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.

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.)

What's your response to poverty if.......?

In my last post I tried to describe what poverty looks like in practice. Here I want to rephrase the same statements and pose the following question in the beginning.

How would you respond to someone who describes his/her situation in a low-income country?

I look at my children and worry that they will have the same life I have – that is, they will have to struggle to make ends meet all the time.

Playing a musical instrument is a remote possibility for me and my children, because I can never afford the tuition fees or the instrument itself.

I can’t see any hope for the future for me and my family, even though I work long hours everyday of the week.

My children have to work everyday to earn money rather than playing with other children.

My daily desire is that some day my economic situation can improve to a place where I can feel safe for my family, rather than a lifestyle where we can flourish and enjoy life's pleasures (because the latter is so out of our reach that I don't think we will get there).

I feel that people look down on me and my children, because I am powerless socially and economically. I know that I am trapped in a cycle of poverty and I cannot see a way out.

A US$3 coffee seems to be far too expensive for me.

If my loved one goes to the hospital she/he will be sleeping in a small portable bed in a busy corridor because the hospital is too crowded.

I don't know what "taking a break to get away for a holiday" is, because I need to work very hard to make ends meet.

I worry that I will be begging on the street if anyone in the family gets chronically sick.

I can’t imagine that I will ever travel overseas because I can never afford it. In fact, the few people I know who have travelled overseas are considered to be really wealthy by people in my social circle.

I know what it means to be marginalised due to the fact that the rich and powerful in my city call the shots.

The stress of not having enough money causes ongoing tension and disharmony in the family, leading to domestic violence and constant distress among the children.

My whole family sleeps in one bed, not because I choose to but because there is no room.

The daily stress and/or the marginalisation I have experienced leaves me emotionally scarred, but I know that I need to be strong for the sake of my loved ones.

Sometimes I just want to cry because life is simply too hard.

What does poverty look like?

I have been thinking about what poverty looks like. Here are some thoughts. (See the comments at the end about what type of poverty I am referring to.)

You know what living in poverty is like if you have experienced the following.

If you look at your children and worry that they will have the same life you have – that they will have to struggle to make ends meet all the time.

If playing a musical instrument is a remote possibility for you and your children, because you can never afford the tuition fees or the instrument itself.

If you can’t see any hope or future for you and your family even though you work long hours everyday of the week for months and years.


If your children have to work everyday to earn money rather than play with other children.

If your daily desire is that some day your socioeconomic situation can improve to a place where you can feel safe for yourself and your family, rather than a lifestyle where you can flourish and enjoy life's pleasures (because the latter is so out of your reach that you don't think you will get there).

If you feel that you are looked down upon by others because you are powerless socially and economically. You know that you and your family are trapped in a cycle of poverty and you cannot see a way out.

If a US$3 coffee seems to be too expensive for you.

If your loved one goes to the hospital she/he has to sleep in a bed in a busy corridor because the hospital is too crowded.

If you don't know what "taking a break to get away to somewhere for a holiday" is, because you need to work very hard to make ends meet. 

If you worry that you will be begging on the street if anyone in the family gets chronically sick.

If you cannot imagine that you will ever travel overseas because you know that you can never afford it. In fact, the few people you know who have travelled overseas are considered to be really wealthy by people in your social circle.

If you know what it means to be marginalised due to the fact that the rich and powerful in your land call the shots.

If the stress of lack of money causes ongoing tension and disharmony in the family, leading to domestic violence and constant distress among the children.

If your whole family sleeps in one bed, not because you choose to but because there is no room.

If the daily stress and/or the marginalisation you experience leaves you emotionally scarred, but you know that you need to be strong for the sake of your loved ones.

If you just want to cry because life is simply too tough for you.

PS. The above is not about extreme poverty where people are starving or have no place to live at all, but a good measure of poverty where daily existence is a struggle. Primarily I am thinking of the experience in a low-income country, although some of the above would apply to a country like Australia as well. Also, people perceive their experience of poverty differently, and so the above list is by no means exhaustive.

