Pentecost: no towers here

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Theology

So many OT themes come together in Acts 2 and one very obvious one is that of the tower of Babel (which then becomes the theological seedbed for an understanding of Babylon – the imperial power that is the antithesis of the New Jerusalem). Genesis 10 expresses the flow of fallenness: ‘make a name for ourselves’, ‘build a city / society’, ‘from here we conquer everything’…

There is such an irony in that chapter. A tower is being built, God the all-seeing one has difficulty in seeing it!

The Lord came down to see…

The tower was designed to be visible even in the heavens, and the one with 20/20 vision has to come down to see it!! Apparently it was not really that impressive and could not be seen from up there. Babel is not a threat to God at any level. It is however a threat to humanity fulfilling its destiny. Destiny is in the heart of humanity, but the direction and effect of the pursuit of its fulfilment is what becomes problematic.

Unity, working together enhanced by linguistic unity was going to be problematic in that context so a restriction is placed on it. Evil can never reach an absolute fullness, that is reserved for righteousness and the One who embodies righteousness. Pentecost is a crazy reversal of Babel. Unity is present, co-labouring together receives the seal of approval. Not only does each one speak but there is the wonder of universal understanding. In the same way that a restriction is placed on Babel’s future a release is given to those of a pentecostal spirit – and by that I mean those who have been touched by Pentecost so that they are not looking to ‘make a name for ourselves’, nor ‘seeking to build a city’, nor ‘looking to conquer everything’. Maybe that might be why we have never seen the full release indicated by Pentecost?

In contrast to building a tower, a city from here to there, we read the New Jerusalem comes down to where we are, it comes from the throne of God. It is not something we build, nor can build. We can help prepare both the ground where it can land and the materials that make it what it is, but build it we cannot do. Pentecost is not a promise of receiving ‘a conquer all’ blessing. It does involve the subduing of the powers that tempt the fulfilment of destiny by a self-promotion path, and certainly involves an authority over the works of the devil but not over people.

The path to Pentecost begins in the subsequent chapter of Genesis. Leave and walk. Leave security, do not bow to familiarity, wander and God will show – even though the sight of what is shown will be partial. That was the pathway prepared, and one that Israel travelled on both with great difficulty and also deviated from. Jesus walked the same pathway, leaving ‘his country’, ‘his father’s household’. We cannot walk the path he walked (his work is finished) but as the Father sent him, so in the same way he sends us, so the pathway cannot be so different and we now have a work to complete. Security and familiarity will not always be our companions on that pathway.

To the hidden ones, the humble ones there is such an implicit promise. If the restriction at Babel was so that they could no longer do whatever they propose, Pentecost is an invitation to abandon all tower building and release imagination about what the future will look like. I wonder if God does not have a vision for the future other than he wants to fulfil our vision of the future. Could be wrong (don’t jump on me – just a perspective!). Could be wrong but I think more right than a hard line predetermined plan. If so a tad frightening but it comes with a huge invitation to all tower abandoning, non-identifiable, meandering pentecostals.

A little postscript: I am not in the habit of dedicating a post to someone, but as Steve and Kathy Lowton have been with us while writing this post I will make an exception as they have taught us a lot about walking away from tower building.

SHARE ON:

Post PermaLink

Pentecost: let’s speak

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Theology

‘They all spoke’ and if there is a creational pattern we can also look at what God spoke into in Genesis as there is a pattern there. Creation has two issues, namely it is without form and it is empty. For three days God deals with the issue of the formlessness, he puts in boundaries so that there is shape, then for three days he fills the shapes he has prepared. Given the creational background to Pentecost this pattern is something we would be advised to follow.

