A new book

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Personal Perspectives

I had a note yesterday about a new book that will be out in May by Greg Boyd & M. Scott Boren (no relation!) entitled ‘God looks like Jesus’. The back cover apparently has a brief summary as follows:

In the past several decades, a grassroots global movement has people rediscovering a Jesus-looking God who is raising up a Jesus-looking people to transform the world in a unique, Jesus kind of way. 

The three elements are so succinct and I wish I had come up with them:

  • A Jesus-looking God

I think so many of us have a sneaky suspicion that parts of God looks like Jesus, but there are some ‘tough’ parts that Jesus did not show us… and even in one movement that crept into the charismatic world and also the Reformed world was that such instructions as we find in the Sermon on the Mount to ‘turn the other cheek’ are only temporary instructions for the day will come, in the future… and because the movement was post-millennial, in this age when that instruction will not apply. Far from turning the other cheek we will be the ones admonishing people and we will be the ones who ‘strike them on the cheek’!!

But God is like Jesus – the fullness of deity dwelt in Jesus, to see Jesus is to see the Father. The cross becomes the meeting point for humanity and deity precisely because the life offered there was none other than truly the God and the human life. The cross is not the appeasement of wrath / payment but the point of reconciliation – as I have oft quoted ‘God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself’.

God did not send Jesus into the world to condemn the world; the ‘delay’ in the parousia is so that none might perish (we have to allow that to modify any exclusivist view that only those like me will be saved!).

  • A Jesus-looking people

Oh… this is the challenge. Orthodoxy has reigned supreme – do I believe the right things; orthopraxy has been left aside – my actions, my responses. Or when I have acted it has flowed from what I believe rather than seeing the person. That is why a percentage of ‘evangelism’ is not ‘good newsing’ it but approaching others as others and inferior. which leads to:

  • A Jesus kind of way

I am convinced at the centre of the good news is that through the crucified one the transformation of all creation is announced. But a Jesus kind of way. Recently I had some dialogue around The Lord of the Rings and the character Borrowmier who had a goodish heart and motivation but wanted the ring to bless others. To use power for good! That one cuts deep and I have been convinced for the past couple of years that this is where the Spirit is drilling deep among us.

The Jesus way. I am still working my way through on the legitimacy of using power (I think primarily of political and economic, but also need to include gender, class and race) for good. Jesus’ kingdom was not of this world… a Jesus kind of way.

The three points from the book are where it is at. We have to move on from views of God that owe more to pagan philosophy (the unmoved mover, omnipotence, omniscience etc) to the Jesus-lens. We have to become guilty of resembling Jesus – would my neighbours ‘accuse’ me of that? BTW – that was one of the Pauline requirements for leadership among the people of faith! And cleansed of ‘we have the power’.

I hope the book is good… for sure the agenda of the above three points remain, have always been in the foundations but are being examined in this season by the Holy Spirit.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Read on… and on…

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Biblical Observations

OK so into Numbers as far as my OT reading takes me this morning (with a splash of Psalms and Proverbs that help the medicine go down!). Here is a sample this morning – feel free to read:

On the twelfth day Ahira son of Enan, the leader of the Naphtalites: his offering was one silver plate weighing one hundred thirty shekels, one silver basin weighing seventy shekels, according to the shekel of the sanctuary, both of them full of choice flour mixed with oil for a grain offering; one golden dish weighing ten shekels, full of incense;  one young bull, one ram, one male lamb a year old, for a burnt offering;  one male goat for a purification offering;  and for the sacrifice of well-being, two oxen, five rams, five male goats, and five male lambs a year old. This was the offering of Ahira son of Enan (can be found in Numbers 7).

The previous verses are a list of who did the same thing on days 1 – 11. They all gave the same offering, then at the end the offerings are totalled… I could well do without reading all of that, and if it were voted out of our Bible I would not be found mourning. Made me think.

It is partly ‘boring’ cos it has nothing to do with my history and we can easily get bored with something that has nothing to do with our personal history; it also makes no connection to my world – all that ritual is a world away. But I also realise that I have been brought up to find a verse (two verses of course make it even more convincing) that defend my views, in other words my reading has been shaped by ‘proving me to be right’. It is said that the people who read most reviews of (and view most adverts for) a product are those who have just bought it – they want to be convinced they have made the right choice. I think sometimes Bible reading can be like that. I read until I find what I agree with, or rather what agrees with me.

We are quite removed from reading the Bible as narrative but I am convinced we need to get back to that. Having said that I am not sure I will ever do a jig around the apartment when reading Numbers chapter 7 in the future… but might be more comfortable with what I don’t know. Maybe…

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Patriarchy – challenging to write as male

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Theology

I appreciated the feedback on Romans 13 and the requirement to ‘submit’ to the powers. One of the comments that came in was focused on another biblical requirement of submission – namely that of women to men, with a note on the current context where in different ways a renewed emphasis is being placed on patriarchy mascarading as masculinity. Defining ‘femininity’ or ‘masculinity’ can be problematic and I think so it should be.

Let’s hit a major issue head on. Jesus was male. Jesus was Jewish. We could interpret that to mean to be male and to be Jewish is to be more in the image of God than to be female and non-Jewish. To assume that leads to a challenging conclusion, particularly when there is ‘neither Jew nor Gentile, slave nor free, male and female’, so even if the above assumption is made (male and Jewish is closer to God-likeness) there is an awesome change through the resurrected Jesus. I also come at the male / Jewish aspect with an assumption. Jesus, sinless, comes in sinful flesh and ‘all have sinned’ but the sin of male and Jew is where it is focused. That is not to make either males nor Jews greater sinners, but what has been acted out since creation has been the sin of dominance by males (patriarchy), and that Jesus first dies for the nation (John 10:51) to break the ‘curse of the law’ from Israel so that the blessing of Abraham might not be blocked but might come to Gentiles (Gal.3:13). In other words, Jesus as male and as Jewish is not a sign pointing to God but a sign pointing to the plight of humanity.

In this age belong, biological sex, covenantal marriage and singleness. In the age to come there will be no more marriage (and therefore no more sex) for covenant will be a living experience between all who are redeemed. I cannot pull forward a Bible verse – and that often leads us to suggest something that agrees with our view but abrogates the biblical narrative in the process – but I strongly suggest that Jesus is no longer male (or maybe no longer exclusively male). He continues as human for the firstborn of all (new) creation is the one to pull all redeemed humanity to its destiny.

I am reading back in Leviticus (finished this morning – always a sigh of relief when that happens!) and again today noted the difference in value for redemption of the male and the female. It is (for me) not possible to get away from the patriarchial bias of many of the OT laws – reflecting the culture, and yet (thankfully) an improvement to the culture of the day. That ‘improvement’ runs through Jesus, the Easter Event and on into new creation, and that ‘improvement’ takes creation to its fulfilment, that being the reason why Paul makes the grammatical change in the Galatian 3 text of Jew / Greek, slave/free. Grammatically he could have gone on to write ‘and neither male or female’ but he breaks the expected language with ‘no longer male and female’, a quotation from the Genesis record of creation regarding humanity in the image and likeness of God. There is a fall in Genesis, but perhaps not the ‘hard’ fall of sin (guilt) but of taking a path that would never be the path to maturity… one repeated by Israel.

Submission… wives to husbands – so clear but what is the significance of the language when there is not a ‘submit’ word in that verse (Ephesians 5:22) but that in verse 21 there is the ‘submit’ word with the instruction to ‘submit to one another’ with the added phrase ‘in the fear of Christ’. No submission because of a creational aspect – biological, nor related to birth – nationality, nor cultural – social. New humanity in Christ and the inter-relatedness of one another – WOW!

Yes there are texts that call for submission in Paul… Those instructions are contingent based on the situation and into the Graeco-Roman world which was very fearful about women not being faithful to the gods of the Empire. Plutarch (b. 46AD/CE) said:

A wife ought not to make friends on her own, but to enjoy her husband’s friends in common with him. The gods are the first and most important friends. Wherefore it is becoming for a wife to worship and to know only the gods that her husband believes in, and to shut the door tight upon all queer rituals and outlandish superstitions. For with no god do stealthy and secret rites performed by a woman find any favour.

