Preserving the animals!

They came in as pairs (Gen. 6:19) or the alternative is that clean ones came in as pairs of 7 (Gen.7:2), probably indicating that there are two base stories for the flood and the salvation of the world. Given that there are numerous flood narratives (a very famous one being the ‘Epic of Gilgamesh’) we don’t have to take every detail as being literal – but as stories to communicate. Maybe there is nothing deeper in the narrative than a story that explains why humanity and the animal world continue after the flood, but perhaps we see something of God’s concern for the animal world (now how many species have disappeared at the hands of those ‘made in the image of God’?).

There are two Scriptures that I know of that show something of God’s care for animals. In the narrative of Jonah and Nineveh we read of the sparing of Nineveh (was Jonah written to challenge the Jewish view of the nations?) and included in God’s sight are the (domestic) animals,

And should I not be concerned about Nineveh, that great city, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand persons who do not know their right hand from their left and also many animals? (Jonah 4:11).

A reference, almost hidden, in Mark’s account of the wilderness experience of Jesus includes a reference to animals, this time not to domestic ones but to the wild animals,

He was in the wilderness forty days, tested by Satan, and he was with the wild beasts, and the angels waited on him (Mk. 1:13).

The animal world was divided between the ‘clean’ and the ‘unclean’ and between the ‘domesticated’ and ‘wild’. The wild beasts, the ones that could never be tamed, the ones that spoke loudly of humanity’s inability to ‘subdue’ creation became symbols of the nations that resisted God’s design – hence ‘beasts’ that rise from the sea / land etc. And here they are in the wilderness with Jesus… in the wilderness the place that will blossom once the kingdom comes, and until then the abode of the demons. Jesus having confronted the three powers – shown by the three temptations of economic, political and religious power – subdues not simply domestic animals but even the wild ones.

In the wilderness, there is shalom, an order that eludes us. Heaven is present on earth, remarkably in the wilderness, and that presence brings an order to everything, so much so that the wild beasts act differently, echoing the eschatological passages of ‘wolves with lambs’,

The wolf shall live with the lamb; the leopard shall lie down with the kid; the calf and the lion will feed together, and a little child shall lead them (Is. 11:6).

Jesus sent out the disciples as ‘lambs among wolves’. Challenging, as there is the absence of self-preservation in the instruction, but if we are to see anything of the eschatological promises breaking in I guess self-preservation has to decrease.

God cares for what has been created and creation is there to teach us both to care for the wider world (Rom. 8) and also to provoke us to ‘subdue’ the ‘wild’ that threatens shalom. As Simon Swift wrote in the previous post:

As we leave the Garden of Eden to head into the wild. We should not hunger for a return to the garden, rather in the wild we should create a garden.

Should we really think that we can see a shift to the powers? Why not… if the cross is far more about cleansing, and keeping clean, the ‘temple’ of God in the earth so that heaven and earth meet not in a specific place on a specific date but in the wilderness of life, perhaps the ‘wild animals’ might just take note.

Carrying God’s image

Another article by Simon Swift on exploring humanity as in the image of God. I particularly liked, ‘As we leave the Garden of Eden to head into the wild. We should not hunger for a return to the garden, rather in the wild we should create a garden’.


In our modern understanding of history and science based fact which is supposed to be based on evidence rather than mythological story telling, we can lose a lot of depth of meaning that can be found in the biblical stories if you take them literally as fact. We have to remember myth does not mean untrue. The Genesis stories are a case in point; especially the first couple of chapters. I find in the creation stories deeper truths can be dug out if you don’t take them literally. It is especially helpful as our own world view changes from that of other generations and we can re-visit the stories to help us understand the world around us and ourselves. The suggestion that we are made in God’s likeness is profound and we would do well to take on board the implications of such a blessing. 

It suggests not so much that we look like God visually, rather we have a destiny within creation to represent God’s intent. I like how Tom Wright(* YouTube Video at the end of the post) advocates that it should not be seen as a static image but a dynamic one. We reflect God’s image into the world through what we do, the way we be, and how creatively we redeem the world through restorative justice. Now if you want a purpose in life I suggest that should be your number one choice.

