Why were the people so angry with Jesus in Luke 4:21-30?

Last time we imagined that we were in the synagogue where Jesus opened the Book of Isaiah and said that the Scripture was fulfilled in him (Luke 4:14-21). I suggested that the passage says that Jesus is the Messiah, the Anointed King. He has come to proclaim the kingdom of God to the poor (and everyone else). Here let us take a look at the next passage in Luke 4:21-30. (Yes, I know that verse 21 is included in both readings. It’s deliberate.) 

What is surprising in 4:21-30 is the contrast between these two verses:

       “All spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious words that came from his lips.” (Verse 22) 

       “All the people in the synagogue were furious when they heard this.” (Verse 28)

We can see why people spoke well of Jesus in verse 22, for Jesus had just said that he had come to proclaim good news. But why did they change their attitude toward Jesus so quickly? All spoke well of him in verse 22, and five verses later, they were furious (verse 28)! Why were they so angry with him?

The answer, I think, can be found in the verses between verses 22 and 28 — that is, verses 23–27.

In these five verses Jesus used two stories in the Old Testament to illustrate how the good news to the poor would work in practice. The first is about God sending Elijah to a Sidonian widow during a severe famine (Luke 4:25–26; 1 Kings 17). The second is about Naaman the Syrian commander being healed by Elisha (Luke 4:27; 2 Kings 5).

This made Jesus’ audience very angry. Why?

In Jesus’ day the Romans ruled over the Jews. The Jews were eagerly waiting for God to send a deliverer to rescue them from the hands of the Romans. This deliverer, it was believed, would be a son of king David — the messianic king.

The Romans were oppressors. They had killed many Jews, carried many of them away from their homeland and enslaved them. Not surprisingly, the Jews were very unhappy with the Romans.

In fact, before the Romans came, the Jews were oppressed by the Assyrians, the Babylonians, the Persians and the Greeks (see, for example, the Book of Daniel). They were all “foreigners” and idol-worshippers. They were the enemies of the (ancient) Jews.

Amazingly, Jesus seems to be saying that he, like Elijah and Elisha, has come to bring healing and freedom to the “foreigners” — that is, a Sidonian widow and Naaman the Syrian. Some people in Jesus' audience might be asking:

How can God's blessing be given to the "foreigners" — the "outsiders"? How can non-Israelites share the privileges of Israel, the descendents of Abraham? How can idol-worshippers be given the opportunity to participate in God's redemptive plan?

Widows and lepers (Naaman was a leper) both belonged to the lower end of the social hierarchy. It seems clear that Jesus has come to bring salvation and healing specifically to the marginalised and oppressed.

Of course, we know that Jesus has come to proclaim good news to all humankind. But here in Luke 4, the emphasis is on the foreigners and the socially inferior. That is, even the enemy of Israel can be recipients of the gracious gift of God.

Throughout Luke’s Gospel we find that Jesus is at loggerheads with the Pharisees and Teachers of the Law (ie. Scribes). Often we find that they are unhappy with Jesus because he spends time with tax collectors and sinners.

Here in Luke 4:21-30 we find one of the confrontations between Jesus and (some of) the people in the audience. They may not be Pharisees and Scribes. But they seem to be very unhappy with Jesus’ message. I think they are unhappy because Jesus speaks of a gracious act of God that is hard for them to accept.

The grace of God is all-encompassing and inclusive. The good news of Jesus envisions a society without social or racial exclusion. The Sidonian woman was a widow and Naaman was a leper. Yet God used his prophets to bring them healing. Likewise, the blind, the tax collectors and sinners, were not “outsiders” according to Jesus’ good news. They can be recipients of the good news of Jesus. 

Imagine that we were there 

Imagine that we were in the audience when Jesus told the stories of God’s gracious gift of healing for the Sidonian widow and Naaman the Syrian. Would we celebrate with Jesus the good news of God’s kingdom? Would we welcome this amazing good news? Or would we reject it because it envisions a community that knows no social and racial boundaries? 