All directive texts calling for submission within the household can (and I consider should) be read as moving the culture forward without making an absolute break that would leave no bridge in place… in other words not the final word but the missiological word.

So here I go, writing as a male, with huge blind spots and shaped by my culture, but I consider that the renewed emphasis on ‘the restoration of masculinity’ will not bring us closer to new creation. This is why we have to go beyond signing up to all ‘again’ messages. The path ahead is challenging, but we have the trajectory that we can follow through the Jesus’ lens. And I suggest that there is a focused battle now (as has always been) on ending the culture of patriarchy. Should that go we will find a leverage point has been found that will accelerate the momentum of the new creation manifesting in our midst.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Submit to the powers!

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Theology

Romans 13 ‘be subject to the governing authorities’ is a great text when the powers that are in place are ones that we favour! When they are not we are likely push for their removal… Surely that indicates that we do not have here a carte blanche text endorsing all authority as an extension of God. Totalitarian governments? North Korea? (And some closer to home?)

[My OT readings are in the Pentateuch for now… laws upon laws… not simply ‘spiritual’ laws (they are the minority) but social governmental laws. Societal behaviour – care for neighbour, extended by Jesus to ‘the enemy’ – lies at the heart of it… hence it is no surprise that the prophetic critique of Israel was as much at a social as a spiritual level, and no surprise that the ‘Gospel’ finds its context in the Roman world that was forever proclaiming ‘good news’ with ‘peace on earth and good will to all’.]

Here is the Romans 13 text:

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct but to bad. Do you wish to have no fear of the authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive its approval, for it is God’s agent for your good. But if you do what is wrong, you should be afraid, for the authority does not bear the sword in vain! It is the agent of God to execute wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be subject, not only because of wrath but also because of conscience. For the same reason you also pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s agents, busy with this very thing. Pay to all what is due them: taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.

And why not first apply this to Jesus, who was executed as a criminal by the state / empire. Do what is good, Jesus, and you will be approved… oh no you must have been doing something bad cos we cannot see how you were approved by the authorities (God’s appointed ones) for they brought out the sword.

And what about Paul, bad rebel as he was, being imprisoned? He did not sit in prison saying ‘God put me here for those authorities are enacting the will of God’! He always found a way of cooperating with God, he was focused on doing what was right in the eyes of God, and understood where he was being punished unjustly that he was living out the cruciform life-style there.

Paul’s letters are contingent – they are into a situation and he is writing here to the Roman believers who are based in the centre of the Empire – a system of government that he was proclaiming that there was an eternal alternative in the kingdom (basileia – same word for empire) of God with Jesus as ‘Lord’. His message was not firstly understood as a private call to raise one’s hand and pray a prayer but as a political (and therefore economic) message, and an-anti Rome one at that (‘they proclaim another King’).

There is a measure of irony in the passage, for Nero, was praised as one who brought peace without the need for the sword. This was the Nero who had already expelled the Jews from the city (52CE under Claudius – see Acts 18:3), was later to blame the Christians for the fire and was responsible for the deaths of both Peter and Paul in the capital.

Paul was not averse to challenging the Roman authorities and he certainly did not give them the right to do whatever they took upon themselves to do. From the overarching challenge of the political (as well as cosmic) term that ‘Jesus is Lord’ to his deeply provocative insistence that he would not leave the prison until the Roman delegated authority came and apologised to him and Silas (Acts 16:37). He did not complement them with ‘you are such an example of the extension of God’s justice’ but required that they apologise.

[Alongside and interwoven with irony we might also have various quotes that Paul is using without a total endorsement of them. Not uncommon in the rhetoric style of the day.]

In it all, with or without irony, there are deeply practical applications into a specific setting. ‘Pay your taxes’ is deeply practical (Rom. 13:6). Rome was forever needing money, in the early years Nero lowered the taxation level but by the time Paul wrote (57CE) there was the beginning of unrest due to increased taxation. This increased in the immediate years that followed bringing about major clashes with the authorities. We have practical advice as to what battles to fight. This is common place in the NT – Jesus (who was God and therefore protected regardless!!) did not go to Judea for they ‘were seeking to kill him’ (Jn.7:1) and ‘hid himself’ for the crowd had picked up stones to throw at him (Jn. 8:59). Wisdom and an understanding of time (long term transformation) is needed and can modify our response at any given time. Jesus, and those who followed, did not simply behave in a way where their lives were taken from them but they laid their lives down – timing was the key.

We have many other instances of disobedience in Scripture – the Egyptian midwives who did not kill the sons being born… and even lied, but had God’s approval!; Jesus not being handed over as a baby to the powers; Mordecai et al. The theme with regard to earthly authorities is summed up in the apostolic statement that ‘we must obey God rather then any human authority’.

And central to our faith is the breaking of the Roman seal on the tomb of Jesus. Truly an act of God,and one that forever established that earthly authorities are temporary. The birth of the new era is marked by the relativising of all authority – the ultimate political act of disobedience. In this Roman passage we also have the relativising of authority – if they are in some way related to God then they are accountable to act in a godly way.

To use Romans 13 (7 verses) as a universal and absolute theology of ‘submit to the powers’ is to abuse the passage and to ignore the wider context – both in this letter (‘do not be conformed to the spirit of this age’) and the canonical context – try another chapter 13, such as Revelation 13… appointed by God or a ‘beast’ in opposition to God?

Christianity (a modern term) will never make a good state religion; and followers of Jesus can never put their hope in the government (why on earth… on earth being a good term to use here… did Paul use / adopt the term ekklesia for the communities within the empire that expressed faith in the resurrected Jesus?).

If I insist on ‘obedience’ to the powers when they suit my preference, but work and pray for their removal when they are not in line with my bias I am indeed simply being subject to this age (Rom.12:2 – the wider context for these verses).

By all means have political leanings. I do. Have wisdom where to resist (though not with violence against people); have a long term vision. Do not give up hope. And when we do what is right we should not be surprised that we are marginalised or punished – by the governing authorities. That is something the Pauline and biblical corpus would agree with, hence we cannot make what Paul wrote, here in Romans 13, something to be implemented at face value.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

The Father, The Wayward Son and His Brother

Posted on
by Simon Swift
Posted in Biblical Observations

Simon Swift’s latest guest post, using  the ‘prodigal son’ parable to talk about what inheritance means for us.

Jesus was very good at using stories to point to spiritual truths. He was able to pack many layers of wisdom into his stories. Like Gold miners we can dig and dig into these parables and keep revealing more truth each time. Of course we have to have a good idea about how the original hearers understood the stories least we miss what he was trying to say to us. None the less because they are stories we can still find rich seams of truth in our own times. One such story is the Prodigal Son and in particular the strange case of the complaining elder brother and how the father makes a remarkable reply.

First we have to make a note of what we mean by inheritance. We are not here, taking about inheriting a large amount of money from some distant aunt and then spending it on a world cruise or something. We are talking about passing on a legacy from one generation to the next. It’s about family, and land that will pass from one generation to the other, each building on previous forefathers work. We tend to think of it as having to wait until our parents die before we can enter into the inheritance. That is why we see the impatient younger son ask for his inheritance now; today please. Surprisingly, the father gives him his inheritance and off he goes to squander it. Just maybe the later conversation with the eldest son gives us a clue as to why he so readily agrees.

Most of us know the story well; if you don’t you’ll find it in the gospel by Luke chapter 15:11. When the younger son after running out of money, returns and makes a plea to his father to allow him back home as a hired hand, he is humbled by his experience and understands he does not deserve anything more. His father has a completely different perspective, seeing him as lost even dead. With the return of his son he is eager to restore him fully to son-ship and therefor inheritance, celebrating because he has been found and is alive. The fattened calf is to be prepared, slaughtered for a celebratory feast; but the story does not end there.

Almost seeming like an add on, the eldest brother makes his appearance for the first time. He is not happy, complaining about how his father is reacting to the return of younger, no good brother. It would seem he has a point and to us today we would be forgiven for wondering why this part was added on to the story, was it even needed?

Lets look at it from the older brothers perspective. His resentment and refusal to join in the celebrations shows us something about his attitude towards his place in the family. First he complains that he is working like a slave then points out he has never disobeyed his father and even moans that he has never been given a young goat for feasting with his friends. He sees his position as not much better than his wayward brother does. Looking for a reward in the future he is obedient to the father. In other words he is playing the role of a hired hand, a slave.