The first aspect then is to create a shape in a hostile environment. When we do this we should not be expecting great success! The powers (institutional and heavenly) are hostile to the plan of God. The heavenly powers hostile by nature and the institutional ones hostile by default as they are hijacked by spiritual powers. If we enter those spaces assuming all we need to do is fill them we should not be surprised if at times we are overcome. Simply sticking the name ‘Christian’ or ‘kingdom’ to it will not make the difference. I have heard too many times (and also from Christians) ‘that’s the way it works’ when referring, for example, to business practices where an unfair offer is placed on the table and that is used to manipulate a deal. Really? A kingdom approach? I appreciate that we work from where we are to something more redemptive and there is compromise in the kingdom as we engage the powers, but there is redemptive compromise and there is being sold out to unethical and dehumanising practices.

What kind of shapes should we be pressing for in politics, medicine, health, education, farming / animal walfare etc.? In the current political realm it seems we have moved beyond simple lying, through denial to the predominant culture of denialism (Denialism what drives people to reject the truth.) The battle to enter that arena as a redemptive politician is enormous. Coming at things from a bias of prayer is there a pushing back in the spirit so that the spirit of denial does not take root? If we, the body of Christ, are responsible for the world we live in what world are we complicit in allowing to take place? The examples can be expanded to cover all the bases of our society.

If we embrace the implications of pentecost I will continue to speak in tongues, exercise the gifts of the Spirit, but will also need to push for something beyond that – or at least some within the body of Christ will need to do so. Into a business / financial culture of profit is the bottom line (and one that is normally aligned to the idolatry of the ‘invisible hand of the market’) what definition do we need to bring as those who embrace a pentecostal paradigm? The bottom line for us believers has to be some level of effort to provide a shape where the majority possible can be helped to see and step toward their destiny. How about a bottom line financially being a response to the question of how many people that we are able to benefit from our services… for free!! Maybe I am pushing it here, but that was an OT stipulation.

If Pentecost is about an imperfect people being empowered by heaven’s perfection so that there can be a transformative agent in the earth, we have a lot of ‘speaking’, of drawing lines in the midst of chaos and mixture. Only once God had drawn the shapes did he begin to fill them. And there is so much need for a filling of the shapes in society. This I understand to be the body of Christ’s responsibility, not a responsibility to fill the shapes but to ensure they are filled.

I am glad that at one level we fail, that is if we set perfection as the level. If however God is not expecting perfection but redemptive signs we have a lot to pull for with optimistic hope.

(Photo by Jon Tyson on Unsplash).

SHARE ON:

Post PermaLink

Pentecost: wind and speech

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Theology

There are so many resonances in Scripture to the opening verses of Genesis and Pentecost (Acts 2) is no exception. God is a Creator and there is a continual restoration and healing of creation and the gathering of the material for new creation. Here is a strong resonance:

In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters. Then God said… (Gen. 1: 1-3).

When the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place. And suddenly from heaven there came a sound like the rush of a violent wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. Divided tongues, as of fire, appeared among them, and a tongue rested on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak (Acts 2:1-4).

Wind and speech. Into the formless void came wind and God spoke. That speech brought creation step by step to birth through the process of shape and then fullness. When Pentecost came (in the beginning?) there came wind again from heaven. God is signalling that there is a new level of creation beginning that will both impact this creation and prepare the ‘materials’ for the new creation, when the truly human one, the one who is in the image of the invisible God will be revealed. He, and then the bride will be revealed at the parousia (= presence).

There is a strong resonance, but there is also a difference. In Genesis God spoke, in Acts they spoke. Peter does become the spokesperson as the day progresses but it begins, the foundation of the day, with that they all spoke. There was no recorded order, nor hierarchy, each of them were filled, each of them spoke. Pentecost releases a sound, a corporate sound. In Genesis God’s voice was into the formlessness and emptiness of what was present to him and a process was released. If the body of Christ is to be pentecostal I suggest something similar has to happen. There has to be a voice that speaks into creation, into what is present to the body of Christ. There has to be speech into the formlessness and emptiness of what is apparent.

So what is the body of Christ speaking into at this time? What is the voice that is going forth? There will always be spokespersons but there has to be a foundation that undergirds that of ‘they all spoke’ because they had all been immersed in the Spirit of God. Maybe the only voice being heard is that of the spokespersons and if so are those voices reflecting the diversity that needs to come forth?

God goes where we go (‘even if I make my bed in sheol you will be there’ states this so strongly) and we can so reduce what he wishes to say through the body. If there is a creational dynamic to pentecost then we need to discover the formlessness and emptiness into which we are to speak. The church has to rediscover her voice – the corporate voice that comes through the diversity of those uniquely touched by the Spirit.

I had two experiences in fairly quick succession. I was in a place where I heard the voices of angels communing together. I could not hear a specific word, the volume seemed to rise and fall. I strained my ear and sought to listen, but there was an elusiveness to the sound. Some weeks later I was in an international gathering and the entire gathered people read in their own language the Lord’s Prayer, all at the same time. The sound was identical to the one I had heard previously. The volume went up and down. I thought I could recognise a word, but it was gone as quick as it had come as another person with another language spoke both alongside and over them. I then knew what I had heard before and this time – it was ‘the sound of many waters’. I was hearing the constant flow of water pouring forth from multiple springs. When the angelic and the human speak there will be sounds we try and grasp, but we will never be able to fully hold on to them. The sound is too elusive, too big, too dynamic, too flowing to be harnessed for the source is too diverse, too widespread.

Time to speak. Let there be light, let there be the light of God that enlightens everyone (John 1). Thank God for prophecy, thank God for preaching… but now is the time for the sound of many waters as we speak for example ‘let there be light in the dark place of immigration’. For this we were touched by the Spirit.

SHARE ON:

Post PermaLink

Can we see in colour?

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Prophetic Perspectives

I have referred to an open vision that someone sent us – along with others – many, many months before the UK referendum on EU membership. In it she saw, and no one was even close to predicting this at the time, that a hand would come and withdraw the UK from the map of Europe. The result was that light and colour drained out of Europe, she saw it going down something like a hole in the south of France. We did endeavour, with those she sent the vision to, to close the hole by travelling there some two years ago.

I appreciate that for those within the UK there is divided opinion on the merits of the (less than perfect!) EU. I voted to remain as an embracing of the continent has always seemed very important to me spiritually – and of course one could vote ‘leave’ and still hold the importance of being together relationally. I also voted that way as I see NO reason from Scripture to suggest the evil beast of Europe – if only it was that easy!! The beast is a lot more subtle and more widespread than anything Brussels could ever compete with. Anyway enough of that and back to the vision…

In these past weeks I have been thinking about what a draining of colour would mean, and realised that colour is diversity. In the diversity of the light spectrum came the promise of God’s commitment to the world. In the diversity of the oft-four times repeated (and varied) phrase in Revelation: ‘every tongue, tribe, peoples and nation’ we find that God is glorified.

The history books that will be written of this period of time will I suspect reflect on a battle for the future of Europe and its identity. Either the future could be more diverse (with the wonderful challenges presented by that) or there could be a shutting down and an exclusion of what looks different. Colour or monochrome?

I think it is very rare that God says, close the door!! It seems he usually says open the door and make room. To do so necessitates that we come out from under the fear narrative. Many in Germany have done just that and we hear wonderful reports of those who have fled there, with no faith or with faith in a God other than the Lord and Father of our Lord Jesus, who have come to faith. It would not be the first time in history that God has revealed himself to those fleeing imperial power.

While reflecting on the vision it becomes apparent that the response of the UK is very important. More important than a referendum on the EU, important as that was and is proving to be, is the willingness to embrace at a deep level diversity. Easier said than done, but an open heart to travelling unknown paths is a starting point.

