A good description of a non-Christian religious tradition

Here is a link a good description of Chinese religious traditions.  Click here.

Excerpts:

Teachings of Confucius

• Concern for others (the fundamental moral virtue).
• Honoring one’s parents.
• Right behavior.
• Treating others as you would wish to be treated.
• Ruling with moral standing and benevolence.  

Heaven and the Divine
Early Chinese writings refer to a supreme or highest god, named Heaven or Heavenly Emperor. Confucius shared this belief, saying: “He who offends against Heaven has no one to whom he can pray.” Heaven presided with moral law. Later followers regarded heaven as the divine moral power of the cosmos, expressed perfectly in harmony with humanity.

Some Basic Daoist Ideas

• Be amiable to everything in the universe, to help maintain universal harmony.
• Live a simple life uncluttered by extravagant ambition or dreams.
• Be modest rather than assertive and dominant. Such ideas have influenced the development of certain Chinese characteristics: “A person is afraid to be famous; a pig is afraid to be fat and strong.” (Chinese saying)
• That is, a healthy pig will be killed and eaten; a successful person will be a target. Many Chinese people keep their work and thoughts to themselves. Parents sometimes tell their children that if they are good at something, they should be modest, even hiding it.

Daoism also rejects competition, rank, luxury, vulgarity and boasting. Laozi said that the highest level was the least secure. Everyone wants to be at the top of the tree, but were we to achieve that, the tree would break. Instead, we should be like water, always seeking the lowest level.

Ancestor Veneration
Ancient belief included the veneration of ancestors. Souls reached happiness according to the conduct of their living descendants. Therefore one’s duty was to live a good and virtuous life. Ancestor worship is still practised. For many people it is simply superstition; something that is done “just in case.” For others it is more important. In many houses a small shrine can be found, usually photos of grandparents to which food and cigarettes are offered. The yearly qing ming festival celebrates ancestors with grave cleaning and firecrackers. Christians are taught not to venerate ancestors but this can be a source of family tension, even a barrier to belief.

Reflection: Suffering, culture and individualism

For years I have been thinking about "suffering" in the Bible. I would like to share a few thoughts over time. These thoughts are not final, for I am still working on them. But I hope they are useful.

Two thoughts in this post.

(1) Our church culture today (in the West) tends to avoid suffering, rather than embracing it. We want the gospel to be one that delivers us from suffering. We even avoid the word "suffering" and replace it with the word "challenge". Suffering is a negative thing, and we want to replace it with a more positive attitude. We want to triumph over suffering, because otherwise we are seen as indulging in it. But the biblical writers are not ashamed of suffering. They happily talk about it. In their suffering they seek God's mercy. They lament, and they even protest (read the Psalms!). And in the New Testament we find Jesus embracing suffering and death, and because of his faithfulness God raised him from the dead and exalted him to the highest place (Philippians 2). In 2 Corinthians we find Paul following the way of Christ. He boasts of his weakness, for he knows that it is in his weakness and hardships that God's power is manifest.

(2) In an individualistic culture, we tend to treat those who suffer as individuals. They have to first deal with their own problems as individuals; and we, as independent individuals, will show them mercy and compassion as we see fit. But people with a Christ-centred communal worldview do things differently. The followers of Jesus form a Christ-community. In this community we see each other as siblings in Christ. When someone suffers, the whole community shares the pain. We rejoice with those who rejoice and mourn with those who mourn. We share our resources and we learn from each other in our suffering. And it is all based on the fact that Christ suffered and died for our sins.

Revelation, a movie and culture (Nijay Gupta, Richard Bauckham)

Nijay Gupta has written a great blog post concerning worldview and counter-reality. Here I will cite part of his post (which includes a great quote from Bauckham's book cited by Gupta).