Perhaps, the story of what we call the fall had to happen. How else would both Adam and Eve be able to tell the difference between good and evil? After all, it was the fact they did not know the difference that led them to eat the apple in the first place. They ended up with knowledge but not wisdom. They were, you could say, immature in how to use this new found knowledge and it led to discovering new emotions like shame and fear. They had to be sent on a journey out of the garden into the wild. Maybe it was God’s intent all along: We as humans have a life which is one big journey through a dark valley where we learn to live in his presence; and waiting for us is an overflowing cup.

Is this not similar to how we grow up, discovering the world is not as safe or as simple as we found it in childhood? Unfortunately we find it difficult to mature into the destiny of reflecting God’s image into the world. There seems to be within the knowledge of good and evil a corrupting temptation which we easily find attractive. The world is cold and dark without a light and so turning to self-preservation we lose sight of who we are as humans. Our ego is prone to make us think the world resolves around us, further drawing us into the trap of selfishness. Unable to see passed our own nose, we do not realise we are walking into the kingdom of death. We create a culture driven by exploitation and lose the delight of beholding creation and of the creator himself. The temptation is for power and control. We celebrate people with such power, we build ever taller towers in homage to it; it becomes our idol. We become owned by an empire based on death and our freedom can only be paid for by blood. Biologically we are human, yet our humanity shrinks in this kingdom of death. In this empire of power, humanity loses its meaning and worth. 

But there is hope. There is one who is fully human and has paid that price of blood. We can now leave behind the kingdom of death and enter into the kingdom of heaven. It is the way of the pilgrim on the narrow road. It winds its way through the dark valley and onward to the overflowing cup; it is still waiting for us. Perhaps it is this journey which gives each of our lives a meaning, finding connection again with the light of the world. A journey of encounter and exploration of God’s love based power. A rebirth into an eternal life connected to the spirit. It may seem counter-intuitive to give ourselves away as we make our way on this pilgrimage, but when we do we find we are filled again with the bread of life.

The challenge for us is to learn how to live immersed in the power of love and freely give that power away into a world run on empire power and death. Have we the courage to live creatively, bringing redemption into the world? The passion enough to see structures, institutions and philosophies stolen from the power of empire, redeemed and repurposed by the creative power of love?  Are we ready to suffer for a kingdom based on love when faced with the demands of the dominating power of empire? Perhaps maturity is to be found in living out a life of love power while still being in enemy territory; not escaping but subverting. 

As we leave the Garden of Eden to head into the wild. We should not hunger for a return to the garden, rather in the wild we should create a garden. Perhaps the wild is, and always was, waiting for us. Waiting for us to learn the way of love, maturing and using the knowledge of good and evil in wisdom. Let us take our destiny, purpose and inheritance as God’s image bearers and give life in all its glory a meaning. The story of Humanity and God is not finished, far from it. The exciting thing is, you and I are writing the story right now. How do you want your chapter to be written?

* N.T. Wright on What It Means To Be An Image Bearer

Seven Mountains… NO!

Jeff Fountain sends out a ‘weekly word’ and this week he explains that there is not a straight line from Loren Cunningham’s belief in engaging with the seven cultural spheres of influence and what is being taught today. He suggests the difference is essentially bottom-up or top-down. Control or serving. [This could be further explored as from within with a bias toward the marginalised?]

https://weeklyword.eu/en/top-down-or-bottom-up/

God or Mammon – Introduction

I have known Adrian for some 20 or so years, and he and Marion have given me hospitality on different occasions. Humble, smart and always wishing to be authentic. He recently posted on SubStack this article that he gave me permission to re-post here. The link at SubStack (which also gives a link there to follow his posts) is:

https://open.substack.com/pub/adrianslowedown/p/god-or-mammon-introduction?r=8d2x8&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true


God or Mammon – Introduction

This is the first in a series of essays exploring the how the architecture of our existence is shaped either by God or Mammon.

In 2005, I resigned from my position as a senior manager at one of the country’s leading retailers to take on the role of lead pastor at my local church. I had worked for Marks and Spencer for nearly 30 years, was 45 years old, and had felt called to serve in paid ministry since the age of 18. Now, one of my dreams was finally being fulfilled. In my mind, I was leaving the relentless, cutthroat commercial world to serve God and His people!

Looking back, in my naivety, I had failed to fully comprehend that the free-market ideology underpinning the cutthroat commercial world I had left behind held no respect for the imagined boundaries I believed existed between the sacred and the secular—the church and the world. As time went on, it became clear that the lifeblood of “buying and selling” coursed deeply through the veins of the many different forms of church. In truth, much of what I had thought of as “church”—local, national, and global—seemed gripped by the forces of commodity, commerce, and consumerism. Beneath the jargonized spirituality lay the acquisitiveness of the shopper and the shop, the client and the service provider!