Who are the people that we tend to "exclude" because we think that they don't deserve God's blessings? Do we realise that God's grace is available to them too?

Let us imagine a world where Jesus reigns as the true King of the cosmos. Let us proclaim that he is the Lord and rightful King. Let us embrace his good news.

Enter into the stories of Luke’s Gospel (4:14-21)

My son’s school has provided him with a weekly Bible reading on Luke’s Gospel. Since I really like this Gospel, I have decided to (try to!) write a reflection on each of the readings.

The first reading is Luke 4:21-30. But I think we should take one step back to look at 4:14-21 first. Here is the text.

Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread through the whole countryside. He was teaching in their synagogues, and everyone praised him.

He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. He stood up to read, and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:

“The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favour.”

Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him. He began by saying to them, “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.” (TNIV)

The passage before this one is Luke 4:1–13, and is about Jesus being tested by the devil. Jesus overcame the devil’s scheme. Then in 4:14–21 we find him reading Isaiah 61:1 (and 58:6) in a synagogue in his hometown Nazareth. It seems to me that most likely he is saying that he is the Anointed King anticipated by the prophets. That is, he is the anointed son of David, the messianic King.

I find this passage very encouraging. Jesus says that the promise in Isaiah 61:1 (and 58:6) is fulfilled in him. That means, Jesus himself is the one who proclaims good news to the poor. The blind will see and the oppressed will be set free.

We see throughout Luke’s Gospel that Jesus has indeed come to set the oppressed free. He heals the sick, and the poor hear the good news. Indeed, in Luke’s Gospel we find that Jesus has come to gather a community of disciples who will follow his way of life, and that this community includes all sorts of people, not least the poor, tax collectors and sinners.

Imagine we were there

Let us imagine that we were in the synagogue where Jesus spoke. Imagine that we were among those who were in need. Imagine that among our friends there were those who were economically poor, or oppressed because of their inferior social status. Wouldn’t it be good news that Jesus had come to bring us good news?

We live in a world out-of-joint. There is evil in this world. But Jesus has overcome the work of the devil (as demonstrated in Luke 4:1- 13). He is the Anointed King of God, and he has come to proclaim that the kingdom of God. This is good news indeed!

Next time we will take a look at Luke 4:21-30.

Mission, Contextualization and Canon (Christopher Wright)

I am reading a great essay written by Rev Dr Christopher Wright. I really like Wright's missional reading of Scripture. The following two quotes about the canon, mission and contextualization are particularly insightful.

The task of recontextualizing the word of God is a missional project that has its basis in Scripture itself and has been part of the mission of God’s people all through the centuries of their existence. The finality of the canon refers to the completion of God’s work of revelation and redemption, not to a foreclosure on the necessary continuation of the inculturated witness to that completed work in every culture.

So, then, we should take into account not only the missional locatedness of today’s readers, but also the missional locatedness of the very first readers of the canonical texts. The Scriptures, after all, are not disembodied pronouncements dropped from heaven, but collections of texts that addressed living people in specific contexts, who were therefore called upon to respond to them, in faith and action. What can we know about those original contexts, and how can we discern the misisonal drive and energy that the texts injected into them?

Chris Wright then uses Jeremiah to illustrate how this works. I think he has given us much to ponder.

(The above two citations are from Christopher J H Wright, “Mission and Old Testament Interpretation,” in Hearing the Old Testament: Listening for God’s Address, edited by Craig G Bartholomew and D J H Beldman (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012), 188.)

A biblical scholar participating in an urban neighbourhood (Tim Gombis)

Tim Gombis wrote a challenging blog post entitled "Evangelical Resistance to the Gospels: How & Why". (26th April 2012)

Here is one provocative thought from his post.

"We strip away the “husk” of Jesus’ clear words to find the spiritual “kernel” that we apply to our hearts and motives. 

This is a reading strategy whereby we keep Jesus safely tucked away in our hearts, self-satisfied with our piety.  But we intentionally avoid doing what he says with our bodies, social practices, and community dynamics.

It’s too threatening.  If we actually did the things Jesus says to do, we’d have to change, and we just don’t want to."

The post has attracted a robust discussion in the comments. I find the following story of Tim Gombis really helpful. I am always encouraged when a biblical scholar engages in the life of those living with poverty. This means that the scholar is not just teaching from some theories worked out in an comfortable library. Instead, she/he engages with both the Scripture and God's world at the same time, which enriches her/his own understanding of the Bible and the people whom God loves dearly.

Here is Tim's story.

"In the 90′s, my wife and I were in a doctrinally oriented church in which being Christian meant having the right mental furniture, having our doctrine sorted out right, and getting others to think the way we did.

During my doctoral studies in the early 00′s, we became convinced that being Christian was communally-oriented and needed to be lived out through service to one another and others. When we moved back to the States in ’04, we looked for a church that exalted Christ and reached out the poor and marginalized to absorb them into a thriving community life of flourishing. We found that church, an urban church plant that served a community hammered by poverty. We read the Gospels and sought to put many of these challenging texts into practice–learning to forgive one another, invite poor people to our homes, receive invitations to enter their homes (not easy for middle class people!), share the ministry load with “others” who didn’t do it like we did, etc. Those were wonderful years–hard, but so rich. Lots of other things to add here, but that’s just a sampling…

We recently moved to Grand Rapids and participate in a ministry that provides shelter for homeless people. We take up concrete service opportunities to participate in the ways our church proclaims the gospel and participates in it."

The following is an excerpt of a separate correspondence I had with Tim. I really like what he says here.

"What changed everything for me was the day-in, day-out exposure to what it meant to live in poverty.  We recognized the power-differentials in our relationships when we just handed out money.  We invited others to minister alongside us in relationships of reciprocity and mutuality rather than top-down relationships of power-inequality.  It was tough, but it completely transformed us.

So many other lessons, too, but our eyes need to be opened through the actual experience--incarnational experience." (Used with permission.)

(Click here for Tim Gombis' blog post. His story above is dated 30th April 2012.)

Our call and our mission (something from Tim Gombis)

I found the following from Tim Gombis' recent blog post. I couldn't agree more with him. (I will highlight a few things in blue.)

"We are called to find places in God’s good world where there is brokenness and pain, and we are called to pray for God to heal.  We are called to provide help to those in need, a glass of water for those who are thirsty.  We are called to rejoice with those who rejoice, and to grieve with those who grieve. 

We are called to sit and give ourselves to the stranger who needs a listening ear, and see her turn into a friend.  We are called to give ourselves to be loved, and to love others, because God has made us one, joining us together as family.

Our mission is to be a community that loves, a community that welcomes, a community that serves, not a community that dazzles and amazes.  Thankfully, a broken, tired, worn-out, and weary bunch of people is exactly what God is looking for to be the hands and feet of his mission to love the world for the glory of the name of Jesus."

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?

The mission of God and participation (Michael Gorman)

In this blog, Michael Gorman has written a post that is really worth reading. It is about Paul's understanding of the mission of God. Here is what he says.

"What is God up to in the world? What is the missio Dei, the mission of God?

For Paul the answer to that question is clear: to bring salvation to the world. The means of that salvation is the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, God’s Son, Israel’s Messiah, and the world’s true Lord. This is the gospel, the good news. The mode by which that salvation is conveyed to the world is the preaching of this good news both in word and in deed. And the mode by which that salvation is received is described best not merely as belief in the sense of intellectual assent but as participation in the sense of a comprehensive transformation of conviction, character, and communal affiliation. This is what it means to be “in Christ,” Paul’s most fundamental expression for this participatory life that is, in fact, salvation itself…."

"According to Paul, God is on a mission to liberate humanity—and indeed the entire cosmos—from the powers of Sin and Death. The fullness of this liberation is a future reality for which we may, and should, now confidently hope. In the present, however, God is already at work liberating humanity from Sin and Death, through the sin-defeating and life-giving death and resurrection of his Son, as a foretaste of the glorious future that is coming. God is therefore at work creating an international network of multicultural, socio-economically diverse communities (“churches”) that participate in this liberating, transformative reality and power now—even if incompletely and imperfectly. They worship the one true God, confess his Son Jesus as the one true Lord, and live in conformity to the self-giving divine love displayed on the cross by means of the power of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of the Father and of the Son."

Click here to read Gorman's full blog post.

What Is the Mission of the Church? (Tim Gombis's interactions with De Young and Gilbert)

My previous post referred to Joel Willitts' review on the book What Is the Mission of the Church?: Making Sense of Social Justice, Shalom, and the Great Commission by Kevin DeYoung and Greg Gilbert. Here I will provide links to the various posts in Tim Gombis' blog, where Gombis interacts with the book. Gombis sometimes interacts with the book directly, and sometimes indirectly. I will try to list both types of posts below.

First post.
Second post.
Third post.
Fourth post.
Fifth post.
Sixth post.
God's Love for Creation.
Seventh post.
Receiving Service to the Poor and Needy.
Eighth post.
Ninth post.
Stetzer's review.

(This list is not meant to be exhaustive. I may have missed some of Gombis' posts here.)

What Is the Mission of the Church? (Joel Willitts' review on a book by De Young and Gilbert)

The questions around social justice and the mission of the church are important. A new book came out this year by the following title.

What Is the Mission of the Church?: Making Sense of Social Justice, Shalom, and the Great Commission by Kevin DeYoung and Greg Gilbert.

Joel Willitts has been blogging on this book in Euangelion, and yesterday he summarised his posts in one post. While I do not totally agree with Willitts on everything, especially his understanding of social justice (although I don't totally disagree with him on that topic either), most of the time I really like what he says in his blog posts. His review is well-written, important and really worth reading. Thank you indeed, Joel, for writing this up for the church today.

Click here for the entire review by Joel Willitts.

(Tim Gombis has also been blogging on this book. Click here for more info.)

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.

The Bible's grand narrative and mission - A book by Christopher Wright

If you have not come across Christopher J. H. Wright's The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible's Grand Narrative, you may want to take a look. Here is a summary of the book's message from the IVP website.

Most Christians would agree that the Bible provides a basis for mission. Chris Wright believes that there is actually a missional basis for the whole Bible - it is generated by, and is all about, God's mission.

In order to understand the Bible, we need an interpretative perspective that is in tune with this great missional theme. We need to see the 'big picture' of God's mission and how all parts of Scripture fit into its grand narrative.

In this comprehensive and accessible study, Chris Wright begins with the Old Testament understanding of who God is, what he has called his people to be and to do, and where the nations belong within God's mission. These themes are followed into the New Testament. Throughout, Wright emphasizes that biblically-defined mission is intrinsically holistic. God's mission is to redeem his whole creation from all that sin and evil have inflicted upon it, and the mission of God's people must reflect the breadth of God's righteous and saving love for all he has made. 

(Click here to the link to the IVP website about this book.)

The Mission of God (Rev Dr Christopher Wright)

This YouTube clip summaries Rev Dr Christopher Wright's view on the mission of God. It's really worth watching.

Some thoughts on mission (especially cross-cultural mission) - Part 2

This post continues from my last post on my thoughts on mission (which can be found here.)

