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.

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.

The eloquent speech and the so-called "gospel" preached by the super-apostles (Frank Matera)

In his commentary on 2 Corinthians, Frank Matera says some really great things about the passage in 11:1-4. Here are two quotes. (I will highlight a few things in blue.)

"What Paul means by ‘another Jesus’ is problematic, since he never explicitly explains how the teaching of the intruders differs from the gospel he preaches. Consequently, one must be careful not to read too much into this statement by suggesting, for example, that the intruders espoused a ‘heretical’ Christology. It is more likely that the real conflict between Paul and the intruders concerned issues of ministerial style and jurisdiction, which in Paul’s perspective cannot be separated from the gospel, since they reflect one’s view of Christ. As Paul will show in his foolish boasting, there is an intimate connection between the way in which one exercises apostolic ministry and the gospel message that one preaches. For example, because suffering, hardship, and weakness are such integral parts of his ministry, the gospel that he preaches necessarily focuses on the paradox of the cross and the crucified Christ who manifests God’s power through weakness. Conversely, because Paul’s gospel focuses on the cross and the crucified Christ, he understands suffering, hardship, and weakness as integral parts of his apostolic ministry. If, in contrast, the intruding apostles focused attention on their powerful deeds, eloquent speech, and ecstatic experiences, it is unlikely that the cross of the crucified Christ played as central a role in their preaching. Conversely, if their preaching was concerned first an foremost with the power of the pneumatic Lord, they would have been more inclined to boast of the outward manifestations of that power in their own ministry. Understood in this way, Paul is quite correct when he accuses the intruders of preaching ‘another Jesus.’" (pages 243-4)

"Although an outsider might view these approaches to ministry merely as different ways of preaching the same gospel, it is clear that Paul did not, since there can be no other gospel (Gal 1:7). Just as there is an inseparable relation between the minster of the gospel and the gospel that is preached, so there is an intimate relation between the 'Jesus' that is preached and the 'Spirit' and the 'gospel' that is received. In accepting the preaching of the intruders, the Corinthians have experienced a different Spirit, but in Paul's view it is not the authentic Spirit of Jesus. Likewise they have received another gospel, but since there is only one gospel, it is not the gospel that he preached." (page 244)

The suffering of the innocent - Comparing Job and Paul

Andrzej Gieniusz has done a major study on Romans 8, entitled Romans:18-30 Suffering Does Not Thwart the Future Glory (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1999). Towards the end he makes a good comparison between Job and Paul in terms of their view of the suffering of the innocent.

“For Job it was the course of a theology set forth in the example of two animals, Behemoth and Leviathan, seemingly a hippopotamus and a crocodile, the ‘most majestic’ and ‘most meaningless’ of creatures, supremely wild and terrible but without any purpose in the human economy, so that the reason of their existence is unintelligible for us. The course made Job grasp that even if in God’s manner of creating and governing the world there is much that is incomprehensible to humans, even threatening their existence, all of it is the work of a wise God who has made the world the way it is for his own inscrutable purposes. Innocent suffering is a hippopotamus or a crocodile. Even if it seems absurd to our eyes it makes sense for god who must be allowed to know what he is doing and, therefore, who can and should be trusted.” (page 283)

“The point of departure which has led Paul to trust in the face of the mystery of suffering is not a God who is incomprehensible yet wise and powerful in the order of His creation but a God who exceeds human expectations and the possibilities of comprehending in the way of His salvation. The ultimate ground for trust is actually offered in the unfathomable gesture of God’s love which cannot be expressed adequately except by the means of a paradoxical formulation ‘giving up His own Son for all of us’ (Rom 8:32). And because it is the gesture of salvific love and not only of creative power, Paul does not remain – As Job did – in an awful and humble silence (‘See, I am of small account; what shall I answer you? I lay my hand on my mouth. I have spoken once, and I will not answer’ Job 40:3-5). He begins, instead, to sing the hymn of trust in the love of God manifested through Jesus Christ, the love which, in spite of the sufferings and in the midst of them, makes the victory for those who love God already tangible.” (page 284)

The suffering of the innocent and God's justice in wisdom texts (Gerald H Wilson)

I am reading Gerald Wilson's commentary on Job (2007). I really think that we need a deeper understanding of suffering in the Bible if we want to be genuine followers of Jesus. It is because the gospel itself has a lot to do with the suffering, death and resurrection of Christ. The cross, of course, involves the suffering of the innocent One. And without death, there is no resurrection.

Here is a paragraph in the introduction of Wilson's book that is worth citing. (I will highlight a few things in blue.)

"The hard-eyed observations of 'pessimistic wisdom' compare and contrast the assumption of retribution in more expansive literary forms, including the extended discourses of Ecclesiastes and the dialogue/debate at the heart of Job. These discussions expose the weaknesses of retributive thinking and explore alternative worldviews that acknowledge the prosperity of the wicked, the oppression of the poor, and the suffering of the innocent. They also raise questions regarding the sovereignty and justice of God, who permits such circumstances to exist. In the end, however, these questioning forms of wisdom do not seek to undermine faith in God. Rather, they offer their own testimony to a continuing reliance on God and acknowledge the pain and confusion that inhabit the real world of the observant sage. Both Ecclesiastes and Job, after their devastating critiques of naive retributive thinking, counsel readers that the only way forward is to remain in a deep relationship of absolute dependence on God (what Israel calls 'fear of God'), acknowledging his sovereign freedom and admitting, along with Job, that knowing this God transcends (but does not remove!) the questions and doubts that diligent sages uncover in their searching." (page 4)

Revelation, suffering, God's faithfulness, attending a good play (Michael Pahl)

I am reading Michael Pahl's The Beginning and the End (2011). In the following I will quote a few things he says about Revelation. What I like about what Pahl says is that he talks about the suffering of the followers of Jesus and God's faithfulness to them. We fail to read Revelation probably if we miss these. The other great suggestion Pahl has is that we can read Revelation as if we are attending a play. (I will highlight some sentences in blue in the quotes below.)

"Revelation is not so much concerned with the precise when and how questions of the future as much as the who and what and why sorts of questions of human - and especially Christian - existence in this present age: Why do we suffer in this world, especially as God's people? Is God faithful to his people and his creation? What is our role as God's people in this oppressive world? What is wrong with the world? How will things be made right?"

"[I]n a real sense, reading Revelation is a lot like attending a good play - which brings us back to the importance of stories in shaping our collective identity and purpose and values. We have narrators (John and his angelic interpreter) guiding us through the story. We have a series of scenes (apocalyptic visions) unfolding before us, which are visually and verbally stimulating, even provocative, critiquing the world in which we live even as they present for us the world as it could be, as it will be. And, just like a good play, if we fully engage the strange world of this dramatic story we call Revelation, we will come out of the theater changed, seeing the real world - and our place in it - in a radically new way."

The paradox of weakness and power (Frank Matera)

Yesterday I discussed briefly something about the paradoxes in the gospel and cited from Frank Matera's  commentary on 2 Corinthians. Today I want to continue to talk about the paradox of weakness and power.

I think it is fair to say that many (though not all) Christians in the West today are in (relatively speaking) position of economic and social power. In Melbourne, Australia, for example, there are (as far as I can tell) more churches in the more affluent eastern suburbs than in the west. The churches in the east are generally much larger than those in the west (with exceptions, of course). As I speak with pastors and theological students about power - especially socioeconomic power - the discussion is often dominated by whether power is in and of itself sinful, and hence whether it is wrong to possess economic power. The answer is of course that power is not in and of itself sinful, nor is it wrong to own property, cars, etc. But as I think of Paul's life and ministry, the issue the apostle is interested in is more about living a cross-shaped life. That is, Paul focuses not so much on whether we should have economic power but whether we embody Christ's way of life.

Here are two further quotes from Matera's commentary.

