hypothetical converts

Terence L. Donaldson has published a good work entitled, Judaism and the Gentiles: Jewish Patterns of Universalism (to 135 CE) which surveys the perspective(s) that were held within various Jewish writings (some from communities and individuals as well) regarding the fate of the Gentiles in the final restoration of Israel.  I am still in process of working through the book, so will reserve further comment until a full review can be given.

This morning I was particularly struck, however, with his conclusions regarding Qumran.  It is no secret that this desert community was quite exclusive in their view of salvation, thus driving them to their separatist lifestyle.  In fact, much has pointed to their apparent exclusion of other 

Jewish individuals for their lack of commitment to Torah.  Indeed, a reading through the text clearly leaves a bleak picture for Gentiles.

Yet what Donaldson explores in his examination of their literature is an apparent openness to Gentile conversion and inclusion within their community!  What appears at first to be contradictory is explored further.  The debate itself centers around the identity of the גר in the documents themselves - a debate which Donaldson reviews but does not himself commit to anything further than those people who were not Jewish in their ethnic origin.  And he is probably right to leave it there at this point.  What he discovers, interestingly enough, is that the Qumran texts speak of conversion and posit scenarios of how a גר is brought into the community.

The ins and outs here are fascinating, but can be boiled down quickly to the conclusion which Donaldson reaches: that the apparent contrast between the inclusion of גרימ in Qumran is a matter of belief versus practice.  For, it appears that the community has written about an idealized Israel, ". . .one which included the category of proselytes but as an idealized, hypothetical construct, rather than as a group of flesh-and-blood Gentile converts to Israel."  He further states, "there were proselytes within the Qumran worldview but not within the Qumran community" (215).

And speaking of the church, the more things change the more things stay the same.

in and out

You can divide your whole life into two basic categories.

You're either saying in or going out.

Everything else is irrelevant detail.

The urge to go out and then return is very strong.  Just

look at what happens to people when they don't want to 

stay home and they have to.  They become despondent.  Or

if someone's locked out of their house and can't

get in when they want?  They go nuts.

We must go out.  We must go back.

When you're out, everything's a little out of control and

exciting.  Something could happen.  You might see

something.  You might find out something.  You might even

be a part of something.  We've got to go out there.

When you're back in your house you're like the conductor

of an orchestra.  You know where everything is and how to

work it.  You move confidently from one part of your

house to another.  You know exactly where you're going

and what will happen when you get there.

You're the maestro of a symphony with nothing on

but socks and underwear.

And it's because we know it so well that

we've got to get out.

bringing jesus

Discussions of the Spirit in Luke-Acts have often centered around the concept of δύναμις and its relationship to πνεῡμα.  Graham Twelftree portrays his view of this relationship in his most recent, In the Name of Jesus, when discussing the nature of Christian exorcism and spiritual warfare.  Although he doesn't really bring anything new to the table on the specific relationship of these two concepts, it is interesting how he strings some thoughts together regarding Luke-Acts.

In regards to Luke 5:17 and 8:46 Twefltree makes the statement, ". . .δύναμις works immediately and impersonally, responding to the contact of any believing person without the knowledge or approval of Jesus" (137).  But (and here he moves forward in 'filling-out' this notion), "It is the powerful presence of God's Spirit received for healing through faith" (137).  What Twelftree seems to be saying here is that δύναμις is the outworking of the presence of God's πνεῡμα.  This means, for Luke, that the source of healing is attributed directly to the immediate presence of the Spirit rather than through any incantation or human personality.

While there is definitely more to be said on this idea, what I want to focus on here is how he moves this into the healing and exorcism ministry of the early church.  He states, "From Luke's perspective, early Christian exorcism was successful because the exorcists brought Jesus into the situation either by using his name or issuing a command as if passed down from him" (148, emphasis is mine).  This is an interesting concept which I think has fallen away in the modern church culture.  As people quite obsessed with our own power and influence, we like the concept of δύναμις, regardless of its specific relationship to the Spirit.

Yet, it is quite interesting to note that Luke's picture of δύναμις is predicated on a specific relationship with πνεῡμα - meaning, power comes from a right relationship with the Spirit and not just our desire to have power.  Twelftree's statement refers to the belief among the early Christians that as they invoked the name of Jesus they were introducing the presence of Jesus into the situation.  And this was reserved for the advancement of the kingdom, especially in exorcism, healing and spiritual warfare.  (It is doubtful that parking spaces and vending machine selection warranted such an invocation among the first believers.)

Rather than using 'the name of Jesus' as a way to cap off an otherwise self-centered and egotistic string of wants, the tradition preserved in the Gospel is that the spiritual presence of Jesus held the power of the coming kingdom which was going to overcome the powers of the world.  Therefore, going in the name of Jesus requires the church to go in the full power of the Spirit and the dedication of making the kingdom a reality within the world.  Sadly, this is missing in large part among modern Christians.