Proclamation
The proclamation of the gospel is found throughout the narratives in the Gospels and Acts. Cross-cultural mission (and mission in general) can especially be found in Acts. But I think we need to note the content of the gospel message. The gospel message is multifaceted. Here I will list a few Scriptures. In Athens, Paul says,

“The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else.   (Acts 17:24-25; emphasis added)

In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.” (Acts 17:30-31; emphasis added)

Later in Acts Paul recalls what Jesus said to him,

‘I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,’ the Lord replied. ‘Now get up and stand on your feet. I have appeared to you to appoint you as a servant and as a witness of what you have seen and will see of me.  I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.’ (Acts 26:15b-18; emphasis added)

Paul, who was Jewish, was sent to the Gentiles and Jews alike to proclaim the good news of Jesus. Note that it is a message of the lordship of the Creator God, God's judgment with justice, repentance, forgiveness of sins, and, most importantly, the death and resurrection of Christ. As Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4,

For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures...

Here I want to point out a few things about the proclamation of the gospel.

(1) My former religion was a mixture of Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism and ancestral worship. One of the most significant Christian experiences for me is the fact that I am a sinner and that by God's grace my sins are forgiven. To me, Jesus is my Lord, my King and my Saviour. The lordship of Christ, I think, should be at the heart of our proclamation.

(2) The gospel message contains many elements, and should never be reduced to a simple formula. For example, the preaching of the gospel is not about "a ticket to heaven". In fact, even a casual look at the Bible passages cited above will show that the New Testament Christians did not reduce the gospel to "a ticket to heaven".

(3) In the Four Gospels we find that Jesus' call is that people may follow him as their Lord and King. The gospel is about the call to follow the crucified Christ and risen Lord - that is, the call to discipleship. And as Dietrich Bonhoeffer says, discipleship is about costly grace, not cheap grace. (Click here for my post about that.) The fact that proclamation of the gospel is about discipleship is evidenced by the so-called Great Commission in Matthew 28:18-20, where Jesus asked his disciples to go and make disciples of all nations. This is not about an intellectual understanding of some formulas to get a ticket to heaven, but about proclaiming the crucified Christ and risen Lord so that people will follow his self-giving way of life.

(4) Michael Pahl speaks of our call to proclaim and live out the resurrection of the crucified Christ, and that "the church is called to enact God's program of creation renewal in this age in anticipation of the fulfillment of the renewal of creation in the age to come." I have previously blogged on what Pahl says in his book From Resurrection to New Creation (Eugene: Cascade Books, 2010). I think it is really worth reading. Click here for the blog post.

(5) It is absolutely important is that we do not see ourselves as superior to those who do not know Jesus. Christians are fellow sinners who need the grace of God for salvation. We have come to know Christ because of God's grace, not our righteousness. We are to proclaim the gospel with humility, and with sincere love for those who are living in darkness.

(To be continued.)

Some thoughts on mission (especially cross-cultural mission) - Part 1

Recently I have been thinking about my own view of mission. There are many who know much more than I, and so I don't think the following is new. But I feel that I need to formulate my view on mission in light of the Scripture and experience. Here are some initial thoughts.

Scripture
Much can be said here. But I will only mention the fact that Paul - the Jewish Christian - is an apostle to the Gentiles. In Romans we find that Paul envisions a Jew-Gentile love-centred community that seeks to follow Jesus. This community is in Christ through Jesus' atoning sacrifice, and seeks to embody Christ's self-giving life through the indwelling Holy Spirit. Paul sees this as God's saving purpose and his role is to proclaim this good news ("good news" is of course the meaning of the Greek word for "gospel") - first to the Jews, then to the Gentiles.

Christ's identification with humanity
The New Testament speaks of a God who sent his Son to our world. It talks about Christ's participation in frail humanity and suffered death as an atoning sacrifice for our sins (not least in Romans 8:3-4). There is a strong sense in which the followers of Jesus are to follow his way of self-giving life. The mission of God consists in him sending his Son to our world to accomplish his saving purpose. The vocation of his followers is to participate in his saving purpose by embodying Christ's way of life. In the context of cross-cultural mission, the messengers of the good news will do well if they enter the culture of their audience, live among them and remain there long-term, learn their language and participate in their sorrow and joy. Through this participatory approach, God's heralds of the gospel reflect God's character and love through their deeds and words. Through God's Spirit the gospel is proclaimed through his Presence in the Christ-followers.