An article on power and powerlessness - a partial response to Dr Andrew Sloane's lecture

ETHOS has just published my latest article, entitled "Reflections on Power and Powerlessness".

This is the description the editor inserted.

[The article] follows up on Andrew Sloane's lecture 'Justifying Advocacy' with reflections on the biblical notion of power, especially in relation to the paradox of power in weakness.

Click here for the article.

A reintegrated view of sin (N T Wright)

Tom Wright has the following to say about "sin" (in Romans 5:12-2) in The New Interpreter's Bible Volume X.

"Part of the problem, of course, is that traditional Christianity has frequently operated with a truncated view of sin, limiting it to personal, and particularly sexual, immorality. These things matter enormously, of course, but there are other dimensions, of which the last century has seen so many examples, which are often untouched by traditional preaching. Equally, those preachers who have focused attention on structural evil within our world, on systematic and politically enshrined injustice, have often left the home base of Pauline theology in order to do so, not realising that there were resources there from which to launch not only critique but also promise and hope. This passage [Romans 5:12-21] invites us to explore a reintegrated view of sin and death, rebellion and consequent dehumanization, as the major problem of humankind, and thereby to offer diagnoses of our world's ills that go to the roots of the problem and prepare the way for the cure." (page 532)

Re-thinking generosity (Deborah Storie)

Deborah Storie wrote a thought-provoking article just before Christmas about "giving well". This article is relevant to giving in general, not just at Christmas time. Take a good look and be challenged. Here is an excerpt.

"The growing popularity of sending gift boxes overseas, orphanages in far-away places, and some short-term 'mission' trips, are all symptoms of a broader shift in Australian thought over the last few years. They reflect a hierarchical worldview in which some give generously and others gratefully receive. According to this worldview, rich Christians are responsible to give generously to the poor and not much more. This worldview is based on a narrow understanding of poverty which equates it with material deprivation and fails to acknowledge the complex networks of forces that give more to those who already have too much, and take from those who already have  too little . In this worldview, deeper structural causes of poverty and inequality don’t exist."

"I long for us to give respectfully and intelligently in ways which address underlying problems and empower the poor. Sadly, our love of mercy often blinds us to the need to do justice and walk humbly with our God."

Click here for the full article.

Practise Love and Follow Christ (Transformation journal)

My latest article has just been published in the Transformation journal (at Oxford Centre for Mission Studies), which can be accessed in SAGE Journals. It is a peer-reviewed article, and has an academic feel. The title of the article is:

"Practise Love and Follow Christ: The Profound Relevance of Romans to Holistic Mission"

Here is the Abstract:

"Recent research in biblical studies has provided us with a good understanding on the socioeconomic condition of Christians in ancient Rome. The comparable economic and social situations between the earliest church in Rome and the poor in the Global South today suggest that Paul’s letter to the Romans can be very relevant to holistic mission. Based on some key findings of the recent research, this paper looks at two passages in Romans, and proposes that practising love and following Christ are the outworking of the holistic gospel. The implication is that Romans can be a useful resource for holistic mission."

(Click here for the full article. You do need to subscribe to the Journal though, and it is not cheap, unfortunately.)

A story of sin's curse - Michael Pahl

I am reading Michael W. Pahl's The Beginning and the End (2011). This little book consists of some brief but brilliant studies on Genesis and Revelation, and it explores how we should live our lives in light of our origins and destiny.

The third chapter is entitled "A story of sin's curse". Here is an excerpt.