It is interesting living life in a land that is not one’s birth land. I cannot claim to understand being an immigrant – I am probably a hypocritical one. (Hypocrite was ‘actor’ in Greek.) Gayle and I have privileges. we can live here legitimately. We are not in fear of someone banging on the door and we are deported – and even if we were we are not being sent back to a dangerous situation. We refuse to live as ‘ex-pats’. We are immigrants. I was told by one of my more honest neighbours recently – so you have lived here 10 years and your Spanish is a disgrace (OUCH!). We are immigrants, but only slightly on the outside. I guess all we can do is continue at the hypocritical (acting) level and maybe we will so get into the character that we become more genuine. We can only give what we have and what our situation allows us. That is our very small contribution into the plea for colour to be present in Europe.

Our contribution is small – all our contributions are small, but maybe in the context of the future of Europe those living in the UK might just have a big say. Bring on the colour!!

SHARE ON:

Post PermaLink

Once a year

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Personal Perspectives

Ever wanted to get to see the notes that were made as a result of that annual appraisal you had? Or rather not see it at all? Of course not all appraisals are 100% accurate but I have checked out with the person in question and have their permission to highlight here some of the key notes. This appraisal was always going to be fairly significant as it was not simply an annual one but it marked the end of their 9th season of 7.

Some glaring weaknesses came out. A tendency toward arrogance marked by an assumption that they already know better, or already have enough knowledge, compounded by an over-developed independence produced at best some strong convictions and at worst a slowness to learn. It is clear that not all people find working in team easy!

I had to mark their communication skills down mainly because of what seems to be an inability to really listen. This was disappointing as they should be able to make a bigger contribution to conversation and been a greater encourager. It seems also that they have moved on too quickly from their mistakes so have not learnt as much as they could resulting in less wisdom that could have been helpful to others.

Positively they remain focused seeking to keep distractions at bay and giving priority to activities that are at the centre of their vision statement. I hope that aspect remains and if they can embrace the critique of their weaknesses their continual small contribution should prove valuable.

I had one suggestion to make to them and that was to consider the next 30 years and what they might wish to focus on: people, places, historic events and current situations. That if they drew up some big brush strokes it would give a greater clarity to the immediate. I am aware in giving them the challenge of 30 years there might not be another 30 years of annual appraisals for them, however I suspect if they can do this it could well open up space for others.

Appraisals are a mixed bag! This person could be discouraged (I hear them say ‘surely there is something more on the positive side?’), they could argue their case, blame others… It will be interesting to see how they respond.

SHARE ON:

Post PermaLink

We beheld his glory

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Theology

We beheld his glory, full of…

John suggests that his glory had content. The glory was more than an existential experience. It was touchable and touchable in an observable way. So time to look up the Greek text and come up with a good translation? How about:

His glory was full of grey – and black and white…

Not really suggesting that is the translation, and I do not want to cheapen the word ‘grace’, so tentatively am going to run with ‘grey’ to make it very concrete. If we use the word ‘grace’ it can be religionised away and truth – well we all know what that is. In a recent post I suggested that we are better to be solution focused rather than answer focused and this is a kind of follow on. So forgive me for the translation!

The classic response of Jesus to the woman caught in adultery: ‘I do not condemn you’ shows a measure of greyness. Grey / grace was the solution to the situation that was a bad one from the start. The deck was stacked against the woman (where was the man?). There was probably the prevailing belief that the woman was the seductress and so what else was the man meant to do. That belief skews any judgement, even a judgement based on biblical texts. We face situations that should never have occurred, but we face them because they started out wrong. Our true judgement does not get us too far with many of those situations. The wealthy person walking past the person sitting on the street and refusing to part with a few coins as they will only use it to buy booze or drugs… yes we can walk past and then at the weekend go and buy some booze, and now even more sadly drugs as well. The black and white judgement against the ‘sinner’ just does not always cut it as there are so many other factors.

Tighten legislation against abortion might well be necessary, but when there is such a connection between abortions and social deprivation, we can tick the box of ‘right move’ but not go deep enough. Grey… not pretty.