Of course, it became starkly apparent that I hadn’t escaped its talons either. While taking some time out on retreat, ten years into my newfound ministry, it dawned on me that in many ways, I had remained a “shopkeeper,” focused on keeping my “customers” happy. I felt as though I was struggling to breathe under the mounting pressure to lead people into ever-new and greener pastures. During this time, I came to realize that the treadmill was less a material reality than an existential one—it lived within me, providing an overarching narrative that governed and judged not only my ministry but my life as well. Anxiety and fear gnawed at my calling, leaving me to wonder whether, as a shepherd of the flock, I could ever truly satiate the deep longing of those I led.

By the grace of God, while on retreat, I came across John chapter 6 and the story of Jesus’ challenge to Philip to feed the five thousand. “‘…He said to him, ‘Where shall we buy bread for these people to eat?’ He asked this only to test him…” (John 6:5-6). In short, Philip’s conclusion is that, however long he laboured (on the treadmill), he could never satiate the appetite of those who had gathered. You know the rest of the story! Jesus goes on to describe himself as the bread that comes down from heaven—sustenance and satisfaction without human labour and free from the notion of buying and selling.

My eyes were opened. To use the Apostle Paul’s words, my struggle was not merely with flesh and blood, but with principalities and powers that sought to govern, regulate, and codify not only my life but also the very essence of what it means to be human. A friend refers to these as “the faceless powers that seek to control and influence us.” I wonder—can we put a name to any of these faceless powers? I believe we can!

‘In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.’

Genesis chapter one, verse one, furnishes us, its readers, not just with an account of a God whose creative genius is of cosmic proportions, but also bequeaths us a vision of who God is. Yahweh, by nature, transcends the dark, chaotic mass of the material world and is revealed as the architect of a different reality—a bringer of light where there was darkness and order where there was chaos. His work is to create an architecture for existence—an environment that enables us as humans, God’s image-bearers, to flourish.

Everything has a beginning; all that was created had a starting point, an origin, and Yahweh is that person. The meta-narrative of the creation story teaches us that everything that exists has its origin in something or someone that transcends the material world. It is the transcendent that illuminates our way, brings order to our chaos, and gives shape, form, and meaning to our lives. To use the apostle Paul’s words, the world “in which we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28) finds its structure, definition, and purpose in the story of whichever ‘god’ we serve. The narrative of the Bible is that the very architecture of existence—what it means to be human and ‘do life’—is founded in the person of God.

Yahweh, the God of the creation narrative, is by His very nature a relational being. He is the Triune God—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Therefore, it is no surprise that the four primary pillars that support the perfect environment for human flourishing, that is for our living, moving, and having our being, are central in the creation story and that all are relational. First and foremost, though not standing in isolation from the other pillars, is our relationship with the transcendent—with God. Secondly, our relationship with ourselves—knowing myself. Thirdly, knowing one another—we are sociological beings. And finally, our relationship with the earth, the planet, the world, with which we have been entrusted. In the creation story, God constitutes reality by giving His order, shape, and purpose in and through relationships.

If, as it seems to me Paul suggests when he confronts Athenian idolatry, our living, moving, and being find their origin in the ‘god’ that we worship and serve, then it follows that both our individual lives and our collective life can be ordered, shaped, and empowered by ‘another god.’

Which brings us to the words of Jesus:

“No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and Mammon.” (Matthew 6:24)

Jesus’ words are profound, clear, and indisputable. We are faced with an ‘either or’ decision. There are two ‘gods,’ two voices that transcend our material world and potentially give purpose, structure, and definition both to our individual and collective ‘living, moving, and being.’ They configure the very framework [PF1] of our collective human existence. Unsurprisingly, they are described relationally, using the terms of love and devotion, and thus it is that both compete for our affection. Ultimately, there are just two ways the world can be ordered. There are just two masters calling for humankind’s fidelity. Humanity must elect to serve God or Mammon. By implication, our collective decision will have a radical impact on the four relational pillars of creation that we talked about earlier. How I understand and relate to myself, how I relate to my neighbour, and how I relate to the world in which I live—these relationships, which have been critical to human flourishing from the beginning, take their form from our worship. These are two opposing kingdoms, and each has an ideological and theological framework that dictates the structure—the architecture—of human existence. The altar at which we sacrifice delineates the architecture of our collective life.