It is a remarkable answer that his father gives him: That all is his. His inheritance is in the now, in partnering with his father; not in working for him as a hired hand; not so he to could squander it partying away; but to grow the estate and be part of the blessing that would come with it, saying, “Every thing I have belongs to you.”*

There is a wonderful connection between ourselves and God. It is a relationship of father and son. Not only do we become part of his inheritance, we also share in the inheritance as God’s children. Rather then see Jesus as the second Adam We should see him as the first in the new age. The first Adam in the new heaven and earth and we too, get to inherit this new earth. Perhaps we must be like the prodigal son and return home, or maybe we are like the eldest and need to realise we are not a hired hand, waiting for a reward.

The earth, the whole of creation is made and realised by God’s word. Manifested out of his desire that pours out from his great power of love. If we are children of God then we are heirs, co-heirs with Jesus, and we can enter into that inheritance today. Partnering with the spirit to build the estate, manifesting the new heaven and earth.

Yet we have sold our inheritance for the desire for material objects on the one hand and for our need to control on the other. Like the younger son in the parable, we chose to cash in our inheritance and go party. We squander the riches of the earth. We turn to consumerism to fill the empty spaces in our lives that should be filled with eternal life. Or like the eldest we fail to see passed his own nose. We build standards that no one can reach and drink in energy from judging other when they don’t. We lose out on the blessings of compassion and instead build power bases of control. In our desire to become gods we starve ourselves of light.

The new age, the new heaven and earth are to be brought into our lives now. Each day whether prodigal son or older brother, we can enjoy the new age by simply having a father-son relationship with our creator. Whether we are out in the fields working or celebrating a returning son or daughter, we are actively inheriting the new age. That means we have to live the new age, the kingdom of heaven life today.

*Quotes of the story from Tom Wright’s translation: The New Testament for Everyone.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Of the increase…

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Theology

What days we are in. The West has dominated for centuries but the writing is on the wall as to the coming to the end of its dominance. A relentless movement to the East is underway. All ‘Babels / Babylons’ (same word in Hebrew) will prove to be projects that do not complete; the promised kingdom is one that ‘never ends’ and that accords with the use of the word eschaton for the kingdom. As far as I am aware we do not have the alternative word telos used of the kingdom. Jesus is the telos (destination and end) of the law, but of the increase of the government of heaven there is no end.

I have been looking a little into the shift of Rome from Republic to Empire (Julius Caesar being the first emperor). I am probably somewhat simplistic in my analysis, but over some decades the equivalent of what we today call oligarchs worked hard to sow distrust in the style of government and sowed the ideology that the concentration in someone strong who could ‘save’ the nation for the future was needed. Those elite wealthy class were deeply put out that their money (taxes) were funding social benefit (‘free bread’) so pushed for all such benefits to come to an end. The strong leader emerged… Roman Imperialism grew.

We are at a similar stage in the West and I think oligarchic rule is temporary so there is still the possibility of a pull back and the hope for something different to Imperial rule or simply back to the confusion of supposed democracy. Given that there was a concerted effort in prayer and understanding to ‘roll up the Roman road’ across Europe over the past quarter century and more we have to have great hope.

Babylon will not last for ever, in spite of its claim to be forever with children. There comes a time when God comes down to see the tower that has been built. That time comes soon.

The Far East is not a geography that is in my focus and also is not easy to get into focus. The New Testament is focused on Jerusalem where no prophet can die outside that geography, hence the crucifixion there – in order to break the ‘God is with us’ claim. God was indeed with them but they did not recognise the day of visitation. This released Paul to spearhead an incredible movement into the politics of Empire with the kingdom of God (basileia being used of the Empire of Rome and of the kingdom of God). Wherever the Roman Empire had gone Paul took the Gospel to subvert the false good news of Rome. And no mention of the Far East. I still have not worked out how to process that, but I suspect that there is something deeply indigenous within the land and people that will in this next phase give us fresh insight into the kingdom that is without end.

Certainly (I am always so certain!!!) the emptying of power is the foundation. God-likeness as revealed in Jesus (being in the form of God emptied himself… not in spite of being in the form of God) will always be the foundation. New paradigms for healing and miracles are on the horizon (always difficult to see when something is on the horizon). Not a demonstration of the power of God, but a carrying of the presence of God; fulfilling the ‘command’ to not bear (carry) the name of the Lord in vain – but to carry the name of the Lord in truth. Healing is in the name of Jesus, and is promised to come through those who go in his name (not a formula, but following the first three commandments – allegiance to God, not image making and carrying the name faithfully).

These next years for the West will be tumultuous – for Europe if 1989 was a water shed so we will see further seismic shifts. What a day of opportunity for the clueless ones to pray – and as a result God to act. The West, the Far East, oligarchs, dictators – all way beyond me. But all will prove to be unfinished projects, they have their telos; meanwhile One proclaimed it is finished and as a result there will be no end.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Saviours – do we recognise one

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Prophetic Perspectives

He who saves his country does not violate any law.

So wrote on social media one world leader who had 80% of the vote from the evangelical population. Yes it is obvious who I am writing about but my concern is not primarily for that geography but closer to home, as there is a mirror for here.

The clear danger signs are there in the post: ‘saves’, and the inference ‘above the law’. However quite some god-like qualities – or NOT! God saves and in the eyes of many is above any law, hence genocide, a commitment to back up violence to ensure that the land is ‘forever’ in the hands of those who are Jews. I wrote yesterday about the Canaanite woman and her child and Matthew’s deliberate (wrong) use of the term Canaanite to show Jesus response to those who were to be wiped out!

Jesus turns everything upside down, including some portions of Scripture. And he turns our view of God upside down… God is under the law of love – other than it is not a law for God, for GOD IS LOVE. And Jesus revealed how far that love was to go – love one’s enemies, for while we were yet sinners God sent Jesus to die.

Whether we think we have the right person in the White House, #10, Moncloa, Kiev, Moscow etc. the biggest issue for us to get straight on is who God is. All the time we see God able to act in ways we are not ‘allowed’ to we will turn a blind eye to all kinds of atrocities, and fearfully acts often done in the name of our God. (One time I think I should write on the sarcastic element in Romans 13 in Paul when he writes about the authorities being appointed by God… Paul writing while Nero, the madman, is in charge!)

The quote at the beginning is the final piece in the Imperial descent, with the implicit or explicit claim to divine authority. The Emperors of Rome were the ‘saviours’, they proclaimed themselves as bringing peace – with the temple to Peace (Pax) built on the field dedicated to war (Mars). (Again the sarcasm in Paul about the sword I do not think would have been missed by his readers.) The final piece was always the divination of the Emperor.

By all means we have to vote according to what we think is best. We might currently be divided over Zelensky’s appeal for a European army – without it what will Russia annex next (and sadly there is talk of annexing in other quarters too)… and with such an army where do we go? Not easy decisions, but there is no salvation of the human race and creation that would ever come from a violent god (small ‘g’), and there certainly is no salvation coming without aligning at some level to the image of God.

God made humanity in his/her image and we have ever since been making God in our image – hence the appeal of those who look like the (our) image of God.

Jesus is the one lens through which we see God, and see the image of the divine in true form.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Wipe them out??

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Theology

The Jesus’ stories are quite remarkable and also the way they are recorded often entice us to think beyond the story itself. The interaction with the ‘Syrophoenician’ woman is one such story (Mk. 7:24-30). In Mark she is identified (correctly) as ‘a gentile, of Syrophoenician origin’, but Matthew does a little sidestep:

Jesus left that place and went away to the district of Tyre and Sidon. Just then a Canaanite woman from that region came out and started shouting, “Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David; my daughter is tormented by a demon.” But he did not answer her at all. And his disciples came and urged him, saying, “Send her away, for she keeps shouting after us.” He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” But she came and knelt before him, saying, “Lord, help me.” He answered, “It is not fair to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs.” She said, “Yes, Lord, yet even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.” Then Jesus answered her, “Woman, great is your faith! Let it be done for you as you wish.” And her daughter was healed from that moment (Matt. 15:21-28).