"Affliction and suffering, then, are essential components of apostolic ministry, since they are the apostle's participation in the dying and death of Jesus, without which there can be no sharing in his resurrection. They are not to be sought in and for themselves, but they will occur in the life of those who authentically preach the gospel. Rather than conceal his apostolic hardships, Paul gladly embraces them as the marks of his apostleship (4:7-12; 6:4-10; 11:21b-33; 12:10)." (page 14)

"In and through this weakness, God manifested his power, so that Paul can also write, 'but he lives by reason of the power of God' (13:4). The fundamental paradox of weakness and power then is rooted in Christ's death, which has been made possible by the incarnation. Embracing this paradox in his life, Paul boasts in his own weaknesses (11:30; 12:9), aware that Christ's 'power is made perfect in weakness' (12:9). This is not to say that power is weakness. Rather, in a manner that can be understood only in light of the paradox of the cross, power comes to its perfection in and through weakness. Because the Corinthians did not grasp this paradox, they could not appreciate Paul's apostolic ministry among them and the new covenant community that he established in their midst." (pages 14-15)

The life that Paul chooses to live is of course counter-cultural, both then (in the Roman Empire) and now.

Gospel paradoxes (Frank J Matera)

In his commentary on 2 Corinthians, Frank J Matera has the following to say about the paradoxes of the gospel.

"The Corinthians did not appreciate Paul's new covenant ministry and their status as a people of the new covenant, in large measure because they did not grasp the paradoxical nature of the gospel Paul preached to them. In their view, Paul's afflictions and sufferings were signs of weakness that were unworthy of an apostle of Jesus Christ. Accordingly, when other preachers arrived at Corinth who appeared more powerful and eloquent many of the Corinthians sided with them and criticized Paul. Although the conflict between Paul and the Corinthians was undoubtedly multifaceted, it was ultimately rooted in the inability or the refusal of the Corinthians to embrace the paradoxical nature of the gospel that Paul had already discussed in 1 Cor 1-4. In 2 Corinthians Paul develops this paradox in relation to his apostolic sufferings and weaknesses." (page 14)

I have been wondering whether Christians today rely on the "powerful and eloquent" preachers/teachers too much. We like to listen to them because they are such effective communicators and their lives and ministries seem to be (so-called) "incredibly amazing". I think this is problematic. The apostle Paul, on the other hand, boasts about his weakness, through which God's power manifests. It is not about his success and power, but God's resurrection power working through the apostle's suffering and death.

Something for us to ponder...

Reflection: Some Scriptures that I have been reflecting on recently

I've been working on 2 Corinthians. What an amazing letter written by the apostle Paul! Here are a few verses that I have been reflecting on lately.

This one is really good:

2 Cor 5:14-15 For the love of Christ urges us on, because we are convinced that one has died for all; therefore all have died. And he died for all, so that those who live might live no longer for themselves, but for him who died and was raised for them. (NRSV)

The following verses are rather counter-cultural, I think.

2 Cor 1:5-6 For just as the sufferings of Christ are abundant for us, so also our consolation is abundant through Christ. If we are being afflicted, it is for your consolation and salvation; if we are being consoled, it is for your consolation, which you experience when you patiently endure the same sufferings that we are also suffering. (NIV2011)

2 Cor 1:9-10 Indeed, we felt we had received the sentence of death. But this happened that we might not rely on ourselves but on God, who raises the dead. 10 He has delivered us from such a deadly peril, and he will deliver us again. On him we have set our hope that he will continue to deliver us, 11 as you help us by your prayers. (NIV2011)

2 Cor 1:12 Now this is our boast: Our conscience testifies that we have conducted ourselves in the world, and especially in our relations with you, with integrity and godly sincerity. We have done so, relying not on worldly wisdom but on God’s grace. (NIV2011)

Embody God's victory (Timothy Gombis)

I am enjoying Timothy Gombis' The Drama of Ephesians (2010). Here is something that can help us understand how to embody Christ' triumph over evil in our daily life (which is perhaps very relevant during Easter but certainly relevant throughout the year).

"A prisoner has lost his freedom and is under the domination of the state... According to the first-century logic, if Paul is in a Roman prison, then the gods of Rome are stronger than the God whom Paul serves. So, why is Paul under the thumb of the powers that Christ has already vanquished?..." (p 109)

"So Paul gives them an apocalyptic interpretation of his apostleship and imprisonment. This is a heavenly vision of his life and ministry focusing especially on how it makes perfect sense that he is in prison... Paul's strategy is to situate his present circumstances squarely within the biblical tradition of God's power being demonstrated in human weakness. He does this by emphasizing the paradox of his life and ministry - at the same time that he occupies this terribly shameful and utterly weak situation as a prisoner, he fulfills a cosmically crucial commission as the administrator of the grace of God. In so doing, Paul wonderfully performs the same paradox as God's victory in Christ. Jesus Christ conquered the powers and authorities through his shameful and humiliating death on a Roman cross. because of God's upside-down logic, performances of God's triumph will inevitably involve displays of God's power through human weakness, loss, shame and humiliation." (p 110)

Reflection: Some thoughts on the cross on Good Friday

Here are some thoughts I have about the cross.

The radical notion of the Son of God dying for the sinful humanity on the shameful Roman cross as the atoning sacrifice is an extraordinary picture of divine participation in human suffering. The Christ-community's suffering is not something unfamiliar with the Creator God, for he allowed his own Son to be subject to ancient Rome’s brutality. The profound “mystery” of God sharing in human suffering has been revealed to us through a notorious object of Roman oppression, namely, the cross.

The identification of God’s Son as a weak and frail human being is at the same time his way of delivering humanity from sin and death, which is of course thoroughly counter-cultural - both in the ancient world and in the 21st century.

What a God we worship. And he calls us to follow him.

Lament as true prayer (Dr Diane Jacobson)

I find this an excellent way of describing lament and prayer in the Old Testament. The following quotes are taken from an article written by Dr Diane Jacobson in The Lutheran, July 2005.

We speak honestly of what we know. God meets us there.

"Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but that very Spirit intercedes with sighs too deep for words" (Romans 8:26).

I often think the sighs of the Spirit are heard most clearly in the laments of the Psalms. Praying the laments is difficult. But so often they are our deepest and truest prayers...

Some say God, in utter grace, allows us to express such lamentation until the time we can return to faithfulness. But I contend that the importance and truth of our laments goes much deeper: To lament is to be faithful.

The lament, more than any other form of prayer, speaks directly to God of the reality of suffering. And God knows when our prayers are true. (emphasis added)

Consider the book of Job. Job's speech is rife with lamentation. He rails against the Almighty, throwing the issue of suffering into God's face, begging for a relationship that speaks to the truth of his loss and pain. Job's friends are appalled by his words, which they deem unfaithful. The friends reason that humans should never question God's motives but, in all humility, should accept suffering as the righteous judgment of a just God...

But in contrast to his friends, Job refused to overlook the depth of his suffering. He refused to protect God from his despair. He refused to believe God wasn't active in the world. Perhaps most importantly, Job continued to speak directly to God, praying for justice, relief and comfort. True prayer, true speech to and about God, never uses theological platitudes to deny the reality of the world.

The power of the lament is this: We come to God boldly, directly, defenses stripped away, with nothing standing between us and the Almighty. Standing thus, we can do nothing but speak the truth from our depth. This isn't to say that we suddenly have right understanding, only that we speak honestly of what we know. God meets us there.

"Out of the depths I cry to you, O LORD. ... I wait for the LORD, my soul waits, and in his word !hope" (Psalm 130:1, 5).

True prayer, true speech to and about God, never uses theological platitudes to deny the reality of the world.

Click here for the full article.

Reflection: Some thoughts about power

Here is a recent reflection.

The notion that power is in and of itself not evil and that we can have power as long as we use it properly sounds good (and indeed is quite right). But the problem is that when we are in a position of power we can hardly understand what it is like to be powerless. (Or if we have experienced powerlessness before, we can quite easily forget about what it is like if we now have a lot of power.) This in turn means that we probably don't know how to use power properly. Paul's resolve to boast in his weakness in 2 Corinthians has much to say to us today.

