One of the beauties of Christianity is the claim that every slate is cleaned at the cross. That upon conversion, everyone's past is just that--past. Of course with conversion there is the expectation that your lifestyle will conform to a certain standard, or an ethos, but it is a second chance in its purest form. A corollary of this reality is that some conversions may create tensions within the community. As humans, we remember things, and, if we are honest, sometimes memories are hard to get over. It is even more difficult when the new convert has tangibly harmed you or someone close to you. Consequently, the inclusive nature of the community, the fact that anyone who confesses Jesus as Lord will be saved, means that there will be times that it will be hard to accept someone's conversion.
With Paul's conversion, we see this dynamic in play, perhaps more vividly than any other occurrence in Church history. Indeed, Acts does not dwell on it, but the text mentions enough to make it clear that Paul's conversion was met with shock and skepticism. First, we are told that Ananias had a back-and-forth with God over his call to heal him from blindness.
The most recent episode of NBC's AD: The Bible Continues gave substantial time to this unspoken but very real dynamic to Paul's conversion. It took the passages just mentioned seriously and offered an artistic reenactment of what those initial conversations may have been like. In doing so, the writers and producers chose to contrast Paul's brazen insistence on moving forward post conversion (as if to brush aside the past) with the disciples' insistence upon talking about the past (as if to dwell on the past). For example, when meeting a couple of the disciples after his conversion Paul proclaims that he understands their fears, but he does not pacify them with any eloquent speech. Rather he states matter of factly, "I have been baptized and made new." Moments later, when accused of violently undermining the Church, Paul acknowledges it only to pacify their fears with the current reality that he has "turned to Christ." This dissonance continues even when Peter and Paul ascend to an upper room to discuss the issues. Paul insists that the Church must start planning, but Peter wants to know what happened on the road to Damascus. Even after Paul tells Peter that they have conveniently forgotten about the teaching of forgiveness, Peter continues. In a telling moment, Paul speaks to his vision of how God will use different people to meet the same goals. Peter defiantly shakes his head. Eventually, Paul screams in exasperation, "Will you ever let it go?!"
It was an interaction that I thought was effective. It painted both parties in a less than ideal picture and it urged the audience to ponder on which side they found themselves. On the part of the disciples, they are shown to be fearful, stubborn, and quasi-hypocritical. Past history was too much. Paul is painted as largely insensitive, somewhat detached, and abrasive. He just wanted to move forward--period. However, both sides are totally legitimate and understandable. This had to be intentional, for after watching the scenes, I was struck with the significant hurdles that had to be negotiated by the disciples. What they experienced defied logic, and it pitted human nature versus love and forgiveness.
But these scenes also demonstrated that the same driven, obsessed personality that was behind the persecution of the Church would be behind the spread of the gospel. Just as Saul was chomping at the bit to destroy the Church, Paul was chomping at the bit to invigorate the Church. Perhaps then this gets at what I admire most about Paul--his stalwart convictions, driven personality, and intelligence. Ultimately, Paul's concern was the gospel, and he did not care who he called out in the process (For example, in Galatians Paul rips Peter when he compromises the integrity of the gospel.). The Church was built on the shoulders of Paul-like people, and make no mistake, its futures depends on them as well.
With Paul's conversion, we see this dynamic in play, perhaps more vividly than any other occurrence in Church history. Indeed, Acts does not dwell on it, but the text mentions enough to make it clear that Paul's conversion was met with shock and skepticism. First, we are told that Ananias had a back-and-forth with God over his call to heal him from blindness. - But Ananias answered, “Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much evil he has done to your saints in Jerusalem; and here he has authority from the chief priests to bind all who invoke your name.” But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is an instrument whom I have chosen to bring my name before Gentiles and kings and before the people of Israel; I myself will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name.” So Ananias went and entered the house.... Acts 9:13-17
Later we are told that the disciples were genuinely afraid of him when he attempted to join their ranks.
- When he had come to Jerusalem, he attempted to join the disciples; and they were all afraid of him, for they did not believe that he was a disciple. But Barnabas took him, brought him to the apostles, and described for them how on the road he had seen the Lord, who had spoken to him, and how in Damascus he had spoken boldly in the name of Jesus. So he went in and out among them in Jerusalem, speaking boldly in the name of the Lord. Acts 9:26-28
It was not until Barnabas put his neck on the line for Paul's sake that he began to make in roads into the community. One wonders if certain people never really got over Paul's past.
The most recent episode of NBC's AD: The Bible Continues gave substantial time to this unspoken but very real dynamic to Paul's conversion. It took the passages just mentioned seriously and offered an artistic reenactment of what those initial conversations may have been like. In doing so, the writers and producers chose to contrast Paul's brazen insistence on moving forward post conversion (as if to brush aside the past) with the disciples' insistence upon talking about the past (as if to dwell on the past). For example, when meeting a couple of the disciples after his conversion Paul proclaims that he understands their fears, but he does not pacify them with any eloquent speech. Rather he states matter of factly, "I have been baptized and made new." Moments later, when accused of violently undermining the Church, Paul acknowledges it only to pacify their fears with the current reality that he has "turned to Christ." This dissonance continues even when Peter and Paul ascend to an upper room to discuss the issues. Paul insists that the Church must start planning, but Peter wants to know what happened on the road to Damascus. Even after Paul tells Peter that they have conveniently forgotten about the teaching of forgiveness, Peter continues. In a telling moment, Paul speaks to his vision of how God will use different people to meet the same goals. Peter defiantly shakes his head. Eventually, Paul screams in exasperation, "Will you ever let it go?!"It was an interaction that I thought was effective. It painted both parties in a less than ideal picture and it urged the audience to ponder on which side they found themselves. On the part of the disciples, they are shown to be fearful, stubborn, and quasi-hypocritical. Past history was too much. Paul is painted as largely insensitive, somewhat detached, and abrasive. He just wanted to move forward--period. However, both sides are totally legitimate and understandable. This had to be intentional, for after watching the scenes, I was struck with the significant hurdles that had to be negotiated by the disciples. What they experienced defied logic, and it pitted human nature versus love and forgiveness.
But these scenes also demonstrated that the same driven, obsessed personality that was behind the persecution of the Church would be behind the spread of the gospel. Just as Saul was chomping at the bit to destroy the Church, Paul was chomping at the bit to invigorate the Church. Perhaps then this gets at what I admire most about Paul--his stalwart convictions, driven personality, and intelligence. Ultimately, Paul's concern was the gospel, and he did not care who he called out in the process (For example, in Galatians Paul rips Peter when he compromises the integrity of the gospel.). The Church was built on the shoulders of Paul-like people, and make no mistake, its futures depends on them as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment