Second generation

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Personal Perspectives

I am deeply grateful for those who, as a generation above me, pioneered many aspects that I have benefited from, and not only me but the wider church. All that is required of us is to be faithful (as we understand it) within our own context and generation. I am often asked to pray for individuals that are unknown to me and bring them anything I consider to be prophetic. This I do in a team of two and afterwards find out who they are and what they do. I am always amazed at what has been given as once I find out who they are I might not have been so positive! I assume most of my readers would not believe that Peter was the first pope and that consequently the Catholic structure is exactly what Jesus had in mind! However, let me also assume that one day there is the opportunity to pray over the pope who showed up incognito. I doubt the Lord would say ‘you are missing it totally, abandon your robes and…’ I assume he is following the Lord in the path that he believed was right for him. That is true for all of us, and although I am not from an institutional church background I am deeply appreciative of those who have taken that route.

Just before we moved to Spain (2009, Jan. 1st) I had breakfast twice with a first-generational apostolic leader. His secretary called me to ask for a breakfast and we worked out dates. I was somewhat guarded as I was no longer working inside a new church network. My guard quickly came down when he explained how he had moved house from what was somewhat detached and private into a neighbourhood and a regular ‘street’. He had made friends on the street many of whom referred to him as the priest. Then he went on to say that the church that he started (large and successful) was really good for those who were already part of it, but should any of his neighbours come to faith it would not work for them and he would not be bringing them to the church he had started and grown.

I was deeply impressed. We fool ourselves if we think we have the pattern (there is a small denomination in the UK called the ‘Bible-pattern church’… and there are many others who believe the name would be more applicable to them than to that denomination!!!). One size does not fit all, and if I push it further I am not sure that the structure and form of church disturbs Jesus very much. Attitudes and behaviour are discipleship issues – and it is important that we make the core issues the core issues! I am unlikely to swing incense (apologies for the unfair caricature) – why? I might think it is because of the question of ‘where is that in Scripture?’… but the main reason is my personality.

Unity as in one defined united body of believers? Don’t think that is a ‘goal’. But recognisable allegiance to Jesus and love for one another… and love for those who object to our existence – absolutely.

A while back I felt two phrases pop into my head:

  • The multiplicity of the small, and
  • the richness of diversity.

How small? Well I do read that Jesus seemed to favour the term ‘two or three’! Those two numbers are interesting for they can never become four, in the sense that 2+1 = 3; 3+1 = 2 groups of 2 that can in turn become a 3 but never a four. Those two ‘favourite’ numbers are the ones that grow through multiplication. I am not suggesting that the numbers are literal (we also read of 12, 70/72 (I prefer the latter MS) 120 etc..) but there is something about smallness where I am an important part and of a dynamism.

In my breakfast meetings the ‘first generation’ person also said that he took responsibility for his street, so much so that a neighbour phoned him while he was away on vacation to say they had received some bad news. The neighbour’s wife was diagnosed with serious cancer. My breakfast colleague said ‘I am cancelling the vacation, coming home, this is not to happen on my watch’. Thank God for someone who was not too big to be known and not too important to be inconvenienced, and someone connected enough to be called on. Small… there is such a hope for something big – the thousands flocking in. I suspect Jesus is looking for something small that is multiplied – Martin on his street taking responsibility for the well-being of his neighbours.

Multiply it – I was going to write ‘multiply it, Jesus’, but I think maybe Jesus is saying ‘how about you guys stop waiting for the big and look at where you are situated and bear my name there’… I’m sold on that as the future.

And then the second part where I think it cuts across our fantasy that one size, one shape can represent God… the richness that comes through diversity. Again the future and something to work toward.

Second generation – that is what I was and have to find my own way. And for many I am now first generation – I owe them something. I owe them my faithfulness and the willingness to still be flexible and allow them to do things differently to me.

Thank you for the breakfasts, DB.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Sect, sectarian; cult, cultic?

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Prophetic Perspectives

So many aspects to blether on about (see even that word ‘blether’ I remember from my pre-adult years). BTW I have not yet reached 70 (but thanks for the congrats – I am of course in my 70th year so maybe that counts?)

These reflections will probably not be in chronological order but will splurge on to keyboard as my memory connects. Last post I mentioned Judith’s tease of me that she and Ben grew up in a cult so a few reflections. There are two terms that are often confused – that of sect and cult. A sect shares the same basic world-view as that of the larger definition that it is part of – so for example Judaism and Pharisee-ism. Pharisees were part of the Jewish faith but claimed that there tenets and practices were more faithful and therefore were ‘truer’. Many Christian denominations are like that and most fresh expressions are based on being more ‘true’ and in the case of the protestant side of things are more ‘biblical’. A cult on the other hand deviates from orthodoxy – Mormonism with practices, doctrines and writings that carry authority; Jehovah Witnesses (a re-incarnation of Arianism?) is deemed a cult with one of its central beliefs that Jesus is not the Second ‘Person’ of the Trinity but a created being – a ‘god’ with a small ‘g’.