Not everyone is called to engage in long-term cross-cultural mission. But we are all called to participate in God's saving purpose by embodying Christ's self-giving way of life in our own contexts and through our solidarity with those who engage in long-term cross-cultural mission.

(Click here for Part 2 on my thoughts on mission)

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.

The resurrection as missional paradigm - An Indian perspective

From Michael Gorman's blog he points us to something an Indian New Testament scholar says about the resurrection being a paradigm for mission.

Here is what he says,

"The significance of the resurrection of Jesus in my Indian context is multi-faceted. When I’m talking about the resurrection of Jesus in our multi-religious, multi-cultural and pluralistic culture of India, I have to re-interpret the significance of Christ’s resurrection for our diverse communities. The salvific significance of Christ’s work on the cross, and his resurrection should first and foremost be taught and proclaimed, as the good news of salvation for the various religious and ethnic communities. As a second order to this, when I am witnessing Christ for instance to the Dalits, Tribals and the Adivasis (the poor and marginalized, also called the dust of the dust), I use Christ’s resurrection as a model for liberation out of the clutches of oppression and dehumanization. As Christ was humiliated on the cross, and was raised by the Father from the grave, so also, Christian mission should focus on the upliftment of the oppressed out of the bondages of poverty, casteism, sin and injustice."

Click here for Gorman's 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.

Social justice and mission (Centre for Applied Christian Ethics (CACE), Ridley College)

Last year I had the privilege of writing a paper to respond to three speakers at a theological forum at Tabor College on the topic Social Justice and the Mission of the Church.

The speakers were

Michael Raiter, Principal of Melbourne School of Theology (formerly Bible College of Victoria)
Deborah Storie, Chair of TEAR Australia
Steve Bradbury, Director of Micah 6:8 Centre, Tabor College

Click here for the papers.

The Task of Our Generation (Daniel Kirk)

Daniel Kirk has posted The Task of Our Generation in his blog. (Click here for the link.) I think it is really worth reading.

As a bi-cultural person (Asian-Aussie), I do find that the dichotomies in our Western mindset somewhat frustrating. But it's our task to overcome that, so that we may proclaim the gospel and live it out at the same time (and to do so both as individuals and as a community at the same time!).

Here are some excerpts from Kirk's post.

"In the post-conservative Christian circles in which I run, people have often experienced a shift. From an entry into Christianity that is all about Jesus dying for my sins, people later discover a Kingdom of God that demands active engagement with the world."

"Within the world of Pauline studies a parallel distinction is sometimes highlighted. On the one hand, there is Jesus dying “for me,” with its concomitant substitutionary language of justification and the like. On the other hand, there is my “dying with Christ,” with its concomitant participatory language of co-crucifixion, co-glorification and the like."

"I see the [t]ask of our generation to overcome this false dichotomy by (1) insisting that it’s not a dichotomy after all; and (2) articulating atonement in such a way that action and transformation are inherent to the saving story of Jesus." (I think Kirk meant "task" in the first sentence here.)

"There are many ways to put the question we must answer.

At the Institute for Biblical Research this year, Tom Wright put the question, “What does the Kingdom of God have to do with the cross?”"

"And, until we can so tell the story of Jesus’ death such that his life is not only an anticipation... but inseparable from his atoning death, that we have not yet comprehended what it is to say that Jesus died for our sins."

Church, community, being counter-cultural

I found the following from Scot McKnight's blog. Is the church about community? Does it have the courage to be counter-cultural?

(Click here for the post.)

"[The] church is and will remain at the epicenter of Christian community, it is the community, essential for worship, for sacrament, for fellowship, but the work of the church, the work of the pastor, is not to lead or cast vision or draw people in, but to equip, disciple, and send Christians out."

"We need to be counter cultural in approach to the church as committed community and as the body of Christ."

What do you think?