I like the word ‘grace’, a nice theological category but grey – I just don’t like it. Yet so many situations that God comes to he comes into the situation that was started wrong, and the solution is sometimes a grey. He walked among us, he did not set out rules from a position away from us. He touched what was wrong, and in touching it solutions, ways forward were manifest. Glory is not to be pushed simply into the transcendent realm of out there and up there somewhere. Maybe though we think that is the only realm where glory is found because we are not able to allow it to manifest among us. He (Jesus) walked and we saw glory… we saw again and again a greyness to those on the margins. They did not face a strong ‘repentance’ call, but words of hope. Grey is not the colour of religion!

Grey, strangely a mixture of black and white. His glory full of grey, but stick with it and we will see that he is not pushing ‘anything goes’ as a response. In the midst of it all there was a black and white (truth). How anyone can hold that together is a mystery, and whenever it takes place, for sure, we see ‘glory’.

Show us your glory is a great cry. Show your glory through me is a most challenging pathway. Truth / black and white will be involved I am sure, but right at the forefront, the leading edge will be grey.

SHARE ON:

Post PermaLink

Memories remembered

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Strategic Prayer

Just under a year ago in our journeys around Spain we visited the city of Badajoz, in the west of Spain just a few kilometres from the Portuguese border. We were provoked to go there during the many months we had travelled seeking to pray into the history of the Muslim expulsions in Spain. We aimed to finish in Gibraltar as that was the entry point in 711AD, and were there over the weekend of September 10th. We had not planned to go to Badajoz but in a dream we had a passionate request:

But do not forget Badajoz and the life threatening storm that is coming there tonight. (Post on the dream in Tarifa/).

When we went to Badajoz we were not ready for what we experienced. It was truly the ‘forgotten place’, and we were more deeply impacted than we realised. Even a local did not know what a sculpture was representing – it represented one of the most brutal massacres of civilians in the whole Spanish civil war. It was opened with an invite by the town council and many of the families affected were gathered – and it was opened without any speeches!!

The place of forgetfulness is the place where memories are kept alive – in the sense of they have not been healed so can be pulled on so that history can repeat / rhyme.

What does one do in those places? Gayle and I are pretty clueless. We walked, prayed, poured out wine and salt. We even tried to sing!!! If anyone knows what to do please send answers on a postcard. If I were to send in my answer it would be ‘stand clueless, and stand until you can move on.’ Probably a pretty rubbish answer.

We were deeply moved when a few months later Pablo Iglesias came to Badajoz and in a public speech spoke of the history and how it will not be forgotten. I wrote about this:
Don’t forget Badajoz on Dec. 2nd last year. So often there is a follow up by someone in some measure of authority to stand where someone who did not know what to do but stood there in the name of Jesus stood before.

Just yesterday we came now across this article in: El Diario outlining guided walks that bring to remembrance the slaughter in Badajoz. The bullring in the photo is where we focused when we were there. It is no longer there and this is where the ‘forgotten’ sculpture is placed.

To say we, the clueless ones, are blown away is an understatement. Let there now be an unlocking.

In the article we can read:

La memoria es un ejercicio democrático. El conocimiento del pasado es necesario para no cometer los mismos errores. Las visitas guiadas quieren fomentar la conciencia histórica para avanzar hacia el futuro, señala José Manuel Rodríguez desde la asociación AECOS.

La Matanza de Badajoz sigue suscitando mucha controversia, y las rutas abogan por visibilizar la memoria de la ciudadanía pacense. “Consideramos que es un hecho histórico que, de manera interesada, fue invisibilizado y ocultado. Manipulado”, destacan desde la organización.

Memory is a democratic exercise. Knowledge of the past is necessary so as not to make the same mistakes. The guided tours want to promote historical awareness to enable forward movement, says José Manuel Rodríguez from the AECOS association.