After all, Jesus teaches us that the dwelling-place of God, heaven, is not an ‘otherworldly’ destination, an upward trajectory, or a future disembodied reality. Quite the opposite: it’s a downward trajectory, from heaven to earth. Not only does Jesus teach His disciples to pray, ‘Thy Kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven,’ but the apostle John also sees a ‘Holy City…coming down out of heaven.’ Both suggest that heaven’s design must affect the earth’s architecture. So, in His declaration, “You cannot serve God and Mammon,” “No one can serve two masters,” Jesus is suggesting that there are two principal ways in which life in the ‘here and now’ is ordered. There’s the order of God, heaven’s architecture, or alternatively, the world is organized and codified by an alternative transcendent personality, another ‘god.’ Just perhaps, there’s another potential superpower called ‘Mammon,’ enticing humankind into a relationship, ultimately demanding its own code of sacrificial devotion. When Jesus talks about Mammon, it seems to me He’s not merely referring to money—pounds and pence, dollars and dimes. I want to suggest He’s talking about a global social and cultural architecture, an ideology, and its power to systematically control us and the rest of creation – the four pillars of our shared life. This is a ‘god’ that not only exerts its power in shaping an economic vision—which, of course, controls us—but more than that, ‘Mammon’ fundamentally shapes human relationships. This other ‘god,’ like all ‘other gods,’ is by its very nature formational; its character is discipling. It configures our ecological, sociological, and psychological relationships—how we relate to the planet, the people around us, and perhaps most critically, it shapes our identity—our ‘self.’

This ‘either or’ that Jesus articulates is nothing new. There are a great number of Old Testament texts that allude to the need for a life-defining ‘either or’ decision. I’ll mention just three.

First, Moses in Ancient Israel. In the Sinai covenant, the practice of which finds its outworking in the book of Deuteronomy, Moses articulates a clear and decisive ‘either or’ that ancient Israel was faced with. The Ten Commandments call Israel to covenantal fidelity and the loving of their neighbour as self (Exodus 20:1-7). This text is part of the re-imaging of life post-Israel’s emancipation from Pharaoh’s predatory social, economic, and spiritual system in which they had been held captive in Egypt for over 400 years. In the passage, Moses seeks to fend off the “Canaanite” alternative that eventually seduced Israel away from their covenantal fidelity. The term “Canaanite” used in this context is not a reference to ethnicity but alludes to spiritual and socioeconomic [PF2] practices that dehumanize life by the process of commodification, turning neighbours into greedy competitors. They risk a return to the slavery they had been liberated from. Moses identifies the way of the covenant or the “Canaanite” alternative as an ‘either or,’ a “life or death” decision.

See, I have set before you today life and prosperity, death and adversity. If you obey the commandments of the Lord your God that I am commanding you today, by loving the Lord your God, walking in his ways, and observing his commandments, decrees, and ordinances, then you shall live and become numerous, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land that you are entering to possess. But if your heart turns away and you do not hear, but are led astray to bow down to other gods and serve them, I declare to you today that you shall perish; you shall not live long in the land that you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess. I call heaven and earth to witness against you today that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Choose life so that you and your descendants may live, loving the Lord your God, obeying him, and holding fast to him; for that means life to you and length of days, so that you may live in the land that the Lord swore to give to your ancestors, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob (Deuteronomy 30:15-20).

Moses makes this emphatic declaration because the “Canaanite” alternative appears to offer a life of ease, comfort, and security, when in truth its power is dehumanizing. Eventually, self, neighbour, community, and creation will fall prey to its destructive power.

Secondly, when, finally, Israel is settled in the land of promise, Joshua leads Israel in yet another ‘either or’ decision. He assembles Israel for a critical covenant-making ceremony where he presents his ‘either or,’ exhorting Israel to choose Yahweh, the God of life, and reject all alternatives. ‘Choose this day whom you will serve.’

Now, therefore, revere the Lord and serve him in sincerity and in faithfulness; put away the gods that your ancestors served beyond the River and in Egypt, and serve the Lord. Now if you are unwilling to serve the Lord, choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your ancestors served in the region beyond the River or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living; but as for me and my household, we will serve the Lord (Joshua 24:14-15).

And finally, one more example of an Old Testament text that echoes the words of Jesus as He talks about the ‘either or’ of God and Mammon—the prophetic contest on Mt. Carmel. This is where Elijah assembles Israel to hear yet another dramatic ‘either or’ when he says:

How long will you go on limping with two different opinions? If the Lord is God, follow him; but if Baal, then follow him. (1 Kings 18:21).

Elijah tells Israel they can’t have it both ways, saying it’s not possible to be faithful worshipers of God while assimilating the way’s of Ball, the god who embodies the world of commodity, productivity, and profit. They have to decide: who will they serve, God or Baal (Mammon)?

As we have already seen, Jesus stands in the same covenantal tradition as His forbears as He exhorts His listeners, including us, to make a similar ‘either or’ decision. In Christ, we too now stand in that same covenantal tradition and are being challenged to make a similar choice, ‘choose this day whom you will serve,’. And like in the day of Moses or Joshua, it’s a life-or-death decision. Who will we allow to give purpose, structure, and definition to our lives, both individually and collectively?

I am convinced that it is the spirit of Mammon that empowers postmodern capitalism’s ‘Machine’ [PF3] and fuels materialism and consumerism, creating a paradigm of reality defined by ‘things.’ Our consumer culture is driven by the myth of secularism—the idea that there is nothing more than stuff, that you are just stuff, so grab all the stuff you can before you die. This is the ‘god’ of commodification, and it is inherently dehumanizing. Mammon also ignites an obsession with progress—progress at all and any cost. Value is measured by productivity; we become monstrously performance-driven, and our worth is calculated based on outcomes. All this results in us all wanting more for less. This is a world order where accumulation is the goal, economic viability is the wise arbiter, people are assets or products, what they can do is more important than who they are, and so human beings become human doings. Mammon is the ‘god’ behind the ‘Machine’ and the author of objectification, disavowing us of our humanity by exchanging human dignity for utilitarian value. Under Mammon’s tyrannical reign, we humans are progressively dehumanized. As God’s image-bearers, we are demeaned, His image is diminished, and we struggle to flourish.

Mammon is more than an ideology; it’s theological. It assumes a transcendent status and is more akin to religion. The ‘Machine’ is a ‘god’ who doesn’t just require mental assent to a political or cultural idea but insists on soulish devotion and fidelity, often demanding sacrifice from followers enticed into servitude and spellbound by its promise of progress, anticipating the next breakthrough.

In this next series of essays, I am going to attempt to explore our contemporary culture’s social, economic, and spiritual enslavement to the tyrannical rule of Mammon. I aim to uncover the methodology of the dehumanizing stealth ‘Machine’ and how it has systematically degraded our vision of what it means to be fully human. I also hope to show that we are not without hope! The story of God, which culminates in the birth, life, death, resurrection and intercession of the God-man Jesus, makes the claim that it’s possible to make an Exodus from the tyrannical rule and enslavement to the powers of Mammon. And so, I also hope that we’ll unearth some of the ways the Gospel liberates us from the treadmill of the Machine.

I must say, I remain ever grateful for the gift of Walter Brueggemann. If you can be discipled by reading, he is my Rabbi. I am also deeply appreciative of the insightful, timely and prophetic perspectives of Paul Kingsnorth. Both Walter and Paul have been a source of inspiration for my writing.

Condemning?

While Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him, and he sat down and began to teach them. The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and, making her stand before all of them, they said to him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. Now in the law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” They said this to test him, so that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” And once again he bent down and wrote on the ground. When they heard it, they went away, one by one, beginning with the elders, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. Jesus straightened up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” She said, “No one, sir.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on do not sin again.” (John 8:1-11).

The mount of Olives… the place that was split in two. In the final week during the Passover it was where many Jews camped out as the city was full, and in this story one can see how it became a place where Jesus lays out a path that inevitably would call people to decide. Decisions on how we see people and therefore of course how we make judgements.

Jesus is challenged along the lines of faithfulness to the law with a woman caught in adultery being brought to him. The question that many have raised is of course blindingly obvious – and the man? Patriarchy… the woman is to blame and needs to be judged – interesting that Jesus reversed patriarchy in the Sermon on the Mount with responsibility laid firmly at the foot of the man – ‘if a man looks at a woman lustfully’. So right at the start of this story is a clash with patriarchy – and therefore misogyny.

In responding Jesus bought time. He bent down and put his finger in the dust, writing something there. I do honestly think he bought time, Jesus being the great teacher because he was the great learner. I suggest though something more than buying time is going on, his finger in the dust calls to remembrance that humanity is alive because of God’s great finger in the dust. Jesus gets in contact with the very essence of our being. If we do not get in touch with God and also with humanity it is unlikely we will be good learners no make good responses.

Humility – we are all of the same stuff, and not here lording it over one another.

Then we come to the final Jesus’ comment…. ‘Neither do I condemn you’. Not ‘I don’t condemn you provided you get your act together’. Would he have condemned the man?

I think he saw the woman, the real woman, her core and as he came not to condemn humanity, neither does he condemn her. And at the same time releases an impartation, an energy for the future.

Wow… what a radical approach, and we wonder why there is no impartation with our (oft) default approach.

And we are justified?

For the past few years I have been interested in what took place during the Roman war in the province of Palestine in 66-70AD/CE. It ended in horrendous tragedy with at times 500 captured Jews being crucified in a day by the walls of Jerusalem; with reported cannibalism inside the besieged city; with bodies of those who had died in the city being thrown over the walls into the valleys outside (including the valley of Gehenna). Inside over those years there was a battle to keep faith alive – faith that God would deliver the city, for after all they were a covenant people, and there right in the city was the Temple the place where the God of heaven dwelt with them. The prophets were essential to keep that faith alive. The might of Rome… no hope of survival, but God, but the prophets, but if only they keep the faith. And then in 68CE the Romans withdraw as Rome goes into a major crisis with civil war and the ‘year of the four emperors’.

Keep the faith. I told you so – God comes through.

Alas a temporary victory.

The danger is always we lose sight of the bigger narrative and this is clearly what took place in Jerusalem, for the bigger narrative centred on Jesus, and perhaps they lost the sight of the bigger picture of God’s love for the world.

Of course claiming that one has a bigger narrative is something that can only be done tentatively, for even those with incredible sight ‘see in part’. So hoping that what follows contains a considerable element of tentativity and is also read in that light let me suggest a few aspects that might be applicable for us in the West.

  • When we centre hope for change in any government we have lost sight of the pivotal chapters of Revelation, that a slain Lamb, and only a slain Lamb can open the scroll of human destiny. And it behoves us to ‘follow the Lamb wherever he goes’.
  • That path of the Lamb was one that withstood the powers of religion, economic oppression (the biblical prophets say that such oppression is bloodshed and the Scriptures say nothing can atone for bloodshed), and perverse political power. That still is the path.
  • We cannot ‘other’ those who change the nature of the population of a land – Scripture attributes a change to the failure to steward land. The prophets in Jerusalem knew who the enemy was – the Romans, and failed to see / acknowledge that the problem lay elsewhere – the very claim that ‘we have God’ being problematic in the extreme.
  • Jesus came in the spirit of Jeremiah with his denunciation of the city, because of what he found in the Temple (den of robbers). He disturbed the economic system, that could be justified as serving the sacrificial system, as he exposed a deeper motivation within it.
  • The Jeremiah prophets who call us to pray into the shalom of Babylon – this is not a time to pray into the shalom of our ‘Israel’. [‘Our’ Israel – as Israel is another Babylon, but we create Israels that suit us.]

What lies ahead in the coming few years? Trauma for sure. Trauma that will be heard in the cry of the land (nothing prophetic there as global temperatures rise and as planet and people are exploited for economic gain by the few). And beyond that, unless something changes, we will find that literal armed conflict will be present in the lands that have been privileged to enjoy peace – to be clear ‘war’.

Unless something changes… the body of Christ has to wake up that Christendom is over – and it has to be over if the Gospel is to make a difference in our world. That we lose the desire for something to happen that has the word ‘again’ in it. The future is the air we are to breathe, that future based on what has always been seen – a new heaven and a new earth where there is no more death, nor weeping. The Christian faith is much more than a philosophy or an ideology – it is air (or if you like Spirit) from another age – that blows through everything.

The future is challenging – leaving behind the supposed safety of what has been; relocating; experiencing ‘both growing together’ side by side. The past repeated is a downward spiral, the future could be the embrace till there is no other.