Richard Bauckham, discussing the way Revelation approaches this, writes thusly

…one of the functions of Revelation was to purge and to refurbish the Christian imagination. It tackles people’s imaginative response to the world, which is at least as deep and influential as their intellectual convictions. It recognizes the way a dominant culture, with its images and ideals, constructs the world for us, so that we perceive and respond to the world in its terms… In its place, Revelation offers a different way of perceiving the world which leads people to resist and to challenge the effects of the dominant ideology. (p. 159 of The Theology of the Book of Revelation)

Let me give two movies as examples of how to think about worldview. The first example, tired and overused as it may be, is still poignant – The Matrix. The Matrix is its own world, but, more importantly, it proposes its own worldview where people inhabit an environment with rules, reality, values, etc… Alternatively, there is the “real world” outside of the matrix. That alternative place has an alternative set of rules, values, reality, etc… When Neo is awakened to the real world, he must keep everything he learned in mind when he goes back into the other world (the Matrix). Hence, he has to repeat to himself, “there is no spoon,” because the matrix “reality” would naturally force him into the limits of its ostensible rules. Cypher, on the other hand, knows about the “real world” and lives in it, but much prefers the world of the Matrix (“ignorance is bliss”).

Click here for the entire blog post by Nijay Gupta.

Reflections on theological training (Part 1): Why bother?

In recent years a number of people have expressed to me their interest in pursuing theological training. It is great to hear their journey and desire to study the Scripture and theology. Our conversations have prompted me to think about sharing my thoughts on theological training in a series of blog posts.

In this first post I want to ask the critical question: Why bother? That is, if theological training does not help us to embody Christ's life, death and resurrection in real life, then why bother?

I don't have the last word on this. But I will share a few thoughts. It may help if I share my own story. I came to faith when I was a teenager. I always wanted to serve God, and was always active in my local church. But it was more than 10 years later that I felt a strong sense of call to go into ministry. After a lot of prayers with my wife, I decided to leave my career to go to a Bible college to study. The good thing about having been a Christian for so long was that I had had the time to (1) read the Bible over 10 times before studying theology; (2) have a good experience in serving in local churches; and (3) have a solid non-church-related work experience.

But before I finished my theological training, I was asked to join the pastoral team of my church. And in a few years I was ordained. Life was really tough at the time. Ministry was hard work, and emotionally draining. We had little money. My wife had to work full-time. I also had to work part-time outside the church for extra income. At the same time, I taught as a tutor in my Bible College. In addition, I continued with my own theological studies, and started an MPhil, in which I engaged in serious research in Biblical Studies. The hectic lifestyle eventually took its toll, and I resigned from ministry to concentrate on my studies.

In the meantime I did more part-time work while I finished my research degree. The subsequent years were more part-time and full-time non-church-related work. I found it a valuable experience to be in the real world again after years of theological training and pastoral ministry. I viewed my work differently, for my studies in the Scripture had helped me to understand better the world that God created.

Years later God gave me a new job to work in an overseas relief and development Christian organisation. Soon I started my PhD on Biblical Studies as a part-time student, while continued to work part-time in that organisation. I am now half way through my PhD. I am not sure whether I am smart enough to finish it. But I will give it my best shot.

So much for my story. But as you can see, in all these years I have had the opportunity to engage in the real world in one way or another. I get to see people from all walks of life, including people from different faiths. I get to talk with them and listen to their cry. And at the same time I engage in theological training. This has been a very enriching experience. I find myself engaging in the Scripture and the real world at the same time. It is not just about theories, or merely about "what works in practice". It is about critiquing the world and its culture with the Scripture, and at the same time allowing real life stories to enrich my own understanding of the Bible.

All that said, I am not suggesting that everyone should do the same thing. There is nothing wrong to take a few years off to engage in full-time theological training. Some may study for one year, simply to consolidate their faith. Others may do two years simply to study the Scripture, but with no intention to become a minister. For some others, it may turn out to be many years of academic studies, if God intends them to teach at seminaries. What I am trying to say is that one should always endeavour to embody the gospel in real life - that is, where people are. We need to hear the stories of the poor and the rich, the unlearned and the educated. We need to get to know people from different cultures, and appreciate what God is doing in their lives, even though we have very different life experiences. We need to identify with the poor and needy, and stand in solidarity with the marginalised and disadvantaged.