“The cost of this disregard for the divine will [Adam's disobedience] is spelled out in ways that would have made sense to ancient Israelites in an agriculture-based society built around close-knit family groups, with all the values such societies and groups hold dear. Shame in relationships – both among humans and between humans and God – is expressed in the images of nakedness (3:7, 10). Guilt in trespassing a divine command is portrayed in eating the fruit of a tree (3:11). Hostility within creation is described in terms of the relationship of a woman and a snake (3:15). Physical pain and suffering is presented in the image of a woman’s labor in childbirth and a man’s toil in the fields (3:16-17). Systemic human oppression is painted in the colors of a husband’s domination of his wife (3:16). A sense of futility in life and work – even creation itself cursed – is conveyed in the image of thorns and thistles in the land (3:17-19). And exclusion from life as God intended it – a summary of all that has been described – is represented in terms of banishment from the ideal garden God has made (3:22-24). All these effects of sin are portrayed in the story in ways that had maximum impact for the ancient Israelites, yet all of these things – shame, guilt, futility, hostility, exclusion, oppression, pain, suffering, and death – are the common experience of humanity in deviating from the divine design, disregarding the divine will.” (pages 38-39)

Pahl’s description of “death” is also useful: 

“This solemn warning of ‘death’ [in Gen 2:17] is fulfilled in the narrative in all the ways we have just highlighted: shame and guilt in relationships, futility in life and work, hostility in relationships, leading to oppression and exclusion, physical and psychological suffering and pain, and the cessation of bodily life. This ‘death,’ the cost of human sin, is thus not simply physical death but rather a comprehensive reality – a ‘deep death’ – affecting individual human beings, collective human societies, and even the rest of creation (see also proverbs 10:16; John 5:24; Romans 3:23; 5:12-21; 6:23; James 1:15; 1 John 3:14).” (page 39)

The effect of Adam's disobedience is multifaceted.

Human trafficking through the eyes of those affected

A friend of mine introduced me to a website where a bunch of young people living in communities affected by human trafficking speak out about the root causes of the problems using photos. Note the participatory approach to the program.  Sounds like something really worth taking a look, especially if you like pictures.

Click here for the link.

By the way, for those who are interested in this issue, this book called Not For Sale by David Batstone will be useful.

Income inequality in the ancient world and now (Scot McKnight and Tim De Chant)

In his recent blog post Scot McKnight points us to an interesting post by Tim De Chant, which is about income inequality in the Roman Empire in the ancient world. (Click here and here for the two blog posts.) Here are some quotes from the blog post.

"Over the last 30 years, wealth in the United States has been steadily concentrating in the upper economic echelons. Whereas the top 1 percent used to control a little over 30 percent of the wealth, they now control 40 percent."

"In total, Schiedel and Friesen figure the elite orders and other wealthy made up about 1.5 percent of the 70 million inhabitants the empire claimed at its peak. Together, they controlled around 20 percent of the wealth..."

"These numbers paint a picture of two Romes, one of respectable, if not fabulous, wealth and the other of meager wages, enough to survive day-to-day but not enough to prosper. The wealthy were also largely concentrated in the cities."

"Schiedel and Friesen aren’t passing judgement on the ancient Romans, nor are they on modern day Americans. Theirs is an academic study, one used to further scholarship on one of the great ancient civilizations. But buried at the end, they make a point that’s difficult to parse, yet provocative. They point out that the majority of extant Roman ruins resulted from the economic activities of the top 10 percent. “Yet the disproportionate visibility of this ‘fortunate decile’ must not let us forget the vast but—to us—inconspicuous majority that failed even to begin to share in the moderate amount of economic growth associated with large-scale formation in the ancient Mediterranean and its hinterlands.”"

"In other words, what we see as the glory of Rome is really just the rubble of the rich, built on the backs of poor farmers and laborers, traces of whom have all but vanished. It’s as though Rome’s 99 percent never existed. Which makes me wonder, what will future civilizations think of us?"

The gap between the haves and have-nots was huge in the Roman Empire as well as in many countries in the West today. Since the events of the New Testament took place in the Roman Empire, the socioeconomic context of the Empire is important for us as we read the Bible. (See my previous post about the economic profile of the earliest church in the Roman Empire here.) This, in turn, is important for us today as we try to apply the New Testament to our own contexts in the affluent West.

Why "social" justice? (Scot McKnight)

For a long time I have been thinking whether I should include the word "social" when I refer to "justice" in the Bible. In terms of biblical usage, "social justice" is not strictly speaking the language used in the Scripture. But on the other hand when "justice" is mentioned in the Bible, it has much to do with social and communal living.

In his recent blog post Scot McKnight discusses this matter. Here I cite a few things McKnight says.

Tim King is a former student of mine, works with Jim Wallis, and is pointing out something I would affirm. The word “social” has been added to the word “justice” because “social” has been too often neglected. Having said that, though, I would plead with us to learn to use the word “justice” biblically — it refers to being right with God, with self, with others, with the world — so that we don’t have to add “social” (with others, with the world) and so we can cease with our gnostic-like spirituality where it is only “me and God.”

I am ready to concede the point that if we properly define our terms, the “social” in social justice and the “personal” in personal salvation should both be dropped. But, I’m not willing to stop using the modifier “social” when it comes to justice until Christians fully engage the biblical definition of justice.

Someday, justice will be flowing like a river and righteousness like an everflowing stream.

On that day, we won’t be fighting about whether or not it is “social” justice or just plain old justice that is rolling.

I gather that the last two sentences echo Amos' words about justice. I think Scot McKnight has something for us to ponder here.

Click here for McKnight's blog post.

Some reflections on different ways to see the world - Affluence, poverty, making a difference

Here are some reflections about how people in the West and those in low-income countries see things differently.

In the West, we want to see how we can make a difference. We want to see how we can fight injustice and alleviate poverty in the world. But for the poor in low-income countries, it is a matter of whether there can be any difference at all. If daily existence is a struggle, how can one find hope in the midst of injustice and poverty? Only a relationship with Christ and his identification with injustice and poverty can give us true hope and comfort.

In the West, we get to choose. Yes, we don't always get to choose, and there are those among use who are marginalised and disadvantaged. But comparatively, many of us get to choose - to study hard to go to university or work hard to learn a trade, save up for a holiday overseas, go to church and spend time with friends on the weekend, etc. Yet for many who live in low-income countries, the only choice is to keep staying alive and not to give up hope. They don't really get to choose in the way we do. There is no such a thing as a holiday overseas to see what the world is like. There is no such a thing as going to university - that is, for most of them because there aren't too many places at university, if there is one at all.

Many of us (not all of us, of course) in the West live in affluence. With our money and relatively high social status, we have the power to help the poor. We find satisfaction and meaning as we give to them. But for many who live in low-income countries, they learn to share with others with the little they have. Sharing resources out of poverty and powerlessness produces a profound sense of grace, hope and love that those living in affluence cannot fully understand.

None of the above means that living in the affluent West is wrong. Nor does the above mean that the rich should all become poor. It is not about guilt. But I hope the above helps us to learn from each other - to see the world from another perspective. I think God sees the world from all the different worldviews, and he knows exactly what the poor have to go through.

The gulf between us and the poor

Sight Magazine has reprinted this article. Check it out here.

Here is a quote:

I do believe that Scriptural truths are universal and the poor do not have moral superiority over the rich, and hence at least in theory our material affluence should not adversely affect our ability to understand the Bible. But I wonder whether our wealth can be a hindrance that stops us from fully understanding the plight of the poor and the Scripture.

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.)

A Greek Evangelical view of the Greek economic crisis (in Michael Bird's blog post)

Mike Bird posted something really interesting in his (and Joel Willitts') blog. The economic crisis in Greece is affecting the whole world at the moment. In this blog post Mike Bird has asked Dr. Myrto Theocharous (M.A. Wheaton College. Ph.D Cambridge Uni ), Professor of Hebrew and Old Testament at the Greek Bible College in Athens, to be a guest writer.