Reflection: Powerlessness - The main players in the New Testament

The main players in the New Testament were mostly poor, marginalised, disadvantaged and/or powerless - either because it was simply their life situation, or that they had willingly given up their power and privileges. There was a leper and a crippled woman. There were women who followed Jesus from Galilee, and fishermen who gave up their possessions to follow him. And, most of all, we find Jesus in the New Testament, who died on the cross, which was a symbol of utter shame and Roman oppression (on its powerless victims!). Then we have the apostle Paul, who boasts of his weakness and suffering, because he wanted to follow his Saviour and Lord.

Let us enter their stories, and let them touch and transform our lives.

A young woman's story that will make you cry

Here is a young woman's story that will make you cry. It is about her father's dedication to the cause of Christ and her own experience in knowing Jesus. Her father's life and her own experience call us to worship and challenge our own lives.

Click here to view the video.

Weakness as true mark of Paul's apostleship - An example for Christian leaders to follow

I am reading Barry D Smith's Paul's Seven Explanations of the Suffering of the Righteous (New York: Peter Lang, 2002). Here are some good quotes about 2 Corinthians.

Paul would argue that he is not naturally weak; rather, God has made him weak by means of this "thorn in the flesh." (p 167)

In his view, God intentionally humiliated him in this way in order to give him a much-needed sense of the need of reliance on another power. (p 168)

The confession of his inherent incapacity is a pre-condition of the ingression of the power of Christ. The pedagogical effect of his "thorn in the flesh," therefore, is invaluable to Paul's apostolic ministry; his affliction prevents his entering into a state of illusory and unfruitful self-confidence, which would cut him off from the power of Christ. (pp 168-9)

Nothing succeeds like success in breeding self-confidence; self-confidence would not be self-confidence unless the self-confident one is convinced of the sufficiency of his innate abilities. According to Paul, however, there is no place in the apostolic ministry for self-confidence for reasons already stated. So when Paul experiences success in his ministry as the apostle to the gentiles, God strategically forestalls the natural movement to self-confidence occasioned by his success by enforced weakness, as well as by "insults, hardships, persecutions and difficulties." (p 169)

Thus, suffering functions to counterbalance the effects of success by reminding Paul that his success has not come from himself, but only through the power of Christ. As a result, he is in a position to appropriate that other power. This is the pedagogical benefit of suffering. (pp 169-70)

The apostles seem always to be on the verge of being overwhelmed by the suffering resultant from their commonness and fragility, and thereby of being rendered ineffectual, but are never actually overcome. It is this model of apostleship that Paul's residual opposition Corinthians find objectionable. they cannot fathom how men who are constantly teetering on the brink of personal collapse can be genuine apostles.

All human beings offer nothing to God. In Paul's view, the realization that this is the human condition is the single qualification for being an apostle. (p 174)

Were people in Paul's churches poor?

Last week I listened to a talk given by a respected scholar, who outlined some of the good work done by Dr E A Judge about the social setting of Paul's churches. He said a lot of good things, but I was a bit disappointed that he did not interact with other writers in the debate, especially the works written in the past 15 years or so. I think this is an important issue to discuss here.

Respected scholars like E A Judge, Wayne Meeks and Gerd Thiessen helpfully challenged the older notion that the earliest Christians were all destitute. They correctly suggested that some Christians in the earliest church were from a relatively more well-to-do economic background. But unfortunately today's church and even some scholars today have mistakenly taken the view that most of the Christians in the earliest church were "middle-class" (which, I believe, Judge, Meeks and Theissen did not say). In the following I want to clarify a few things.

