the Gentiles, as many do not live as Jews according to the law, but like Gentiles in their everyday life: (Galatians 2:24) "If you though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?" As such, we are all called to live in the same manner, according to the Word, so neither is above or below the other. Likewise, neither are the Hellenists, the Greeks, any lesser or worse for their beliefs so long as they come to live according to the teachings of Jesus and forsake their former beliefs. We have all be justified by faith so long as we live believe, profess, and behave accordingly. As Paul says in Ephesus 3:6, "Gentiles are fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel."

Slaves and Masters. Slavery was, unfortunately, commonplace in Biblical times, and it is my firm belief based on my readings that Jesus's teachings themselves did not justify slavery, but provided spiritual guidance for those who both practiced slavery and were bound by it. In Galatians, Paul discusses who shall inherit the Kingdom in terms of slavery, something which, to me, is allegorical so that those receiving the Word can understand. Thus, the notion that we should "cast out the slave woman and her son, for the son of the slave woman shall not inherit with the son of the free woman" is not to say that slavery is good or bad, but that the slave woman is the chains of sin and the old law, and the free woman is the freedom of Christ. By believing and behaving according to the Gospels, we become sons and daughters of the free woman rather than the slave, and we shall inherit the Kingdom accordingly, whereas those who do not are of the slave woman and will not.

In a similar vein, in Ephesians, slaves are called not to hate or rise up against their masters, but to use their position to glorify God by obeying, serving with pure intent, and knowing that while their time on Earth may yield hardship, their devotion to their masters in the name and manner of God will redeem them. So are we called to do the same for our "masters," whatever that master may be: a job, a government, or someone to whom we are indebted. For in doing so, we serve as an example of what a Christian truly is and what the teachings of the Bible truly embody. And if we are in the position of master, as a boss, government official, or even head of a household, we are to treat those under us as Jesus would, as we are all ultimately subjected to the Master in heaven. Some have pointed to this passage as a justification for slavery, but it is no such thing. It is a provision for a common state of affairs, one which has, fortunately, been eradicated in the Western world. However, slavery still exists across the globe (especially in the Middle East and Asian Subcontinent), so those who find themselves there should still abide by this passage (while the rest of us fight to end the institution).

Abolish the laws. Jesus preached that he came to fulfil the law, but he also entrusted his disciples to preach in his name. Like in Romans, Paul, who God spoke to directly on the road to Damascus, states in Ephesians that Jesus tore abolished the old laws and reconciled man with God himself instead of through devotion to the law. In this, Jesus ended the hostilities between those who practiced and enforced the Jewish laws and those who did not. The Gospels are replete with instances of the Pharisees condemning men and women according to the law, only for Jesus to rebuke them for their exclusionary nature while invoking God's name. That is not to say that we should throw out the teachings of the Old Testament in their entirety; indeed, there is a great amount of wisdom within its pages; we are simply no longer bound by the laws contained therein (mostly in Leviticus). As a personal commentary: that does not mean that every law is no longer applicable, as many were actually reaffirmed by Jesus, such as prohibitions on sexual immorality, and those he entrusted to carry the message of God forward in His name.

Sexual immorality and crudeness. I am beyond guilty of everything I am going to write in this paragraph; I just wanted to get that out of the way up front. We are called for there to be "no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking," yet many in the Church partake in such filthiness, foolishness, and crudity on a regular basis (maybe even at lunch immediately after church!). It is funny, true, but what does it do to those who see us going to church only to turn around and behave in this manner? In our modern society, swearing, crude jokes, and sexual content permeates every part of our lives, from television shows to books to movies to politics. But it wasn't that long ago (only 40-50 years, which is not long in terms of human existence) that saying "damn" in a movie was seen as provocative, and it was expressly forbidden on television. We once chose truly honourable men as our leaders, but now we have settled for adulterers, liars, blasphemers, and the power hungry. We may have disagreed with George H.W. Bush or Jimmy Carter, but there was no question that their character was beyond reproach, even in office. Being a porn star or prostitute was once a shameful profession; now, OnlyFans, open marriages, and paying for "meetups" is not just mainstream, it is seen as a legitimate and lucrative business opportunity. Is that the fault of our politicians and social heroes, or the fault of Christians (who make up 67% of the American population) for not abiding by the Bible's teachings and participating, actively or passively, in the descent into sexual immorality and crudeness?

"Do nothing from rivalry or conceit." There is not much more to be expanded upon than those words to the Philippians. Yet, we fall into this trap every day. Now, the term "rivalry" here doesn't apply to the friendly competition among brothers or sports competitors, but the fierce and other-izing rivalries amongst peoples and sects. Catholic and Protestants, Baptists and Methodists should not do things out of rivalry with each other and competition for followers. At the end of the day, we all follow the same teachings, and we are called to look out for the interests of others more than ourselves. Yet, many Catholics believe (and until recently it was the official doctrine of the Catholic Church) that Protestants are leading people away from Jesus; many Baptists believe that Methodists are not truly Baptised, because they were not fully immersed in the water. These are not friendly competitions, but dangerous rivalries that threaten to turn people away from Christianity with their pettiness.

Emissaries, missionaries, or hierarchy. Paul sends Timothy and Epaphroditus, two of his disciples, to the Philippians to assist them in their ministry and help to provide for their welfare. Clearly, this is in line with the Great Commission to spread the Word, but is it more? This passage (Philippians 2:19-30) is one where tension builds between the Catholic Church and Protestants. To the Catholics, this is a clear provision for a hierarchical structure, as the Apostle Paul is giving instructions to the Philippians and sending his own people to assist and guide them with those instructions. To Protestants, this is not a hierarchical decision, but one of evangelism by missionaries. At most, Protestants see Timothy and Epaphroditus as emissaries of Paul, just as we have our own emissaries with sister churches across the world. So, which is it? Personally, I am against interpretive doctrine; that is, doctrine which churches create based on their interpretation of a biblical passage rather than what the Bible actually says. As such, I am solidly in the Protestant camp. Paul was a leader in the church, just as my pastor is in my home town and as the leader of the Southern Baptist Convention is for those within the association; he is not, however, above any other person according to Jesus, just as my pastor and the leader of the SBC are not in charge of other churches. Instead, we help each other, provide corrections on anti-biblical teachings, and help each other grow in our faith and expand our ministry. The Philippians did not "report" to Paul, and there is no such indication with this passage.

What we should practice. Like in Romans, Paul provides a list of things good Christians should practice to the Philippians (Philippians 4:8-9). Personally, I appreciate such clear lists, because they eliminate the need for interpretive doctrine and give modern Christians a definitive guide for how to do good work here on Earth.

Now, I must say, I am no minister or pastor; I have no formal training or education via seminary or college courses in Biblical history or theology. I am open to be corrected for my understandings of these teachings in the New Testament; however, those corrections must be grounded in clearly-identifiable truth, facts, and history, not interpretive doctrine. Unfortunately, as I make my way through the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles, I am alarmed at the state of affairs in the current Christian faith. The Episcopalians and United Methodists have adopted theology and doctrine that is unapologetically contrary to the Bible's teachings, even the words in red, and the Catholic Church is increasingly falling into the same trap in the name of social and political expediency. Baptists are not excused either, as I once witnessed a worship leader make a crude joke about his guitar's G string popping during worship, and we only recently (in my lifetime) apologized for using the Bible to justify slavery.

The more I read, the more work I know I have to do in my own life, so I do not make these points from a position of moral superiority. I hope that comes across in my commentary.