A ‘Canannite woman’ – totally anachronistic and so we can say inaccurate. We sometimes might do something similar such as ‘a Viking from Sweden’. Anachronistic but the use of the term is to pull something of the history (or myth) and call for the person we are talking to to allow their imagination to apply something of the history to the person we are describing. The Canaanites – Matthew is pulling on the OT story where the Canaanites are not simply to be avoided but to be exterminated, and tellingly in this story, their children also!

[A]nd when the Lord your God gives them over to you and you defeat them, then you must utterly destroy them. Make no covenant with them and show them no mercy. Do not intermarry with them, giving your daughters to their sons or taking their daughters for your sons, for that would turn away your children from following me, to serve other gods. Then the anger of the Lord would be kindled against you, and he would destroy you quickly (Deut. 7:2-4). 
Then they devoted to destruction by the edge of the sword all in the city, both men and women, young and old, oxen, sheep, and donkeys (Jos. 6:21).

Genocide in our language. Love the Bible for the texts as are can cause all kinds of problems, and the wriggling that is done to get round what the text says, and claims to be instruction from God is deeply problematic. Along comes Jesus… A Canaanite with a child. This is more than the redemption of a (Deuterononist) text but the ‘redemption’ of God. Already there is a shift, and a further shift comes in the narrative for one way (the best and clearest way) is to read that a change takes place in Jesus’ understanding as the woman pushes him. The interaction pushes his understanding to follow his heart, and even to go so far as to stretch what the time-line meant. For sure he was sent to the ‘lost sheep of the house of Israel’ (very clear in Matthew – ‘he will save his people from their sins’), which I think indicates a two-stage movement: first one to restore Israel (don’t make an assumption as to what I mean by that!) so that the Gentile world can be totally included… so maybe Jesus would have allowed for the hope of the healing of the daughter at a later stage, but…

She pulls by faith so that even such a time line is adjusted. Matthew writes anachronistically. Jesus acts out of time due to the woman with great faith.

The text challenges the OT ‘wipe them out’ narrative; it reveals Jesus as the great Teacher because he was the great Learner; it shows that someone on the margins can align a future time to the present.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

This is nuts

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Theology

The last Zoom that was on Eschatology: Here not There I found quite encouraging and illustrated that what we think on such supposed ‘academic’ questions really affects the practical… indeed the questions are not so academic, this one was simple ‘is it all about us going there, or is it about there coming here?’ The problem is the subject has been hijacked and we have been taught what the answer is, and by taught I suppose I mean brainwashed with no small amount of money and resources behind the onslaught on our thinking.

After the Zoom I was sent this page to look at (not from someone thinking the page was good but illustrating the ‘nuttiness’ of so much that goes on). It might be extreme and on the edge but here it is:

Rapture Ready Index

Check it out if you have time. Basically through a series of indexes (currently numbered at 45) it becomes clear how close we are to the rapture. More ‘bad things’ the higher the score, so examples are floods, drug abuse, wild weather, Satanism, globalism. As each one gets worse that score goes up and the aggregate score of the 45 indices give us a total – so as of right now we are at a score of 181 and we are informed that a score above 160 indicates we are to ‘fasten our seat belts’. The rapture was actually closer in 2016 with a score of 189. Maybe it was so secret that even the creators of the system that gives us the inside information missed the sound of the trumpet and the shout of the archangel! (Not going to be so secret then? Other than Paul is making NO reference to said event in passage quoted.)

The craziness of all this is we should actually be rejoicing when disasters, ‘natural’ or ‘moral’ take place for they are hastening the time of our escape. A perversion of eschatology and a total debilitater to prayer and action.

Thankfully there is such a move away from that kind of eschatology but I suspect there still is a ‘well it is all going to burn up in the end anyway’ leaning that remains. We will be OK – palace in the sky is where I am headed, and at the same time the oligarchs of the West figure out that they will be OK with their palace in some safe place, even if that safe place is somewhere in space where they have planted their flag (thank you Naomi Klein for making the connection). Meanwhile we do not take in the words of Scripture concerning the destruction of those who destroy the earth.