(1) Tradespeople were hardly like today's middle-class professionals. It is true that people with a trade like carpenters, tent-makers and fishermen were relatively well-to-do, but it does not make them "middle-class". People like Peter, John and Paul might be literate. But it does not necessarily mean that they had a high social status. Indeed Peter and John had to "give up" a lot in order to follow Jesus, for they, being fishermen, would have had some material possessions. But we must remember that artisans (e.g. tent-makers and fishermen) did not belong to the upper classes. They were not destitute, but they were not wealthy either. They needed to work long hours, and often in tough conditions. They might be running a so-called "small business". But it's nothing like a small business in Australia. People like Peter, John, and indeed Jesus, were second-class citizens in the Roman Empire and had to pay taxes to the Romans. There was an underlying political, social and economic oppression that they had to live with everyday. A part-time tent-maker like Paul would hardly be able to survive financially. Although being a Roman citizen he did enjoy some privileges, it did not stop him from being jailed on various occasions. There were no laws or insurance to protect them from the risks of running a business. If there was a fire, it would be hard to recover the loss. If the main "bread-winner" (usually the father) was sick for a few weeks, the well-being of the whole family would be at risk. If there was a prolonged sickness or a bad injury in the family, their whole livelihood would be at risk. In fact, in many Roman cities, artisans (including doctors) were slaves. They were looked down upon because of their social status.

I myself grew up in an Asian city in the 1960's and 70's. It was quite a thriving city, with many migrants from the rural areas. It was similar to, for example, ancient Rome. My dad had a trade and was a small business owner. He had about three workers in his factory. But I can assure you that life was tough - very tough - for the family! We were a little bit better off than the workers in the factory. But we worked day and night, most days of the week, and we could only just make ends meet. My father is now retired, and his living standard is worse than most people in Melbourne today (although he's considered to be quite "successful" in life). Well-being should be measured in "real terms" - that is, the fact that Peter and John enjoyed a relatively stable lifestyle economically in their own social setting does not mean that their lives were easy or free from anxiety. And we must remember that they did give up their security to follow Jesus.

(2) Paul's request for a collection from the Corinthians does not mean that they had plenty of money. I have heard on several occasions that the fact that Paul asked the Corinthian Christians for a collection in 2 Cor 8-9 means that they were not poor. To me, this sounds like someone speaking out of a lack of experience in poverty. When I was a pastor I struggled financially. I found that those who had little money were often very generous. In fact, Paul just said in 2 Cor 8:2 that the Macedonians had given in the midst of their extreme poverty. It seems to me that Paul was expecting the Corinthians to be generous despite their poverty. It doesn't mean that the entire Corinthian community was destitute. In fact, if they were all destitute I am not sure whether Paul would say that they should give their very last penny to others. My point is that it is likely that many of the Corinthians were relatively poor (and some of them might be destitute) and belonged to the lower classes - just like many people in the urban cities in the pre-industrialised world. And Paul was saying that those who had some money and could do better than surviving should try to help another church that was poorer.

(3) Think about this statement: "The earliest church was run by people of high social standing, and they needed people like that to lead because otherwise nobody would listen to them." This is a statement made by some people (but not necessarily by the scholars mentioned above, as far as I know). But is this statement true? Yes and no. The first-century society in the Roman Empire was highly hierarchical. No doubt high social standing would be helpful. But it doesn't make it necessary for the church to grow through the help of people of high social standing. It is true that the literacy rate was low and hence by necessity it needed literate people like Paul to write the New Testament. But it doesn't mean that they deliberately adopted a "strategy" of using people of high standing to lead the church, even though that was probably what happened in practice. The church in China, for example, grew without many educated people during the 1970's and 80's. They needed no "people of high standing" to have people listen to them (in order to grow the church). The leaders had some education, for sure. But they did not have a high social status. They were poor and without any Western influence. But the church thrived nonetheless.

I am not suggesting that we don't need teachers in the church. I myself think that academic training in Biblical Studies - when done properly - is very important. But my concern is that we think that people with little or no education cannot contribute to the theology and ministry of the church. In aid and development it is well-known that the poor often knows what is good development. The West does not have all the answers. The rich and the poor are equal partners in poverty alleviation and in tackling the causes of injustice.