My own experience is that I can never be prefect when it comes to these things. But it has been a profoundly enriching experience. The Scripture comes alive when we engage with real people in the real world. If we do theological studies for the sake of study alone, why bother?

Jesus-shaped leadership and today's trend in the Christian circle

His his second post on Cruciformity and Christian Leadership, Tim Gombis suggests that we should take a look at Mark 10:42-45 and Deuteronomy 17:14-20, and says,

Taking a cue from these texts, I will discuss cruciform Christian leadership by contrasting it with worldly leadership practices.  This may help us discern how perverted ambitions, hidden idolatries, and destructive practices subtly affect how leadership works in Christian communities.

And then he says that a Jesus-shaped leadership looks like this:

An unrelenting commitment to the delivery of the love and grace of God into the lives of others (or, the life of another), and taking the initiative to see to it that this happens.

For many years I have had the privilege of working with Christian leaders in churches, Christian organizations and even Christian ministry training colleges. What is disturbing is the increasing trend of importing leadership skills and methods in the corporate world into the Christian community.

What happens in practice is not the outright unrestrained pursuit of self-promotion or self-interest. Rather, the issue is the lack of an “unrelenting commitment to the delivery of the love and grace of God into the lives of others (or, the life of another), and taking the initiative to see to it that this happens.”

This is the trend I observe in recent years: Instead of treating people with grace and love, Christian leaders resort to policies and procedures – and all too often, statistics and numbers (which are used to measure the so-called “performance”). The rationale is that policies and procedures – and numbers – are not wrong. The Bible is not against them, they say. So, as long as they work for the “greater good” (e.g. more people to come to church, or more money to give to the poor), it is okay to use them, even though in the process love and grace are missing.

Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying that all Christian leaders act like this. Not at all. I love the church, and I hold nothing against those who have ill-treated me. There is no unforgiveness. My concern is the health of the church, and where we are heading.

Gombis says it so well, and is worth repeating. Jesus-shaped leadership is about

An unrelenting commitment to the delivery of the love and grace of God into the lives of others (or, the life of another), and taking the initiative to see to it that this happens.

(By the way, Dr Christopher Wright has something really good to say about Deut 17:14-20 in his commentary.)

Click here for Tim Gombis' entire blog post.

An Australian survey identifies key "blockers" to embracing Christian faith

Sight Magazine has an article on a recent survey on Australians' attitude towards Christianity. The survey collated data from over 1,000 Australians across the county.

According to the report, 23% of "Protestants/Evangelicals" are not at all active in practising their faith. On the other hand, 23% of them are extremely active in doing so.

Also, Christianity's top 10 belief "blockers" are:

1.   Church abuse

2.   Hypocrisy

3.   Judging others

4.   Religious views

5.   Suffering

6.   Issues around money

7.   Outdated

8.   Hell & condemnation

9.   Homosexuality

10. Exclusivity

These are, of course, not surprising. The list here reflects what we already know as we interact with people. It should be noted that the list above does not necessarily reflect the actual beliefs of Christianity. (For example, Jesus was totally against hypocrisy.) But the issue is about how Christians live out their faith.

Click here for the full article in Sight Magazine and here for links to the report itself.

Capitalism, democracy and slavery (Clarke and Dawe on ABC)

Last Thursday John Clarke and Bryan Dawe on ABC 7:30 (10th November 2011) was really good. They talked about the current international economic problems, with reference to democracy and slavery in the ancient world in (Western) civilization. Take a look!

Click here for the link to the clip. (It's 2 min 31 sec long).

Timothy Gombis on "God's Missional Sustenance for God's people"

Timothy Gombis has posted something really nice in his blog. It's his reflection after a number of posts on John 4. It ends with Gombis' own experience in his church. For years I have been thinking about what the Christian community should be like, and I am really glad to find that Gombis is saying something very similar to what I have in mind (and he articulates it so much better). Here are some excerpts from his blog post.

"I’ve been thinking about this in relation to divine election as the identity of the people of God.  So often we shrink back from this notion because it seems to imply an “insiders only” mentality.  “We’re God’s elect and they aren’t.”  We may have seen a doctrine of election put to use to endorse a lack of redemptive involvement in the wider culture."

"Jesus indicates, however, that it is only when the church encounters outsiders in open-ended relationships that we are sustained."

"First, we do not encounter the other—or, the world—with a posture of condescension, arrogance, or even in order to set anyone right.  Just as Jesus asked the woman for a drink, taking on a posture of mutuality and even need, we ought to cultivate friendships and relationships of mutuality with others."

"There are countless ways that churches can relate to outsiders and to surrounding culture(s) that follow the pattern of Jesus, but so many of these are unexplored.  We tend only to imagine manipulative relationships, ones that will “get results.”"

"Churches can offer to clean up local neighborhoods, care for town parks, staff after-school services for kids from low-income homes,... And we can serve the world in these ways with no interest in “the bottom line,” but simply with hopes of faithfully embodying our identity as followers of Jesus."

"We tend to imagine that we need to have all the right tools, get all the right teaching, and only then do we go out and get involved in our communities.  I wonder if we think this way because we want to have some sort of guarantee that we’ll get results.  Or, maybe to pacify our fear of failure."

"About a year into our urban missional church experience, I was walking with my friend John Mortensen in our church’s local neighborhood.  We had imagined that God was going to do amazing things through our church.  After all, we were sent there as their salvation.  Or so we imagined."

"The on-the-ground realities slowly dissolved our romantic notions and our big dreams.  Rather than seeing lots of change in the neighborhood, we began seeing changes in ourselves.  That conversation made all of this make sense to me.  John and I came to the realization that we weren’t the salvation of that neighborhood.  God had us there in that neighborhood to save us."

"God was sustaining us and giving us life as we enjoyed conversations with people over a meal, as we shared about our lives and listened to their stories, and as we developed friendships of giving and receiving."

Click here for the original blog post.

Something from C Kavin Rowe's World Upside Down

I am reading C Kavin Rowe's World Upside Down (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009). There is a lot of good stuff. (But I have to admit that I am no expert on Acts, which is what the book focuses on.)

The title of chapter 2 is "Collision: Explicating Divine Identity". It examines the following:

Acts 14: Paul and Barnabas - Hermes and Zeus
Acts 16: Power at Philippi
Acts 17: Athens
Acts 19: Ephesus

I think it is a fascinating chapter. It talks about the collision between Christianity and Paul's audience in different cities. Here are some excerpts from the conclusion of the chapter (on pages 50, 51).

"This collision, however, is not due to the missionaries' lack of tact (though they were doubtless bold) or to a pagan propensity for rash violence...; rather, its deeper basis rests ultimately in the theological affirmation of the break between God and the cosmos. For to affirm that God has 'created heaven and earth' is, in Luke's narrative, simultaneously to name the entire complex of pagan religiousness as idolatry and, thus, to assign to such religiousness the character of ignorance."

"Ancient religion, that is to say, is a pattern of practices and beliefs inextricably interwoven with the fabric of ancient culture. Religion is not, however, just part of this fabric, ultimately passive and controlled by other more basic influences such as politics and economics, for economics. Rather, religion is also constitutive of culture; it helps to construct the cultural fabric itself."

"In short, religion and culture are inseparable, and the difference in the perception of divine identity amounts to nothing less than a different way of life."

To me, this last sentence says a lot. To be followers of Jesus is about a different way of life. We can't speak of "believing in Jesus" without following his way of life - a new culture and a new way of living that centres around Christ and the cross. I think the above from Rowe's book has several other implications to the church today.

• Do we engage in mission as if culture and religion are inseparable? If we do, then we can't be effective. Indeed we can make a lot of mistakes.
• What is the relationship between our faith and our own culture? Does our faith transform the culture in which we live? Or is our faith actually influenced by the culture of the world so much so that the world cannot see any difference between us and them? (For example, are we just as materialistic and the world in affluent West?)

More questions can be asked. But I will leave it there.

Walking with the poor cross-culturally in Melbourne

In the latest issue of UNOH's Finding Life newsletter (March 2011), I read the following article by Peter Dekker, which is really worth reading. As a bi-cultural person I can testify that Peter and his family's dedication to Christ and the poor in a non-Western culture has set a good example for us.

From “FOR” to “WITH”

The most crucial change that must take place in our adjustments to a new culture is to learn to see its people as “people” – as human beings like ourselves – and their culture as our culture.
(Paul G. Hiebert. Anthropological Insights for missionaries, 1985)

There is a massive difference between doing something FOR someone and doing something WITH someone. As a Westerner in a Western context, it is easy to do a lot of things FOR a refugee group that is settling into your neighbourhood. We can get results, we know the system, we know the ways to get things done... we know what is best for them. What this sort of an attitude boils down to however is imperialism, and we are all well aware of the sins of the past committed by colonising countries and even missionaries in the name of “knowing what is best”.

2010 was a real time of spiritual growth and formation for Naomi and I as our team was reduced from 5 or 6 down to just 2. God was teaching us an important lesson; through team-mates leaving to pursue their callings in other places, and reducing our team from a well oiled machine that could get things done, to a married couple faced with more work than they could possibly handle alone. We could no longer run around and do things FOR people, if we did this we would have burnt out in a couple of months. Rather we were forced to slow down and do things WITH people. This involved coming along some close relationships and going much deeper than we had before, seeing these people as more than just a ministry opportunity, but beginning to see them as friends and even family. It involved grappling with both the beautiful and ugly sides of their culture, and struggling to understand those parts that seemed most foreign to us, so that we could call their culture our own. It also meant humbling ourselves, and allowing those we were working amongst to do things for us so that our relationships could become truly equal.

As 2011 begins with our team growing from 2 back to 5, and with our work in the neighbourhood gaining more momentum, we thank God for the growth that occurred in 2010 with all its highs and lows. Though there is still a lot to be learnt, 2010 truly was the year we moved from “FOR” to “WITH”.

Peter Dekker.
Springvale Neighbourhood Team Leader.

(Reproduced with permission from the author.)

The decline of Bible literacy

Here is my new article entitled The Decline of Bible Literacy.

Some excerpts below.

A research report published by the Evangelical Alliance in the UK (EAUK) just came out. It mentions two interesting trends about Christians in the 16-24 age group. First, they are “less likely to strongly agree that the Bible has supreme authority in guiding their beliefs, views and behaviour.” Second, they are “less likely to pray or read (or listen to) the Bible every day.”

On the one hand, there has been an overemphasis on the intellect. Pastors at my age (the 40-something age group) often complain that their theological training was loaded with a highly intellectual analysis of the Scripture, which is not useful in ministry.

On the other hand, there are those who habitually use the Bible out of context. Their teaching is characterised by the use of proof-texts and the neglect of the literary, social and historical context of the Biblical texts.

Maybe our attempt to make sense of the Christian faith in the emerging culture has led us to neglect the basics, including the simple but all-important discipline of reading the Scripture devotionally - both individually and as a community?

The Bible is no dry theology textbook. It is a book consisting of stories easily accessible to everyone – both the educated and unlearned.

Everyday Theology (edited by Kevin Vanhoozer)

I just bought Everyday Theology: How to Read Cultural Texts and Interpret Trends, edited by Kevin J Vanhoozer. Here are two interesting quotes on page 8.

If theology is the ministry of the Word to the world, it follows that theologians must know something about the world to which they are ministering. What should have been common sense, however, has for various reasons been something of a blind spot, at least until the advent of postmodernity. Indeed, one way of viewing postmodernity is as a "turn to culture." Postmoderns have criticized modern myths about universality precisely because postmoderns have a keen sense of our situatedness in race, gender, class, history, tradition—and culture.

Christian missionaries have always been aware of the need to engage culture. Yet only recently has it been suggested that the West has become a mission field. Lesslie Newbigin points out that the West presents a special challenge to Christian missions, for this is the first time the church has had to mount a mission to a culture that was previously Christian. How does one evangelize cultures that have already received the gospel only to revise or to reject it? For these and other reasons, Christian colleges and seminaries are increasingly coming to see that the study of culture is part and parcel of the prospective minister's theological training.

What is required for us to become a missionary congregation?

I have come across a series of articles entitled "What is required for us to become a missionary congregation?"

I think it's really worth reading. Here is an excerpt.

It is only as we are a living pulsing community of God's love to the world, living with Him as the centre, that we can be a sign, that we can not just bring the Gospel but live the Gospel. In order to do this our centre must be God Himself, we must be grounded in the Word and empowered by the Spirit. We must indwell the Scripture so that it becomes a part of us, so that it not only informs us but forms us. If we are the only way for the world to understand the truth of Christ then we must live this story in a way that both make sense to the world and yet points to something much greater than ourselves.

I like the author's call for us to be shaped by the Scripture, so that we may live out the story of Christ as we bear witness to the world.

Click here for the article.

Self-improvement, dreams, or following Jesus?

I have long been thinking what life is about for Christians. Where is the line between achieving our own dreams and doing God's will? How can we be sure that we are not trying to fulfil our own desires? Are we sure that, as we seek to fulfil our dreams, we do not in the process lose sight of God's kingdom and his purposes for his creation? I think the answer lies in the Cross.

Here is something Tom Wright says in his book, Virtue Reborn (or otherwise called After you believe), page 100.

Jesus's call to follow him, to discover in the present time the habits of life which point forward to the coming kingdom and already, in a measure, share in its life, only makes sense when it is couched the terms made famous by Dietrich Bonhoeffer: "Come and die". Jesus didn't say, as do some modern evangelists, "God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life." Nor did he say, "I accept you as you are, so you can now happily do whatever comes naturally." He said, "If you want to become my followers, deny yourself, take up your cross, and follow me" (Mark 8.34). He spoke of losing one's life in order to gain it, as opposed to clinging to it and so losing it He spoke of this in direct relation to himself and his own forthcoming humiliation and death, followed by resurrection and exaltation. Exactly in line with the Beatitudes, he was describing, and inviting his followers to enter, an upside-down world, an inside-out world, a world where all the things people normally assume about human flourishing, including human virtue, are set aside and a new order is established. (Emphasis added)

Jesus would have said, of course, that it's the present world that is upside down and inside out. He was coming to put it the right way up, the right way out. That shift of perception is the challenge of the gospel he preached and lived, and for which he died.

What this means is that the normal standards, even the standards of virtue itself, are challenged at their core. No longer is the good life to be a matter of human beings glimpsing the goal of "happiness" in which they will become complete, and then setting about a program of self-improvement by which they might begin to make that goal a reality. They are summoned to follow a leader whose eventual goal is indeed a world of blessing beyond bounds, but whose immediate goal, the only possible route to that eventual one, is a horrible and shameful death. And the reason for this radical difference is not obscure. It is that Jesus's diagnosis of the problem goes far deeper than that of any ancient Greek philosopher. (Emphasis added)

Religion, economics, politics and salvation in the New Testament world

The following quotes are from Bruce Malina and John Pilch. Although I don't agree with them totally when it comes to interpreting Paul's letters, they help us to understand the New Testament world from a social science perspective.