I have come across from many angles the four way relationship / reconciliation: Godward, otherward, selfward and planetward. Wherever we start we cannot end there. Simply being reconciled to self can end up with a perversion if we do not go beyond that to ‘love our neighbour as ourselves’ for example. And I cannot truly love God (I am reconciled to God) and there not to be a ‘before and an after’ on every other area. Reconciliation is a work in progress. And let me repeat… wherever we start we cannot end there – and yes that does have implication for soteriology, and has to, as the biblical examples of the use of the word cannot be reduced to one-dimension. It is all a process, and theologically all four aspects flow from the cross and resurrection. That is an eschatology that is deeply practical as it flows from you + me + ‘others’ (every tribe) with God present with ‘us’ in a creational context so that shalom is tangible – no more weeping, suffering, death.

A theology, for example, that quickly jumps to God gave the land to Israel so maybe this idea of moving the Palestinians out could just be OK… well maybe I jump quickly to the parallel exodus of the Philistines and that they need their land restored, and who might be in that today? (Thanks Amos for that insight. It’s a good book to read so I won’t simply give a one verse reference.) When can we get an eschatological vision (a true vision for the globe) such as Paul, a Hebrew of the Hebrews, advanced in the Torah beyond his peers… who simply said that Israel was not promised the land. I appreciate I am trampling on toes and giving little substance to back up what I am writing, but I am doing that to push back against ‘what a mess, but it is all prophesied and we will be OK’. And certainly pushing back against the ‘and if there is yet more mess we simply add it to the total score to tell us where we are’.

There is a book ‘I’m OK You’re OK’. There is a God who said ‘You’re not OK I’m not OK’. The God who followed us out of Eden is the God who is worthy to be followed.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Good deeds

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Personal Perspectives

I am grateful to those who came along to the Zoom a couple of nights back and thanks for the feedback then and subsequently. I made a statement that I thought might be worth expanding on in a post. I said something along the lines that I am not sure that God is too concerned about the exactness of what we believe but is focused on how we live out our convictions as we serve others. To use language that we will remember from school (surely allowed as Paul used all sorts of illustrations borrowed from his world) at that final day what will be on the exam paper? What did you believe about the millennium? How did you understand the answer to the question of the disciples about the restoration of the kingdom to Israel? I know there will not be a question on the secret rapture as God knows how much money, time and effort has been given to convince people of its reality… I think s/he will have much grace for those who have believed that!

No, the questions will not be about ‘beliefs’ and I think God will be happier if I have some errors in my beliefs (and that is not a confession that I have any errors!) but have acted in a way that represents the kingdom of God and the heart of heaven.

Brings me to a not so popular biblical theme – not so popular with those who hold to ‘you must be born again and all righteousness is as filthy rags’. That is a strong wing and look I have quoted a couple of verses right there to back them up. The not-so popular theme is being judged, wait for it… by works.

And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Also another book was opened, the book of life. And the dead were judged according to their works, as recorded in the books (Rev.20:12).
If the work is burned up, the builder will suffer loss; the builder will be saved, but only as through fire (1 Cor. 3:15).
He will repay according to each one’s deeds: to those who by patiently doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life, while for those who are self-seeking and who obey not the truth but injustice, there will be wrath and fury (Rom. 2:6-8).

We could add a few other verses such as: Ps. 62:12; Prov. 24:12; Jer. 17:10; 32:19; Matt. 16:27; Rom. 14:12; Rev. 2:23. My point being that the ‘exam paper’ will not be over beliefs but over behaviour.

A couple of points that we need to hold in tension: it is not saying ‘saved by good deeds’ but judged by our deeds. And yet it is not categorically saying ‘damned in spite of good deeds’. Oh my… if only God made everything so clear that I understood it all; I just don’t think things are as tied up as I would wish them to be, and it means two things… I leave things in the hands of God who will ‘do all things right’ and I need to make sure that I respond with the huge big good work that will get me a sweet reward… other than it is not about doing things for a sweet big reward, but acting as God would, and that acting as God would is not the big good work but the giving of a cup of cold water when required.

Eschatology is a big word, with all kinds of complex ideas within it… but as per all theology it is deeply practical. There is a huge day coming and I need to live in the light of that. Always practical.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink
Perspectives