Give me a title

By default we are so accustomed to describe biblical writers as (e.g.) ‘the apostle Paul’ thus both giving him a title and therefore authority. Jesus in critiquing the scribes and Pharisees stating that they ‘take the seat of Moses’ (position of authority above others) says that in contrast those who follow his path are to be careful to shun titles that support hierarchies.

But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers and sisters. And call no one your father on earth, for you have one Father, the one in heaven. Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Messiah. The greatest among you will be your servant. All who exalt themselves will be humbled, and all who humble themselves will be exalted (Matt. 23:8-12).

In Luke’s Gospel he describes himself as ‘one among you’:

But he said to them, “The kings of the gentiles lord it over them, and those in authority over them are called benefactors. But not so with you; rather, the greatest among you must become like the youngest and the leader like one who serves. For who is greater, the one who is at the table or the one who serves? Is it not the one at the table? But I am among you as one who serves (Luke 22:25-27).

Shaped by the age to come… living within this age… the tension is present, but we have to live from the age that has been inaugurated by Jesus. Titles… They have to be pushed away; hierarchies have to be resisted; gifts and callings respected – but they cannot be allowed to obscure ‘you are all brothers and sisters’ and we have to be ‘among’ one another.

Paul: an apostle. He was clear as to who he was called to be. In prison he does not write as ‘Paul, a prisoner, apostolic call temporarily on hold till I get out of here and demonstrate my authority’. If he was the apostle Paul he would be above everyone and the title would give him authority, but because he was an apostle he now was accountable to live up to that calling.That would place him under authority/ the authority of heaven, the accountability to heaven.

When pushed to tell a story of his heavenly encounter (2 Cor. 12) he uses less-than-veiled language that makes it clear that he is writing about himself. How does he describe himself?

I know a person in Christ.

A person in Christ! This is why he ends in some measure of internal conflict. He defends himself and claims he is not lesser than the ‘super-apostles’. As I read it he seems to be unclear if he has done the right thing in describing his experience, but what remains clear is he is (simply) a person in Christ. No title can replace or improve that description.

To be in Christ, to be among and alongside others who are in Christ; to be Christ to one another.

There is coming a revolution. There always has been a revolution, for the democratisation of the Spirit at Pentecost has effected that revolution (‘all flesh’ and particularly the margins mark Pentecost) so that all can hear the voice of heaven in their language. The Spirit and the democratic revolution; our resistance exemplified by the pedestals that we create. The revolution is picking up speed and momentum. Discrediting is here and will cast a wider net resulting in babies thrown out with bath water. The revolution will increase and ‘these signs’ will follow. Yes, perhaps, those who are living the life of ‘an apostle’ might need to be present at times (Dorcas is raised from the dead by Peter though she died in a community that was acquainted with the miraculous) to keep the bar raised high, but if they come with their title, let’s not be surprised when we are disappointed.

The titles, and the positions – and by positions I also mean our self positioning with respect to others – let them go; ‘persons in Christ’, let us connect with the revolution.

Try this for an approach

I entitle this web site ‘Perspectives’ as we often develop when we see something from a different angle. I recently read an article from Keith Giles (https://www.patheos.com/blogs/keithgiles/) with the opening paragraphs as below. And thought – need to read those a few times more. A perspective…

The story of Adam and Eve in the Garden is a metaphor. I don’t believe it actually happened, but I do believe it gives us way of understanding how and why we sometimes struggle with this simple truth of Oneness and Connection with God and one another.
Here’s what I mean: The first people – Adam and Eve – were created in an original innocence where they experienced absolute Oneness with God and each other. Eve was even pulled out of Adam, which suggests that the two of them were once both inhabiting the same body before experiencing that separation process.
The ultimate separation for them came when they ate of the Tree of Good and Evil. This is a metaphor of duality. Once they eat from it they experience a form of spiritual death where they can only see and reason from a place of good/bad, right/wrong, us/them, etc. This is what shatters their ability to see and experience their original Oneness with God and each other.
This story is the perfect metaphor for our own personal experience as human beings. We are born with an original awareness of our Oneness with God and humanity. But, at some point early on in our development, we begin to observe how the world around us operates on this system of good and evil, right and wrong, us and them; the illusion of separation seeps into our consciousness and we are suddenly cast out from the Garden when we lose that original awareness of connection with all things.

Library of Two Shelves

Another article by Simon Swift – wonderful thoughts and perspectives shaped by his own journey. And I am sure very helpful in your (and my) journey. A journey that will not end… Enjoy!


