Song for the afflicted - 6

The difficulty of understanding all about paul

Friend paul

Who’s actually speaking?

Let’s reconstruct paul’s letters

Friend paul

This is going to be a relatively short article, it’s going to raise enough dust all by itself.

Some of you may recognise yourselves in what i’m about to share.

I had major issues with paul for a long time. The way he seemed to barge into the storyline, almost hijacking the stage, the focus acts put on him and his actions, the dictate-ings of his letters to ‘his’ established churches, the authoritarian position he placed himself in, the actual content of his writing itself, basically everything about him i took exception to.

It was so bad when i read the new testament i would read the gospels and then skip to james and carry on from there.

But as i grew in understanding i made myself go back to paul’s writings and take another look, see why they were found important enough to be included in what we now know as scripture. And because my understanding had grown, i started seeing that he was in fact speaking very accurately, as regards the old testament and that what Jesus had brought into the world. Still i could hardly suffer him as a person, basically i’m saying i just couldn’t like him.

Now as i pondered and read his writings, which i re-read a few times because for all my reading i had been ‘skipping’ him for so long, the strangest thought came into my head.

This is not paul speaking, i thought, this is somebody else speaking, but who?

It was paul’s interjection at times that now he himself was speaking that got me onto this train of thought, the presumption usually being that paul was speaking on Jesus’ authority mostly, and speaking for himself when he specifically said so. But it was precisely the correctness of what he was saying that got me thinking…

Who’s actually speaking?

Don’t get me wrong, it is indeed on Jesus’ authority that what is being said is said, i just couldn’t shake the thought that something else is going on.

Now acts got my attention as well, and to me it was no surprise that there are numerous occurrences of multiples of seven going on, go look for yourself, between key segments of the journeys he made up pops seven places passed thru onto the next key moment, or seven companions going along the way, or meeting him somewhere. Now i am of course very sensitive to that number seven, it’s a focus point for me. So go and have a look at the meanings of the names of those places, or those people for that matter. Their meanings are all to be correlated back to what i’m trying to show in the seven arms of the menorah, and neatly in order too. This is no coincidence. And it got me thinking.

Jesus is the Word, and it’s easy to understand that the old testament, being that what at that time was understood to be the scripture (albeit in it’s jewish order and numbering of books), is His word(s), and revelation being the revelation of Jesus Himself is also His Word(s).

When i say His Word(s) i mean written through the various authors as they were inspired to exactly phrase everything as they did so that His message would get through perfectly. Remember i perceive the Word to have been intended to come down exactly as it has, there are no inconsistencies, errors etc, there is only a lack of good understanding of what is being said (i’m excluding genuine translation inaccuracies, but we have enough of an archive available that there are no arguments regarding the original hebrew/greek/aramaic from which translations take place anymore - and don’t nitpick this statement).

In this vein of thought one can say that the gospels and acts were also inspired by Him, the fact that they were written after His death and resurrection and ascension doesn’t take away that the authors were there at the time and thus then inspired. He even appeared to paul on the road, after His ascension.

But i had this nagging feeling that someone else was talking, and it wasn’t paul, and it wasn’t Jesus Himself either, so who was it then?

And i remembered that in john Jesus said that if He didn’t go, the Advocate could not be sent, the One who would comfort us, advocate for us, help us and teach us further on the Way.

The One who does not speak for Himself, but only speaks of what He hears, the Holy Spirit.

And i realised who was talking through the writings of paul.

And it suddenly made a lot more sense, the authority with which was spoken, the correctness of what was spoken, the difficulty understanding it even, because now, reading the writing of paul but understanding it was our Comforter speaking, the writings weren’t difficult to understand at all! And why paul would take pains to make clear it was himself speaking in those passages, which co-incidentally contain subject matter of high contention within the churches, no? It’s ok folks, that’s just paul himself speaking.

The reason i emphasize this is if you think paul speaks ‘for’ Jesus ‘out of’ his own authority then you weigh his words more heavily when he speaks for himself, but if you think the Spirit is speaking ‘for’ Jesus ‘out of’ His authority (which fear not, comes only from Jesus) ‘through’ paul, then one needn’t weigh paul’s own words quite so heavily.