She provides some reflections from Habakkuk as a Greek evangelical herself. Here are two excerpts of what she has to say.

"In the crisis that we face today, although all have sinned, some have sinned to become wealthy and some have sinned to survive. Lots of Greeks see that not everyone is paying to make things right, thus perpetuating an unjust system where the elite always manage to escape with their funds unscathed. It is the lower strata of society that have to carry the burden for the sins of the powerful: their salaries are slashed, thousands have lost their jobs, cannot pay for their rent, stores are closing down one after the other – all sheep to the slaughter for saving the banks."

"How does the evangelical religious minority react to this? On the one hand, the traditional approach continues: the church remains focused on spiritual issues and individual guilt, while passively submitting to the government (appealing to Romans 13) and trusting the EU’s “roadmap” on how to get out of the financial mess. Some tend to emphasize the church’s “heavenly” citizenship and the imminent coming of Christ, which render political involvement futile. Evangelistic efforts and charity continue, both of which focus on saving individuals from the clutches of what seems to be an irredeemable society. Without discounting the traditional approach, some are beginning to place greater focus on systemic evil, assessing what should be the level of their political involvement and what direction it should take. For some the evil lies in the productivity-killing corrupted socialist system of Greece, while for others it is to be found in the poverty-generating greed inherent in global capitalism." (emphasis added)

Click here for the entire blog post. See especially how Dr. Myrto Theocharous applies Habakkuk to the situation.

Serving the poor through incarnational love (Tim Gombis)

Tim Gombis recently posted an excellent post in his blog (on 2nd November 2011). Here I cite from his post some profound insights about serving the poor. I will highlight a few things in this colour.

If we seek to help others motivated by guilt or emotion, we will typically seek to pacify our own immediate feelings rather than seek to do what’s in the long-term best interest of others. 

Doing good that ultimately helps is something radically different.  It requires incarnational love and boldness to get involved personally with difficult situations.  It may also take long periods of time to build trust and establish healthy relationships of mutuality.  Further, most ministry situations will require that we relate from our weaknesses rather than our strengths. That can be very disorienting.

Perhaps most difficult—and why guilt and sentiment hinder rather than help—doing good challenges us to discern when and how to act in ways that benefit others in the long run.  We may have to fight our impulses and resist the manipulations of others in the interests of avoiding doing immediate and long-term damage.

Beyond all this, Scripture doesn’t motivate service to the poor and needy out of guilt.  Solidarity with the suffering and service to the poor and needy are motivated eschatologically and sacramentally.  That is, we are motivated by a future-orientation toward the day of Christ and by an awareness of where we have access to the life-giving and sustaining presence of Jesus.

We could look at a number of texts, but I’ll just point to John 12:25-26:

Anyone who loves their life will lose it, while anyone who hates their life in this world will keep it for eternal life. Whoever serves me must follow me; and where I am, my servant also will be. My Father will honor the one who serves me.

If you grasp too tightly to stuff and give yourself to lustful accumulation, you will lose your life.  But if you let it go in service to Jesus, you will honored by God himself!  That’s the eschatological orientation.

But Jesus goes on to say that “whoever serves me must follow me; and where I am, my servant also will be.”

Where is Jesus?  Read the Gospels.  Where is he? 

Jesus spent his days on earth with the poor, the outcast, the shamed woman in the Samaritan village, the despised and traitorous Zaccheus, the single mother from the red-light district in Syro-Phoenicia.  Jesus goes on to say in John 15 that when we serve others we are sustained by Jesus’ own joy.  There’s a “sacramental” character to serving those in need.  That is, those actions and patterns of life are encounters on earth with the very presence of Jesus.

We serve others, especially those in need, because that’s a pattern of life that is sustained by the life-giving and joy-generating presence of Jesus.  And we serve because that’s the mode of life that has its end in exaltation with Jesus himself at the final day.

....... Christian leaders would do well to cultivate language that expresses these motivations, shaping the imagination of God’s people to serve the world joyfully in the name of Jesus.