There’s this library contained in one book, known as the Holy Bible, it has just two shelves. The first, is full of poetry, historical accounts, prophetic writings, and some self-help books. The second, is newer and contains eye witness accounts of the life and times of a man known as of Jesus, along with apocalyptic writings, the history of the early movement that came about because Jesus and a bunch of letters written by leaders of the Jesus movement. At the centre of these assorted texts is the story of a people and their god.

But there is a problem, it seems there are two gods. One for the first shelf and another one for the second. It has, when people have claimed as much, caused controversy. The majority of those that use this library for their spiritual life generally don’t agree with the idea of two gods. Yet they can still find it difficult to reconcile the differences that seem to be in the descriptions of God. So what are the different perceptions and is it irreconcilable?

On the first shelf we have accounts of the early history of the people we call the Hebrews or Jews. They came about because of promises by God to a man called Abraham, who is considered the father of their nation. These promises form an ongoing relationship, that include curses should the people fail to be faithful to that relationship. When they fail, bad things happen including removal from the land they were promised. It’s not surprising then that we can view their god as an authoritarian god of power able to crush empires. If you obey, you are rewarded. If you cross him, you are punished. The enemies of the Hebrews will be crushed by the god of empire power.

On the second shelf we begin to find not only a new description but a new relationship possible with God. The first four books are an account of a teacher, prophet, and Messiah called Jesus, he describes God as Father and in turn he is described as God’s son. His message is: we should not live in fear of God, but run to him with open arms as a child. We are to see him as provider and a redeemer wanting to set us free from authoritarian power. God on this shelf is the god of love power.

Look closely on the first shelf, at the stories of God and his interaction with humans you might just find that it is the same god that you read about in the books on the second shelf. In the very first book, the book of beginnings, we find that he creates man and woman, called Adam and Eve, and we find them living in a garden. In that garden there is a fruit tree of good and evil. If you eat its fruit you will have your eyes open. God warns them not to eat it; but of course being human they do. And on the surface as we read the story it seems that God does punish them with eviction from the garden and a few curses to boot. However, one of the first thing God does is to help the hapless couple, who on eating the fruit realise they are naked and become frightened, feeling ashamed for the first time. So what does God Do? He makes them clothes. Is that the act of an authoritarian god or a father’s reaction to the needs of his children?

Adam and Eve are children who must mature to be able to judge between good and evil. To do that they must set out from their sanctuary, to learn how to deal with this new knowledge. They need wisdom; Knowledge on its own if not enough. You have to experience love, and that comes from relationships. So we need the father of love not the one of control.

What other books on this first shelf have examples of God the father? What about the exodus and the need for food. Here we find God providing manna each morning. How does he deal with the pregnant Hagar when she fleas from her mistress into the wilderness? What other places does God act and advise that are more relational than authoritarian?

As we move to the second shelf we find books of a different nature and in particular the stories of Jesus who is called God’s son. We find Jesus looks to show the love of the father and the parable of the prodigal son is one of the best descriptions of God as father. His treatment of the people who are in need speak of compassion and care. He calls people back in to the family of Abraham. But he has condemnation for those in authority whose only desire is to exploit.

Later after his death and resurrection, new communities begin to be created. When it comes to Paul of Tarsus we are often given the picture of man in authority of the communities he is planting. Yet look closely at his urging and advice; you will see him passionately encouraging his people to mature in wisdom. This means understanding their new status as sons (and daughters) of an inheritance, that they now belong in the kingdom of Heaven where love is the ultimate power.

On the first shelf, In the stories of the Hebrews entering into their promised land it is shocking to read of the amount of violence and ethnic cleansing that goes on. Is this the god of empire? It seems that many nations and tribes have over the centuries opted for such a god. Even Christendom reflects such a position despite its claims of allegiance to Christ. If we can look closer even on this shelf we can find a different god, one who reflects the god Jesus calls God the Father. A god of relationships who wishes to reach out to us.

Through the blood of Jesus we have been brought into a relationship with God. This is where justice is served, in a new covenant. His act of going to the cross for us is the final critic of empire and its power. It is where love defeats death and gives us hope.

So when we read the books on the first shelf let us be influenced by Jesus’ revelation of who God is. Let it temper our reading of the first shelf lest we fall into the trap of hating those not like us or simply do not fit in with our world view. At this time in our history we need the God who’s power is Love.

Perspectives