My concern is that the concern of Paul, I think. We see this in 2 Corinthians, for example. Power is a dangerous thing. Knowledge puffs up. We should let God's power work through our weakness. My humble personal opinion is that when we fail to focus on this (ie. God's power working in our weakness), we fail to understand the true meaning of the cross.

(4) Ancient non-biblical documents were often biased because they were written by people from higher classes. Their view of the poor was biased, for often they did not have a first-hand understanding of what it meant to be poor. My concern is that scholars can have an over-reliance on documents that had a biased view of the poor. My concern is also that if today's scholars do their theology from a safe and comfortable office or library without any first-hand knowledge of poverty and injustice, then they need to be aware that their research can be somewhat biased too. Paul, on the other hand, learned to live in want. As a former Pharisee and learned person, he would have been a respected member among his people. But he chose to to live differently. If we think that the earliest church was led by people of higher social standing such as people like Paul, we need to remember that the apostle himself had chosen to give up that social standing - see 2 Corinthians.

(5) We need to stop thinking that Paul's churches are like ours in the West today. Nor was his world like ours. In our Western society (e.g. Australia), we have the Bill Gates of the world (the very rich), the homeless people and the very poor, and those in the middle (me, my friends and colleagues). Those in the middle are doing not to badly, often with some kind of social welfare system as a backup, as well as emergency public health care. But in the ancient Roman cities it wasn't like this. The elite groups consisted about 1-3% of the population. About 20%-35% of the population of Rome, for example, were slaves or their descendants. These slaves might have food on the table, but their lives were not their own. Often they were used for sexual pleasures (applicable to women and young boys). At least some residents in Rome were destitute. There were several slums in Rome. The elite groups not only had a lot of wealth, they had political and social power as well. Those in the middle had no social welfare if some mishap happened to them. Many in the middle were not Roman citizens and by default had a lower social status (or "rank", some want to make that distinction). Basically if you do not belong to the elite or the upper-middle social groups, you are subject to injustice in a world where the rich and power well and truly called the shots. It is in this context that Paul's churches lived and in which Paul talked about financial giving and God's justice for the world.

(6) Finally, I want to say that the above doesn't tell us whether Christians are supposed to be poor or not. I think there is no simple answer to this question. A simple "yes" or "no" answer will not be satisfactory. I believe that we are all supposed to follow Christ's way of life, and Paul seems to endeavour to do that himself.

Coming back to the scholar I heard last week, I think he was right in many ways. My concern is more about how the audience would have understood him, and I hope the above can clarify a few things.

For those who are interested in the more recent scholarly debate, here is a list of interesting reading. I think few would disagree with what I said above.

J. J. Meggitt, Paul, Poverty and Survival (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1998).
Dale Martin, "Review Essay: Justin J. Meggitt, Paul, Poverty and Survival," JSNT 84 (2001).
Gerd Theissen, "The Social Structure of Pauline Communities: Some Critical Remarks on J. J. Meggitt, Paul, Poverty and Survival," JSNT 84 (2001).
Gerd Theissen, "Social Conflicts in the Corinthian Community: Further Remarks on J. J. Meggitt, Paul, Poverty and Survival," JSNT 25.3 (2003).
J. J. Meggitt, "Responses to Martin and Theissen," JSNT 84 (2001).
Steven Friesen, "Poverty in Pauline Studies: Beyond the So-Called New Consensus," JSNT 26, no. 3 (2004).
John Barclay, "Poverty in Pauline Studies: A Response to Steven Friesen," JSNT 26, no. 3 (2004).
Peter Garnsey and Richard Saller, The Roman Empire: Economy, Society and Culture (London: Gerald Duckworth, 1987).
Peter Oakes, "Constructing Poverty Scales for Graeco-Roman Society: A Response to Steven Friesen's 'Poverty in Pauline Studies'," JSNT 26, no. 3 (2004).
Peter Oakes, Reading Romans in Pompeii: Paul's Letter at Ground Level (London: SPCK, 2009).

(JSNT stands for Journal for the Study of the New Testament)