The massacre de Badajoz continues to provoke a lot of controversy, and the routes promote making the memory of the citizens of Badajoz visible. “We consider that it is a historical fact that, in an interested way, was made invisible and hidden. Manipulated “, stand out from the organization.

SHARE ON:

Post PermaLink

Invitation to live

Posted on
by Elly Lloyd
Posted in Poetry

Elly Lloyd sent me this piece she wrote… So with permission here is ‘Invitation to Live’.

Live daringly
      on the edge of the precipice
        truthfully
        by the river of righteousness
 knowledgeably in knowing
      and being known
      outrageously
 poured out
      abandoned
      but not lost
   passionate in My true image

SHARE ON:

Post PermaLink

The definite answer

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Personal Perspectives

For many of us with our evangelical background we have been intuitively taught to believe that there are answers (not so bad a concept) and that we have them (not always a good concept!). This is also compounded if we also have a personality that is biased toward the black and white approach of there being an absolute that is knowable in every situation. Maybe add a little bit of youthful energy and we will always be looking to receive or to give the definitive response. ‘I’m glad you asked me, and even if you didn’t ask me I am more than capable of telling you the answer. So pin back your ears…’

I suggested in conversation recently that when we are younger in our faith and in our stage of life that we are often ready with the answer, but as we develop we move away from being equipped with the quick answer to seeking the slower and less easy task of trying to help find solutions. An answer based approach will say ‘this is right, that is wrong, I know that because…, and so this is what you need to do.’ A solution based approach might even say ‘I don’t have the answer, and I am not sure there is an answer, and probably what you are experiencing will be an untied loose end and won’t even be resolved.’ A way forward (a solution) can consist in ‘there is no answer.’ Strangely knowing that there is no answer can help us find the solution, whereas holding on to an answer can leave us vulnerable to the many turns and twists of life.

I listened recently to a part of a video where the person said, in effect, that he had come to them with questions for their answers. That is not something we like when we want certainty! Yet doubt and uncertainty is not the enemy of faith, but are the companions that enrich our faith.

There are answers to many of our situations, it is not as if all of life is a loose end – thank God! But a premature answer can also sell us short, so that we avoid the journey in waters unknown, and do not discover what needs to change within us. Maturity is not marked by finding all the answers (becoming a human ‘wikipedia’) but in meandering ever closer to the God who does not always deal with rights and wrongs but in redemptive solutions that move life forward. (Life is a meander because we do not always know in what direction we should head, but somehow as we walk in humility our meander takes on a distinct direction.)

We can see this kind of meander in Paul (an apostle meandering – whatever next?). We read:

Paul and his companions traveled throughout the region of Phrygiaz and Galatia, having been kept by the Holy Spirit from preaching the word in the province of Asia. When they came to the border of Mysia, they tried to enter Bithynia, but the Spirit of Jesus would not allow them to. So they passed by Mysia and went down to Troas (Acts 16:6-8).

They were headed toward Asia, presumably because they felt clear to head in that direction, but hit a block; they tried to enter Bythinia but were prevented. Not exactly clear apostolic direction at this point. There must have been a relief when at last Paul got his act together announcing he had had a clear dream of where they should go – Macedonia. The dream of the man calling for help clearly restores faith in his ability to receive apostolic direction! So off to Macedonia (Philippi) they go and ever so quickly they walk into the fulfilment. Or do they? It is not a man of Macedonia that features but a woman – Lydia! Of course there might be ways of resolving it all (the jailer and family respond later) but I like that there is not a clear – ‘and as a result of the dream this is what came about and all the boxes were ticked.’ The Bible helpfully leaves things unresolved – it is a book of God’s solutions not simply his set of answers. It is not a codified text of a way to live but a narratival account of the meanderings of those who were not among those who were mighty, highly intelligent and lived happily without a doubt again ever after.