So, Judith, you did not grow up in a cult!!!

Then there are two adjectives that are also validly applied in situations – ‘sectarian’ and ‘cultic’. They describe attitudes more than beliefs. The first one being descriptive of divisive behaviour often being aligned to derisive descriptions of anyone not considered ‘in’. Glasgow with the two Scottish football teams – one supposedly Catholic, the other supposedly Protestant; Northern Ireland with its Orange marches expressing the clear division between Protestantism and Catholicism. Cultic I consider is more about tendencies that are exhibited in cults and often centres around authoritarianism and ways of controlling behaviour. I have a friend who spent some time in the ‘Moonies’ and he describes the sleep deprivation and monitoring that he experienced – typical of many of the more controlling cults.

I don’t consider that we (House Church Movement, later termed ‘New Churches’) were sectarian though I think we – like many others – could have been termed sociologically a ‘sect’. Definitely not a cult… but cultic? Perhaps mildly so. There is a movement that had a very wide influence that has had a significant shock over this past year. I have worked with some from there but have always thought that a psychologist would be able to see very quickly who was in leadership and who was not. The ‘followers’ would in the main be those who were troubled by fear and anxiety with a focus on how antagonistic the world was to those of faith and how it was getting even more so in these ‘last days’… meanwhile the leaders could affirm the rightness of the antagonistic world but they know where it is all going and if followers stay within boundaries they will make it through together. In Enneagram language predominantly #6s (anxieties manifesting) and #8s – always strong. That kind of combination is set up for ‘cultic’ elements: strong leadership and followers who find a security in the authority framework. Pushing it further many charismatic setups are open to that outworking… and the New Church movement with the foundation of ‘apostles and prophets’ was no exception. Cultic? Not in my opinion but I am sure there were those who did well and those who did not within the movement(s), and the variety of how strong the discipling was (R1, R2 as per Andrew Walker and the many further distinctions) made an impact in different ways on different personalities.

I once heard John Barr say that we are to cover one another’s weaknesses but to confront sin and that sadly the church has often confronted weakness (in the ‘weak’, aka those who did not fit the system) and covered sin (in the leaders?).

I am deeply grateful for the most formative years of my Christian life being with the New Churches (and for me, Pioneer) in the UK: from 1977 – 2000 (or so). I was introduced to principles that seminary never taught, saw integrity, and still live with the passion to continue to explore new territory (another post: beyond ‘restoration of the church’ to the ‘restoration of God’s world’).

Gerald Coates’ radicalism has left an enduring mark on my life and I was deeply privileged to be asked to give the final eulogy at his funeral. I suggested that those present, should they like me acknowledge the deep impact he had made on our lives, should consider how we might play a part in ‘he though being dead still speaks’. In answering the ‘how’ of that I decided to tell his foundational story. He was brought up in the Plymouth Brethren and at the time he was starting to journey with the small group in his and Anona’s house he had a dream. That dream clearly marked his transition from his days in the Brethren to what might be coming. He dreamt he was driving a car down a narrow lane, the lane being lined by trees either side so there was no possibility of going left or right. Then the path ran out. He came to a beautiful manicured grass lawn in a country manor setting. On the grass were those having picnics, playing games – having a wonderful time. However, he continued to drive across the grass, disturbing all the activities and left behind two dirty tyre tracks that forever disturbed the beauty of the setting. He sent the dream to a brother in Canterbury who had a gift to interpret dreams. He wrote back along the lines that ‘you have been on a narrow path and one marked by boundaries set by men (‘men’ being appropriate in this setting) as Scripture says ‘I see men as trees’; that path has ended for you and you are now coming to disturbing flesh (‘all grass is flesh’) and the most beautiful flesh is religious flesh but it is still flesh…’

I gave that as the foundational story for Gerald, and suggested if we wanted to honour his life we should be guilty of leaving behind two tyre tracks wherever we confront religion. I hope I am guilty!

An aside: I was amazed how many came to me afterwards to say they had never heard the dream. From 1977 – early 1990’s I must have heard that dream recounted 100 times… We can move on from our foundational story, but I do think our lives need to pay attention to our foundational story.

A cult… no. Cultic – ouch I think no, but lessons to learn. Foundational story – stay true. On the edge – I hope so. Diversity… another post. OK all for now.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Off to London

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Personal Perspectives

I often meet people who regret the path they have travelled and I can understand that, and the majority of people would not repeat the past if they could have their life over again. The latter part of the above two perspectives I am sure I would relate to if I took enough time to reflect, but the former I find harder to resonate with. I am philosophically simple – I am where I am because of the journey I have taken so try to make the most of today, and I believe in a God who maximises every opportunity, a God who works in everything – including mistakes, wrong turns and what is simply wrong!

Anyway my journey took me off to London Bible College (now London School of Theology) in 1973. I had been strongly touched by the Holy Spirit when I was 16 and had a straight forward Pentecostal understanding of al things biblical!

I don’t remember every aspect of my travels but probably flew a small plane to Aberdeen or Edinburgh and than took the train to London the next day. I do remember being asked in Aberdeen / Edinburgh as to what station I would arrive at in London. I looked at them as if they were stupid – London station I replied! I had no idea that there were multiple stations in London and finally when I did get there had no understanding that I would have to catch a train that ran underground. (At least I came from Orkney where the nearest train station is in the norht of Scotland… if I was born in Shetland the nearest train station is Bergen, Norway.)

My room mate upon meeting asked me a question I did not understand how to answer. ‘How was your journey?’ I did understand the words, but the question… I had never encountered a question like that in my life. One, coming from an island such a question at a literal level would not mean very much – a journey of more than 5 minutes would be impossible and it took me months to work out that the question was not a question literally about my journey but a polite conversation opener. Cultural differences are subtle, but that interchange (or lack of cos I did not know how to reply) has helped me cross cultures.

Three years later I left with a degree and less than a year later married fellow-student, Sue Middlemiss. Immediately following LBC I joined YWAM (youth without any money?) for the Toronto Olympics outreach and then travelled across the USA. I am sure I wonderfully displayed all my lack of understanding in that period of four months, but very glad for the experience.

Back to College days… It was not the spiritual hot-house I anticipated; lectures were not so exciting and given my difficulties with comprehension of things written preparation for seminars was somewhat limited. Most professors / lecturers were either Reformed or modertely so and I was well able to engage a few in the lectures to push and press them, such were the inconsistencies that I perceived. Of course, as per all systems, provided nothing was adjusted the system would hold, but move one aspect and the system was vulnerable.

In the New Testament introduction I never understood the great pains that were gone to to ensure that each and every book was ‘apostolic’. Impossible to prove, and of course there was an underlying aspect that was ebing defended. Presuppositions based on a prior doctrine of the Bible is what rightly leaves such an approach open to criticism. In the 70s credible evangelical scholars were just beginning to enter the wider world of academia but the theology was just too defensive for its own soul’s sake. Thankfully that has changed a lot in the last 50(!!!!!!) years.

[‘Doctrine of the Bible’ will always be problematic and is normally filled with unproveable presuppositions. There was no ‘Jewish canon’ until after the NT era, and we still have different Christian canons… Jesus probably read or had access to books such as the book of Enoch – certainly NOT written by Enoch and yet quoted within our Bible as ‘Enoch the tenth from Adam said…’. And as for ‘all Cretans are liars… and this testimony is true’ does rather condemn anyone born in Crete! All the above pushes me to a narratival approach to the text with Jesus as the hermeneutical lens, blah, blah.]

Of all the subjects I enjoyed three the most – hisotrical theology, New Testament Greek and New Testament theology.

During those three years of study I visited YWAM on numerous occasions and sat through lectures there from Gordon Olson who had the largest library in the world on Charles Finney and Oberlin College (I was later to stay with him in Chicago in 1976). He was one of the earliest people in the modern era to embrace Open Theology – now in the popular world with people like Greg Boyd and the very articulate theologian Thomas Jay Oord who is yet more adventurous and I like that he uses the phrase ‘Open and relational theology’. Gordon Olson’s material was invaluable for me and I have leaned heavily in that direction ever since those sessions.

I think the professionalism and career aspects that I witnessed in those years… as well as coming to terms with what on earth does a 21 year old know about anything meant I now had ‘training’ (not!!) under my belt but could not with any integrity look for a post to exercise it. Thank God any form of church you care to mention was spared! And thank God it ended any concept I had of a ‘career’ in church ministry.

So a few months later – January 9th, 1977 – Sue and I moved to Cobham Surrey, south of London. Gerald and Anona Coates had initiated a small (with 5 others) in their home in the late 60s and this had now grown to around 60 people by the time we joined. It was like breathing fresh air – non-relgioius and with a passion for Jesus. Genuinely relational (not perfect… and daughter always teases me with ‘we grew up in a cult’)!!!

In a later post (also known as a ramble, and perhaps sometimes a ‘confused ramble’) I will get into life in Cobham Christian Fellowship, the Pioneer network and the wider New Church scene in the UK.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Faith – when? what? and how?

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Personal Perspectives

My family background was that of evangelical, and am aware as the decades have passed that word can carry different meanings. It does seem to centre on two key aspects – the authority of Scripture and the meaning given to the death of Jesus. Of course how those two are understood can differ enormously. Anyway my family background was more of the stricter form of evangelicalism – Sunday as a holy day, no alcohol, no -did I mention no fun? OK sarcasm was not allowed so delete the last comment. It can be easy to find flaws in faith approaches but I am glad that there was a basic authenticity in the faith context in which I grew up, and the respect for the Bible has been something that has stayed with me ever since then – when I had a daily reading in Scripture Union notes.

Coming to faith? In that background the question would be worded – when were you converted or born again? Interestingly Jesus only used that term once – John 3 to a specific person, someone who was totally versed in the ‘Scriptures’ but needed a major transformation to ‘see’ / ‘enter’ the kingdom of God. Nicodemus needed to be born again / born from above (the Greek can be translated either way). It is used one more time in the New Testament so it is not without content beyond the Gospels, but it is probably overused as the one and only paradigm. (Maybe an underused one is ‘sell all you have and come follow me’? – again used by Jesus to one person.)

New birth… birth is a process, and some births are premature, some difficult etc. This is why defining faith can be a challenge.

I grew up always believing in God, always having a Trinitarian belief, always considering that Jesus died for my sins. I many times considered God and talked to God. So was that faith, or what might be termed ‘saving faith’?

I made some kind of personal profession at age 11, but now looking back am not sure if that crossed me over from one side of the line to the other (more on that below).

At age 16 there was something very definite that took place. Under an old paradigm I was ‘born again’ at 11 and baptised in the Spirit at 16 – with the very presence of God coming to / through me as if I were physically under a fairly hot hair dryer that literally came through my body in a tangible physical way maybe for an hour or more. I spoke in tongues and very easily the two stages of Pentecostalism explained everything.

But… complex is it all, and never too easy to squeeze Scripture into what fits our personal experience.

‘Salvation’… Let me jump forward. Reconciliation to God – never God being reconciled to us through some payment by Jesus on the cross, but God was in Christ reconciling the world to him/herself. And in the fullness of that reconciliation is that of restoring our humanity, repairing and restoring us to the image of God. Salvation that is forensic might have made sense in the Reformation era when the context was that of indulgences for sin – but would that have made sense in the NT era? I think not – it would have been seen as inadequate, even if a truth of it could have been argued for.

The root of sin (big subject) is that of failing to be truly human, thus falling short of the glory of God. The one and only truly human one – the one who was the express image of the invisible God both revealed who God is and who humanity is. Thus salvation is probably more a process than we evangelicals make it out to be – more of a healing, restorative process.

‘Salvation’ is more to do with saved for than save from. Hence I find it harder to pin down what ‘saving faith’ is. It probably differs from one context to another, and the wonderful part of ‘evangelism’ is not that of a narrow – you are bad, admit it and I will show you a path – but I think more along the lines of ‘there is good news for you and for the whole of creation… come join the movement that is centred on Jesus and find your (small) part in the transformation (reconciliation) of all things’.

Follow me – consistent in the Gospels where the controversial nature of that invitation / command should not be minimised. Follow me spoken in the Jewish context was both radical and offensive, and post the cross deeply offensive (to the Jew a ‘stumbling block’). Yet it continues and finds a central part in Revelation where there is the description of those ‘who follow the Lamb wherever he goes’. Not come worship me, come preach me, but come follow me.

Following is a process… and although the 10 words were given to Israel, the early instructions that focus on ‘God’ continue to express elements of our journey – no other ‘god’, no ‘image’ and do not carry the name of the Lord in vain. Truth be out we all create an image of God, and we all probably act / carry out actions in God’s name that are not reflective of who God truly is – OOOFFFFF; Jesus was so vital, to show us the image of God and what it was to act truly in the name of that God.

I have no idea if there is a ‘line’ or not – that is not my deal. There are followers of the Lamb, and I trust that I am one of those and I trust the mercy of God that I have been solidly included ‘in Christ’… so to jump to the big picture I have worked with this pattern for years – all who genuinely receive Christ are ‘saved’ and those who reject Christ are ‘lost’. But no line that I have drawn as a result of my reading of Scripture.

‘My’ reading – so problematic!

When did I come to faith? In stages and it continued today when I encountered the Lord.

To know God and to make God known. Am I pentecostal? No idea… Was Paul pentecstoal – no idea… but I do know that he challenged the Galatian believers as to what was happenning among them as the expectation that God would continue to do miracles among them:

Well then, does God supply you with the Spirit and work miracles among you by your doing the works of the law or by your believing what you heard? (Gal. 3:5 – present (ongoing) tense).

Always today is important.

A friend who I miss (John Barr, passed away in 2001) was asked by a woman if he would pray for her as she had cancer and had been given 4 months to live. He replied with ‘the doctors have it wrong’. What then is the diagnosis and prognosis, she asked. Scripture tells me ‘you have today’… Today, choose life and thus be a life-giver. I you agree you have life today I will pray for you.

I am grateful for my background, probably no longer being recognised as someone from that background… but I hope that I am guilty as charged as being a follower of the Lamb, and continue to try and discern where that will lead to.

If someone can say ‘I was born again’ and then give a date and a place, I am delighted (though follow Nicodemus’ journey in John’s Gospel and try to find the date and place! Nicodemus’ journey is a process); I am delighted if someone says ‘I was baptised in the Spirit…’. Yes, yes and yes. But faith – it is a journey. It is an adventure. Jesus, not theology has to be central. And it is deeply personal… certainly those who are religious need to be born from above… maybe those who are centred on wealth need to sell all they have; all of us have to heed the call to follow.

  • Faith – when?
    Today.
  • Faith – what?
    An alive belief that there is in Jesus a ‘new creation’.
  • Faith – how?
    Full of authentic questions.

Not 70 yet… and definitely not arrived!!

My family background was that of evangelical, and am aware as the decades have passed that word can carry different meanings. It does seem to centre on two key apsects – the authroity of Scripture and the meaning given to the death of Jesus. Of course how those two are understood can differe enormously. Anyway my famly background was more of the stricter form of evangelcialism – Sunday as a holy day, no alcohol, no -did I mention no fun? OK sarcasm was not allowed so delete the last comment. It can be easy to find flaws in faith approachesbut I am glad that there was a basic authenticity in the faith context in which I grew up, andthe respect for the Bible has been something that has stayed with me ever since then – when I had a daily reading in Scripture Union notes.

Coming to faith? In that background the question would be worded – when were you converted or born again? Interestingly Jesus only used that term once – John 3 to a specific person, someone who was totally versed in the ‘Scriptures’ but needed a major transformation to ‘see’ / ‘enter’ the kingdom of God. Nicodemus needed to be born again / born from above. It is used one more time in the New Testament so it is not without content beyond the Gospels, but it is probably overused as the one and only paradigm. (Maybe an underused one is ‘sell all you have and come follow me’? – again used by Jesus to one person.)

New birth… birth is a process, and some birhts are premature, some difficult etc. This is why defining faith can be a challenge.

I grew up always believing in God, always having a Trinitarian belief, always consdiering that Jesus died for my sins. I many times consdered God and talked to God. So was that faith, or what might be termed ‘saving faith’?

I made some kind of personal profession at age 11, but now looking back am not sure if that crossed me over from one side of the line to the other (more on that below).

At age 16 there was something very definite that took place. Under an old paradigm I was ‘born again’ at 11 and baptised in the Spirit at 16 – with the very presence of God coming to / through me as if I was under a fairly hot hair dryer that literally came through my body phayscally maybe for an hour or more. I spoke in toungues and very easily the two stages of Pentecostalism expalined everything.

But… complex is it all, and never too easy to squeeze Scripture into what fits our personal experience.

‘Salvation’… Let me jump forward. Reconciliation to God – never God being reconciled to us through some payment by Jesus on the cross, but God was in Christ reconciling the world to him/herself. And in the fullness of that reconciliation is that of restoring our humanity, repairing and restoring us to the image of God.

The root of sin (big subject) is that of failing to be truly human, thus falling short of the glory of God. The one and only truly human one – the one who was thee express image of the invisible God both revealed who God is and who humanity is. Thus salvation is probably more a process than we evangelicals make it out to be – more of a healing, restorative process.

‘Salvation’ is more to do with saved for than save from. Hence I find it harder to pin down what ‘saving faith’ is. It probably differs from one context to another, and the wonderful part of ‘evangelism’ is not that of a narrow – you are bad, admit it and I will sho you a path – but there is good news for you and for the whole of creation… come join the movement that is centred on Jesus and find your (small) part in the transformation (reconciliation) of all things.

Follow me – consistent in the Gospels where the controversial nature of that should not be minimised. Follow me spoken in the Jewish context was both radica and offensive, and the other side of the cross deeply offensive (to the Jew a ‘stumbling block’). Yet it continues and finds a central part in Revelation where there is the description of those ‘who follow the Lamb whereever he goes’. Not come worship me, come preach me, but come follow me.

Following is a process… and although the 10 words were given to Israel, the early instructions that focus on ‘God’ continue to express elements of our journey – no other ‘god’, no ‘image’ and do not carry the name of the Lord in vain. Truth be out we all create an image of God, and we all probably act / carry out actions in God’s name that are not refelctive of who God truly is – OOOFFFFF Jesus was so vital, to show us the image of God and what it was to act truly in the name of that God.

I have no idea if there is a ‘line’ or not – that is not my deal. There are followers of the Lamb, and I trust that I am one of those and I trust the mercy of God that I have been solidy included ‘in Christ’… so to jump to the big picture I have worked with this pattern for years – all who genuinely receive Christ are ‘saved’ and those who reject Christ are ‘lost’. But no line that I have drawn as a reuslt of my reading of Scripture.

‘My’ reading – so problematic!

When did I come to faith? In stages and it continued today when I encountered the Lord.

To know God and to make God known. Am I pentecostal? No idea… Was Paul pentecstoal – no idea… but I do now that he challenged the Galatian believers as to what was happenning among them as the expectation that God would continue to do miracles among them. Always today is important.

A friend who I miss (John Barr, passed away in 2001) was asked to pray for a woman who had cancer and was given 4 months to live, and he replied with ‘the doctors have it wrong’. What then is the diagnosis and prognosis, she aksed. Scripture tells me ‘you have today’… Today, choose life and thus be a life-giver.

I am grateful for my background, probably no longer being recognised as someone from that background… but I hope that I am guilty as charged as being a follower of the Lamb, and continue to try and discern where that will lead to.

If someone can say ‘I was born again’ and then give a date and a place, I am delighted (though follow Nicodemus’ journey in John’s Gospel and try to find the date and place!); I am delighted if someone says ‘I was baptised in the Spirit…’. Yes, yes and yes. But faith – it is a joiurney. It is an adventure. Jesus, not theology has to be central.

Faith – when? Today.

Faith – what? An alive belief that there is in Jesus a ‘new creation’.

Faith – how? Full of authentic questions.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Way back in time

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Personal Perspectives

Been a long time since posting, so will try and ‘correct’ that. Gayle and I are away from home for almost a month and I am replying to emails as best I can on a phone. This is the first day I have managed to hook up to a wifi signal… But been thinking over these days that this year I have a birthday coming up, and as I have not had one of them in a long time I got out the calculator in one hand and the birth certificate in the other, could not believe what it said… changed the batteries and repeated… same response. So decided I would blog away with a few posts on some reminiscences. Now that will be a challenge as it involves memory. My memory for many things is great, but I seldom look back so it means my recollection is either non-existent or probably inaccurate. Great parts of life are forgotten. The strength? Of course there is a strength! The strength is I don’t get stuck but want to move forward. And – only if I were to admit it – the weakness is I have learnt so little as attempts, mistakes, wrong turns are all part of God-given human ability to encourage us to reflect and learn. Explains a lot!!

My larger framework I am working with at the moment is that of reconciliation in four directions – to God, to others, to self and to creation. It opens up a lot of scope and I expect I will cover some of that at a personal level as I blog.

I don’t intend to cover in minute autobiographical detail, but here are some insights from way back… My dad was a farmer so growing up on a farm the outside was almost as much home as the inside. I have no idea how old I was but I do vaguely remember smashing (with a stone?) every pane of glass in a newly built chicken run. No thought at all as to what that meant, no thought that this was wrong or even naughty. No thought of consequences, no conscience. Not normal. I think I have grown beyond that – and do think (now some 6+ decades later) that there are consequences for behaviour and the world does not resolve around one’s own enjoyment.

Second memory is being put in the driving seat of the land-rover and allowed to drive. I think two elder brothers were also on board. At one point one said to me ‘can you see the pile of stones, you’re driving straight toward them?’ I think I answered ‘yes’ but truth be out I could not see them as I was always badly short-sighted. A short time later as one of them grabbed the steering wheel, but too late, as I ploughed straight into a concrete post, thus altering the contours of the land rover for ever! I pretty much think that I was 10 or 11 at the time of the accident. Driving has improved slightly since then.

Short sighted. I do remember thinking at school (in my big class of 7 kids) that I could not understand why the teacher used a blackboard and chalk. No-one could see what was being writing on it. Until I had an eye test (after 5 years of thinking the teacher was evidently stupid for using such equipment) and thus discovered everyone else could see what was written there. Painfully discovering that I was not the ‘norm’ on everything. I still am learning that – we are all different and to some extent eccentric.

And my final memory for this blog is that of buying my first laced up leather soccer ball. Bought at Leonard’s shop for the price of 21 shillings (yes I grew up under pounds, shilling and pence). A leather ball that lost its shape, weighted a ton when in the wet grass, but meant I could run and kick it around for hours on end. Rain or sun made no difference. Not sure if I have grown out of that, but having played football in the street against two young kids I did decide my call-up to the Scottish national team is not going to come any time soon.