The Word’s content is timeless, independent of culture etc, but those contentious words of paul that occur when he speaks for himself, are from himself and bound to the time and culture he was in. let that thought put a lot of issues to bed.

But this gives paul’s letters even more weight, if you can accept what i’m saying, it’s our Helper Himself speaking, listen to Him! And so i changed just like that from a sceptic, even a hater, of paul into a fervent supporter of ‘his’ writings. Funny world.

And this is why, way back in the beginning of my articles, i said there are only two people speaking in the scriptures, and they are Jesus and the Helper. Remember, the Helper only speaks of what He has heard from His Master, so it does still all come from the Word Himself.

For completeness, what about the letters of james, peter, john and jude? Well, as far as i’m concerned they’re from the Advocate too. They could be directly inspired from Jesus, but it doesn’t matter, i weigh them just as heavily because i’ve studied them, and their content is precisely correct, fitting into the menorah, let me explain…

Let’s reconstruct paul’s letters

And those of james, peter, john and jude.

But first, paul.

So, remember my focus on the seven arms of the menorah, and the four grounds to be traversed, and how i had seen that the occurrences of seven, in correct order, are embedded in acts too (i’m gonna let you go look for yourself, think i’m talking nonsense? Check it out), let’s just say i’m highly sensitised.

So what would i do but look for occurrences in paul’s writings?

And it stares you in the face again, hidden in plain sight. Did i kick myself once i eventually saw it.

Now paul wrote 14 epistles, if you include hebrews, 13 if you don’t, anyway, hebrews is still there in the mix. Thinking that it’s 2 occurrences of seven just results in gibberish as far as any spiritual meaning is concerned, whichever way you try and group them.

But looking at the index of the books of the new testament shows something else.

Paul writes to places, and to people(s). What i mean is when he writes to romans, for instance, he’s writing to the people OF rome, ephesians OF ephesus, etc. and then he writes to people, timothy, philemon, titus and the hebrews. That last one i almost didn’t see, but the first three are to individual people, and the last to an individual people(s), there’s no place called hebrew after all.

And group when he writes twice to an addressee together (they’re placed in consecutive order together already aren’t they?) as one, and what do you get? Paul writes to seven places and four people(s). Read with an eye for the spiritual content and you can see that the core message to each place refers, in order of course, to the relevant arm of the menorah, in the case of the seven places, and the relevant ground, in the case of the four people(s).

Now i will say that it needs a certain amount of familiarity with all this to see it, we’re talking a bit more advanced here. But take it from me if you can’t see it yet, it’s there.

I know one can object and say but the first and second letters to corinthians for instance was written with years inbetween, never mind missionary loopings, but strip away the limitations of the physical/literal story and look at the spiritual content and it’s a single whole.

So take a step back again, and look at the index of the new testament again.

Sigh, fours and sevens, fours and sevens. We’re getting our noses rubbed in it.

Four gospels

Intermezzo of acts, the most literal historical book of them all, necessary to put a frame around the whole story, but still littered with sevens etc.

Seven (when grouped) epistles to places

Four (when grouped) epistles to people(s)

Seven epistles from james, peter, john and jude (and to be mapped in order to the menorah)

And then revelation as the big wrapping up of everything.

So how did that grouping and order of the canon come wafting up out of the white smoke from the chimney of the council meeting of the early fathers, huh? (yeah yeah, jumbling up things here, poetic license). Which books became part of the canon and the order they’re in are no co-incidence at all.

The core content of those fours correspond to the attributes of the grounds, and the core of the sevens to the attributes of the arms on the menorah.

God loves order, and things are so tight here they squeak, He hasn’t left anything to chance, He hasn’t allowed anything of His Word to be corrupted, He has provided us with all we need. We just need to do our work, spiritually, of SEEING what He’s saying.

And the Helper will show us, we just need to pay attention to Him.

Luckily everything that i am saying in these articles is already so different it means that hopefully i haven’t offended anybody too much when i throw my thoughts on paul and the whole canon of the new testament into the mix…hope so anyway.