I suspect God is not scratching his head seeking to find the answer but is willing to open his heart to us and help us find a way forward. And the way forward just might be a messy one.

Solutions are not always the answer, but answers are not always the solution. Solutions open the future; answers try and explain the past. They might be related, and maybe one day we will receive all the answers to the questions we had, but I suspect when we fully live the other side of the solutions we probably won’t be interested in the answers.

PS: You can present all the answers in the comment section should you wish!!

SHARE ON:

Post PermaLink

To, for or with?

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Personal Perspectives

For the past couple of months I have been mulling over these three words in the context of our relationship to ‘the world’. Here then are a few of my not totally formed thoughts (partly provoked by a video clip of Dr. Sam Wells that I watched). My guess is this is an extension of contemplating how to be ‘in’ the world but not ‘of’ it. The application should be into a much wider context than evangelism (and I think the primary biblical paradigm is ‘witness’ not evangelism as defined by modernism) but will use that as my means of dialogue.

In the TO the world, my approach is shaped by a view that I am over here, the world is over there and there is a gulf in between the ‘washed’ and the ‘great unwashed’. I have an obligation to do something to them, but in taking that approach I enter into a I-it relationship (Martin Buber’s usage to describe something that falls far below a true encounter). I do this to someone as we are very different, they are truly the other, and other in the sense of inferior. Evangelism is done to in order to convert, if there is a conversion then they can move over here to where I am, and then together we can act to do more ‘to’ those who need conversion. If there is no conversion then necessity means I should move on with the hope that someone else I do this to will be more responsive.

In the FOR mode, I recognise how much I have that the world does not have, therefore am moved to share what I have with them. The invitation is to come to my ground as I have something for them. This normally moves beyond a simple I-it relationship, but can prove very problematic when there is no response leading to conversion. Does the relationship continue or is it now unprofitable as there are others who I can relate to in a ‘for’ them relationship. The hope is that they will convert, join me in my ground and together we invite others across to hear what we have for them. If they do not convert I am in a bit of a dilemma as I only have so much capacity. If it was a true I-thou relationship do I drop them and use my energies with others?

In the WITH mode, I recognise that there is a commonality between us all. I do not abide in some separate piece of ground, but live, move and have my being as all others do in God. This commonality means I am seeking always to relate to anyone, regardless of how ‘other’ they are in a I-Thou relationship (Buber’s term). I see we have much in common, this commonality is not based on a specific response of faith – and Paul’s relationship with the Asiarchs is a powerful example on this (Acts 19). We are not simply coming with our projects, but with our gifts, calling and faith to discover ways of being ‘with’ people. There will be a very strong ‘with’ whenever there are those who dream of a different world, for if anyone is in Christ they do not simply dream of a different world – there is a different world.

(The above I have applied to ‘evangelism’, but it needs to be applied to so much of Christian charitable work also. It might be a great experience to go and work in an underprivileged place, and there might be many reasons why we cannot simply go and live there, but the deepest relationship is the ‘with’, not the ‘for’, and certainly not the ‘to’ relationship.)

The believer in Christ lives in two places: in Christ / heavenly dimension and geographical / horizontal relational level. (‘To the saints in Christ in Corinth’ was a typical Pauline greeting.) We have to be faithful to both settings, and both settings are lived in simultaneously. Our faith determines how we live in the second setting. We live there to humanise others, to be full of hope, to bear witness that our world view is shaped by the Transcendent one who entered into a I-Thou relationship with us. Tangible signs also accompany us: the signs that Jesus gave marking the change of time, those of supernatural healings and of the marginalised hearing the sound of good news.

To be in the world but not of it necessitates living in both spheres simultaneously, of determining to be shaped by the ‘with’ mode. A new day is always being offered; a new day should have been our habitat given the resurrection. Maybe the sound of a new day has been muted because the body of Christ has not been too quick to live out the new day in the ‘with’ mentality.

SHARE ON:

Post PermaLink

Perspectives