Maybe all kids are stupid? But one of the best lessons in life I have learnt is I am not that smart. I did well at school but I think cos I had a good memory and discovered how to negotiate exams. Doing well in that way can lead to the deception of being smart. I was not and continue to be amazed how slow I am to learn. Ah well – assuming I will have as many more birthdays as I have had (!!!!) I might even become a little smarter than I am today, though probably not.

On not too smart, one thing I have realised is that I am not a good reader. I can read words but do not have a high level vocabulary nor comprehension. It is far better for me to listen to someone so as I grasp what they are communicating then later I might be able to read anything they wrote. A good lesson for me was moving to Spain and saying good-bye to a reference library of some 2000+ books. Accept your limitations.

When Sue was 40 she had a list of guests and celebrated. She asked – and you what about your 40th (7 months later). I replied with I will do nothing as I have not got to that stage where I have accomplished anything, but maybe talk to me when I am 55, maybe then I will have made enough mistakes to have matured a little. Fast forward… eve of my 55th and cycling along a wet path, a man walks out, I instinctively hit the back brake, but the back brake handle in the UK is the front brake handle in Spain. Front brake locks, I go over the top and land with the handle bar into my ribs – broken rib as a result. OUCH. Maybe I hadn’t learnt enough?

So now coming up to the 70 marker, at last the mature Martin is arriving.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Where did he go?

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Theology

I have just finished reading Lamb of the Free – the fourth reading of the book and if I had the energy I would need one more reading that included the footnotes, a Bible in one hand and a pen and paper to make extensive notes. That is not going to happen today and I will probably let the material settle for a while. (I highly recommend this book and a challenging read but a major pushback against ‘substitutionary’ view of the atonement.) What was not new for me is the idea that sacrifice is not something done in my place but in order to cleanse… forgiveness of sins does not require blood / death but cleansing – so Heb. 9:22 “Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins”; Acts 15:9 “in cleansing their hearts by faith [the Gentiles] he has made no distinction between them and us”. Cleansing, purifying being the effect of both the OT sacrifices and that of the death of Jesus. God not requiring the death of Jesus in order to forgive – indeed (from memory) in Acts we always read that ‘you’ put Jesus to death BUT God raised him from the dead. Anyway enough of the book and my smart observations!

Partly provoked by the book and also my own readings it seems clear that Hebrews focuses on areas regarding the work of Jesus from unique angles. So what took place after the death of Jesus – and death is understood as the presentation of life to God, hence the death of Jesus is the presentation of an indestructible, perfect human life to God. Maybe there are two ‘opposite’ answers – he went to ‘hades’ to proclaim freedom to the captives:

He was put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, in which also he went and made a proclamation to the spirits in prison (1 Pet 3:18, 19).

Or the very opposite!

Thus it was necessary for the sketches of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves need better sacrifices than these. For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made by human hands, a mere copy of the true one, but he entered into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. Nor was it to offer himself again and again, as the high priest enters the holy place year after year with blood that is not his own, for then he would have had to suffer again and again since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to remove sin by the sacrifice of himself (Heb 9:23-26).

Moses had to make the tabernacle according to the pattern he saw in heaven – and that needed cleansing (sacrifices) so as it would be a meeting point of heaven and earth. Is there a ‘heavenly’ tabernacle? And why would that need cleansing? I think rather than there being a heavenly tabernacle what Moses was to create was a reflection of heaven itself (we read ‘Jesus entered into heaven itself’)… but that still raises the question as to why heaven needs better sacrifices, and needs to be cleansed! Maybe heaven was left polluted after the fall of Lucifer (not likely to get my vote) or perhaps the sin of humanity affected heaven also (OK a tentative vote from me this time).

If I had to choose between the visit to ‘hades’ or to ‘heaven’ I go for the latter – though of course both might be possible.

And on the going to heaven I think probably what we have is the flip side of cleansing of things merely earthly but to include all of creation (‘heaven and earth’ being a merism for the whole creation).The result being that rather than the separation of the two (dualism) that the path is opened through the cross for the reconciliation of all things – things in heaven and things on earth. Jesus’ death is much more than my sins + your sins placed on Jesus (indeed I don’t see that at all!) – it is the defeat of every power that stands in the way of the divine presence manifesting through all things. Thus the death of Jesus is that of the indestructible human life that overcomes all hostile powers (narrowed to ‘sin and death’ and including ‘principalities and powers’) being presented to the Creator God, thus cleansing the Temple (heaven being the throne and earth the footstool) in totality. Jesus the one who ‘tabernacled’ among us risen and ascended to ‘fill all things’ cleanses all things by his blood (and here we have to think life, death, resurrection and ascension) – hence there can be no more need for a tabernacle / temple (ripped curtain).