Click here for the entire post by Tim Gombis.

Survey: Frequent Bible Reading Can Turn You Liberal (Christianity Today article)

Christianity Today in the US just published an article entitled "Survey: Frequent Bible Reading Can Turn You Liberal". Very interesting findings from a survey in the US, and here are some on the issues of consumption, and social and economic justice.

"Some of the most interesting findings relate to moral attitudes. "How important is it," the survey asked, "to actively seek social and economic justice in order to be a good person?" Again, as would be expected, those with more liberal political leanings were more likely to say it's very or somewhat important. And those who read the Bible more often were more likely to agree. Indeed, they were almost 35 percent more likely to agree at each point on Baylor's five-point scale... Likewise, contrary to liberal media stereotypes, those who are most engaged in their faith (by directly and frequently reading its source material) are those who are most supportive of social and economic justice."

"Likewise, the survey asked whether one must consume or use fewer goods in order to be a good person. Political liberals and frequent Bible readers are more likely to say yes. A conservative Bible reader might not be as prone to say yes as a liberal non-reader, but think of it this way: Ask an evangelical who is politically conservative, has some college education, has an average level of income, is a biblical literalist, and does not read the Bible, and you'll have only a 22 percent chance he or she will say reducing consumption is part of ethical living. Ask the same person, only now they read the Bible, and you'll have a 44 percent chance they'll say so. It's still not a majority, but the swing is dramatic."

The author of the article, Aaron B. Franzen, makes the following observations at the end.

"But frequent Bible readers don't just see the Bible as personal. They also see it as authoritative, written by an author who had a specific context and intent, and they want to conform to its message. After all, why read the Bible with no desire to embrace what it teaches?

In short, sometimes reading the Bible can change views and attitudes because readers are surprised by what's in it. Other times, it's just a matter of discipleship."

Click here for the article in full. (A friend of mine pointed out that the labels of "conservative", "liberal", "literal", etc., are unhelpful. I tend to agree with him.)

Wealth, poverty and being servants

A friend pointed me to David Chronic's article about Jesus' being a servant. I think he makes some very good points here. Although some may disagree with his view on economics, he is right about exploitative power dynamics and the sinful human nature that tends to misuse power. Here is an excerpt.

"Early in my Christian walk, Jesus’ words, “Go and sell what you have, give to the poor, and then come follow Me,” challenged me to simplify my life in order to serve God. I didn’t hear these words as a harsh, top-down command; rather, I saw how Jesus modeled this message and invited me to walk after Him. He gave up the riches of heaven to “take the nature of a servant” (Phil. 2:7). His actions encouraged me to give up my comforts and to become a servant. In my experience of “downward mobility,” I identified myself with Jesus’ move from master to slave or royalty to servant — or at least, so I thought. Focusing on Jesus’ actions, I missed something essential about the nature of God. And it has been among socially and economically excluded peoples that my eyes have been opened to see beyond God’s serving actions to God’s servant nature.

I had thought that the move of Jesus was one from lord to servant, a sort of trickle-down movement. Margaret Thatcher, a former British prime minister, is quoted as saying that if we want to serve the poor, we need to empower the rich. When the rich have wealth, they, like the Good Samaritan, take care of the poor. Since Thatcher said that, the trend of the rich getting richer and the poor poorer has debunked her trickle-down theory.1 Never having “enough,” the rich tend to serve their own interests — without “taking the form of a servant.”

Not only do we rarely see servanthood modeled by the upper classes in the stewardship of their power and possessions, but it is among the marginalized and oppressed that we find amazing lessons of servanthood. One of our friends, a mother of five, awakens early to go to the market. She spends the days cooking, cleaning and caring for her kids. On top of all this, she is always looking for odd jobs to bring some income to the family, often working late into the night. Although extremely poor, she is one of the hardest-working people I know, and she does it for the love of her family."

(Click here for the entire article.)