There is no language implying abstract concepts of market, monetary system, or fiscal theory. Economics is "embedded," meaning that economic goals, production, roles, employment, organization, and systems of distribution are governed by political and kinship considerations, not "economic" ones. (p 393)

Ancient Mediterranean religion likewise had no separate, institutional exis­tence in the modern sense. It was rather an overarching system of meaning that unified political and kinship systems (including their economic aspects) into an ideological whole. It served to legitimate and articulate (or de-legitimate and criti­cize) the patterns of both politics and family. Its language was drawn from both kinship relations (father, son, brother, sister, virgin, child, honor, praise, forgiveness, etc.) and politics (king, kingdom, princes of this world, powers, covenant, law, etc.) rather than a discrete realm called religion. Religion was "embedded," meaning that religious goals, behavior, roles, employment, organization, and systems of worship were governed by political and kinship considerations, not "religious" ones. (p 393)

The temple was never a religious institution somehow separate from political institutions, nor was worship ever separate from what one did in the home. Religion was the meaning one gave to the way the two fundamental systems, politics and kinship, were put into practice.(p 393)

[A]ncient Rome elites did not have an idea of juridical relations among various peoples. Instead Roman statesmen dealt with other peoples in terms of good faith based on the analogy of patron-client relations. Rome was patron, not holder of an empire; it wanted persons to behave like clients. To behave otherwise was to be a rebel, an outlaw. (p 393)

Salvation means rescue from some difficult situation. The rescuer in question is called a "savior." As a rule, in antiquity the title was bestowed on persons and deities whose actions benefited a great number of people.(p 395)

Quotes taken from Bruce Malina and John Pilch, Social-Science Commentary on the Letters of Paul (Fortress: Minneapolis), 2006.

The Bible being rhetorical, and our lives being 'rhetorical' God-speak

In an article in The Regent World (Winter 2010, Vol 22, Number 1), Professor Rikk Watts says the following

Ancient rhetoricians were designers, seeking to persuade people of a different vision for the polis. Since it did not exist, they could not prove it — how do you "prove" a dream? But if you've seen the movie Invictus you will understand what is involved. You need to know your audience, their history and their culture. You need to know what they value and you need to use metaphors, since metaphors are the essential bridge between the known and the unknown... [Then] it dawned on me that the Bible itself is fundamentally rhetorical.

Marketplace theology is about precisely this: incarnational "rhetorical" God-speak. His word to us is brimming with metaphors, history, ethics and vision. It is God's rhetoric, persuading us to join him in his new creational work for a new and glorious future. It is a divine summons to design in the light of his life-giving truth.

The more I study Paul, the more I realise the rhetorical character of his letters. They are letters - speeches! - that seek to persuade. The Bible is not about a set of otherworldly (so-called) 'spiritual principles'. It is not a set of systematic theological propositions. The biblical authors did not write the Scriptures to prove the existence of God per se. Instead, the Bible is God's revelation to humankind about who he is and his saving acts. And we are called to embody the gospel in our daily life. That is, we are to be incarnational "rhetorical" God-speak', as Watts says. In doing so we bear witness to Christ.

Looking beyond the labels

My friend Nils Von Kalm has written a new article. I highly recommend it. Here is a quote in his article.

"In our noble attempts to be Christ-like, we have tried to civilise the poor. Gardiner believes that the Spirit would say to the church today, ‘stop civilising and start discipling’. Or, as a pastor at a church I was at many years ago said, we are just one beggar telling another beggar where to find food."

Click here for the article.

DVD review: Lord, Save Us From Your Followers

I have written a DVD review on Lord, Save Us From Your Followers.

Click here to see the review.

"The Limits of Incarnational Models" by Tim Chester

Here are three posts I found in Tim Chester's blog on "The Limits of Incarnational Models".

I really like the idea of following Christ by being with the poor and marginalised, and I appreciate those who try to do so in some of the poorest areas in Melbourne and the world. But Chester's posts are interesting and worth reading.

Click here for the 1st post: "The Triumph of the Many over the One".
Click here for the 2nd post: "Embodiment and Incarnation".
Click here for the 3rd post: "The Need for a Whole Gospel Approach".

Christmas reflection: What is it like to be 'truly human'?

Sight Magazine has published an article I wrote recently. It can be found here.