Now I guess over to us – what aspect do we fill out, not with domination, but with presence?

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Two links: Kenarchy Journal and a podcast

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Updates

A couple of links today… A short while back the Biblical (Old Testament) scholar Walter Brueggemann passed away. He could not be classified into a narrow box – not surprising as he never allowed the Bible to be classified into our personal small box. A while back (2017 I think) Pete Enns interviewed him. Here is the link to the podcast:

Episode 301: Walter Brueggemann – Resurrecting the Bible in the Mainline Church (REISSUE)

Second link is to the current recently published Kenarchy Journal (Volume 7: Perfecting Love):

https://kenarchy.org/perfecting-love/

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Europe – left behind or aligning for the future

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Prophetic Perspectives

The global world order is changing. No amount of trying to restore a former order will succeed. In every challenge that changes order there is the opportunity to sow into the future. Europe could be left behind -and by that I am not referring particularly to trade and commerce but spiritually. If Europe can learn how to get on board then there is a major contribution to be made.

I have (and still do) hold to a two-fold movement in the NT. Jesus dies in Jerusalem stating that no prophet can die outside of that city, for religious restrictions have to be broken in order for the promises to Abraham to be released by the Spirit. Paul then travelled throughout the then known world (almost) with the implications for society. We have reduced the effect of the cross to a possible internal transaction (you can have your personal sins forgiven), reducing the overcoming of all powers in order that there might be a new creation… Paul’s message was that the Caesar reign was over (for Caesar’s imperial rule was the earthly image of the demonic realm that seeks to subjugate all humanity in that ‘kingdom’. Jesus, not Caesar, was ‘king of kings and lord of lords’ (titles accorded to Caesar) and a new era was present – an era of liberation of humanity.

A twofold movement – from Jerusalem to Rome – Jew first then Greek / Gentile:

καὶ κηρυχθήσεται τοῦτο τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς βασιλείας ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ οἰκουμένῃ εἰς μαρτύριον πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, καὶ τότε ἥξει τὸ τέλος (Matt 24:14… Greek text not to be clever but a few interesting points within it).

And this gospel of the kingdom (same word for kingdom of God and also the Empire (of Rome)) shall be proclaimed (a public message) in the whole civilised world (oikoumene – the word used to draw boundaries of what was in and out in the sense of Roman Empire) for a witness to the non-Jewish peoples (ta ethne – used to distinguish from ‘the people’ of God, in other words Gentiles) and then the end (telos not eschaton) will come.

The second element that captivated Paul with his ‘I want to get to Spain’ – the Western end of the Roman oikoumene. OK… the then known world with an all-but one world government… except for the Empires that co-existed at that time (and before and after)…

Europe – a pivotal time for something that recaptures the Pauline proclamation with a reach now beyond that world he operated in. The Far East waits. What will that look like… 2040 we will be able to look back and see how we responded. There is more at stake than global trade wars and what currency is the reserve currency. And then… yes the Middle East. The place where the prince of peace died in order that there might no longer be the divisions of Jew and Gentile (Arab – close cousins!, caucasian, Asian/ East Asian); those who control the finances and those who serve to maintain the economic inequalities; the patriarchal system… War about boundaries can hide the desire to hold things in a proper way…

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Embracing and manifesting presence

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Prophetic Perspectives

Often in the Charismatic world there has been an emphasis on demonstrating power to convince… I see a necessary shift from power to presence. Knowing who God is… carrying that presence, so that God is again mobile – not having to put up with the frustration of being confined to a ‘temple’. The curtain is torn.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Time – repeats or the future arrives?

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Prophetic Perspectives

Time is such an elusive factor – a discussion within the scientific community, a theological / theo-philosophical discussion (I am not of the ‘God outside of time’ school, but cannot easily resolve all the factors – another post another day!), and in the light of the video that I reference here it is a challenge prophetically. I am deeply disturbed by the ‘again’ language that is used explicitly and implicitly. In times past I came across people who said that the most basic step in the prophetic was to have authority over the weather but I have come to the conclusion that the greatest requirement is to enable kairos time (arrival of heaven) to chronological time. Otherwise history just repeats.

I recorded three videos, the first one here and I will publish one a day over the next couple of days. The first is on the issue of time and not being caught in the snare of ‘again’. The second is a shift I see that is vital that we move from ‘demonstrating the power of God’ as a conclusive sign to that of the presence of God, and the third I look at the shift from Jerusalem –> West, and now what?

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink
Perspectives