"Exorcism was not simply healing a sick person but the bringing of salvation" (148).

zeke's bread

Two things we know for sure about Ezekiel: 1) about 158 practicing Christians worldwide even know what this OT books says (only 267 know it is an actual biblical book); 2) he could make some wicked bread.  How do I know this?  A simple walk through the freezer section revealed this:

I must confess, I was a bit skeptical at first.  BUT!. . .Brethren, hear my testimony: As the weight of the Lenten fast was upon me I sensed my spiritual life drying up.  This morning was especially difficult as I felt no desire to work on my research, to plan for my church, to spiritually guide my family.  But after a mid-morning PB&J with the aforementioned bread, I now feel compellingly affirmed that the Spirit has flown to my heart (much like the dove pictured on the plastic wrapper in the aforementioned bread).  Yes, Ezekiel can throw down some prophetic smack - we knew that all along.  But he can also deliver some fabulous dough.

Aaaaaaaaaannnnnnd!  As though that witness wasn't enough, there has been this discovery.  I am sure that when Jesus had a hankerin' for a burrito, he went this route (because he had not yet created Chipotle). . .

passion meditation

N. T. Wright. Christians at the Cross: Finding Hope in the Passion, Death, and Resurrection of Jesus. Ijamsville: The Word Among Us Press, 2007.

Although it would have been more appropriate to read this work daily during Holy Week, as a pastor I am constantly on the lookout for fresh perspectives on the church's appointed times of meditation, so I read through this over the last week and a half.  As expected, it is a wonderful collection of sermons given by Bishop Wright suitable for daily reflection throughout Holy Week.  No, there is nothing particularly new in his work (if you are familiar with NTW), but it is framed and explained in a manner more fitting for laity, sermon, devotional, and the like.

The collection comes from Wright's week long journey with the congregation in Easington Colliery in 2007.  This community, which lies in County Durham, has experienced tragedy and hardship in the past few generations.  As the village now lies in somewhat of an eclipse, Wright takes the message of the cross and resurrection as a challenge to the fear and dread and a proclamation of hope and life.  This certainly makes for some interesting coloring upon his well-documented theological beliefs of the resurrection, resulting in a powerful and poignant message of salvation.  I know of many communities (my present one especially) who can relate to much of what lies in this work.

On a more subjective note: I felt that the book/sermon-series reached a particular climax on the Meditation on Holy Saturday, entitled "Waiting."  Here Wright brings together the themes of suffering and death with hope and resurrection in a unique way, for it is the in-between of the passion narrative.  And we who participate in the church today are in a similar situation (being those who mourn and who are, simultaneously, filled with joy).  Reading the chosen text from Lamentations with this setting, one can better reflect the tragedy of this life and the call of hope which has gone forth.

To quote from this chapter: "And if we want to find God's way forward for this community, for ourselves, for this church - and we are, in  many respects, a microcosm of where so many churches up and down our country are today - then we must learn to wait, to be quiet, to affirm God's order in our chaos but not yet to understand it" (67).

print me

I found this gem on a bulletin board hanging in the entry of a local restaurant.  On the back is the info for an area church.  Although placing this card a random bulletin board is probably bringing people to the kingdom in droves, I lifted it to post here and make fun of it - thereby adding one more piece of evidence that I will most likely need something like this someday.

bound to the land

In a book drawn from his doctoral thesis, Michael Fuller discusses the motif of exile and re-gathering of Israel as the restoration of the kingdom.  While I will look at reviewing more of the book in its entirety later, I wanted to briefly explore one of his conclusions.  His claim (working from Luke-Acts) is that the Twelve - as representative of Israel - are "bound to the Land" as part of the eschatological restoration of Israel.

Building into this, he makes a number of assertions with which I can readily agree:

1) the Twelve are indeed representative of Israel

2) the enthronement of Jesus is the decisive moment of restoration for Israel

3) the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the disciples confirms the exaltation of Jesus

4) the coming of the Holy Spirit is portrayed by Luke as the inauguration of the 'last days'

Fuller then continues his reasoning to demonstrate that Luke's perspective centers on the traditions of Israel which link restoration and re-gathering specifically to the Land.  Thus, any geographic movement of the gospel is found outside of the Twelve (mostly taken up by Paul).  While I think that Fuller has constructed a good thesis overall and that his argument is well placed, I am still a bit hesitant to accept this final point of the restoration being bound to the Land.  Within the overall framework of Luke-Acts it appears that the focus is on the outward movement of the gospel on so many levels that one might be more prepared to see a perspective which emphasizes the Jewish belief of God's restoration of all creation as an outworking of a restored Israel.

If anyone else has said this before, I have yet to discover it - perhaps it is articulated in a manner which I would more readily accept.  Or it could be that this week is getting waaay too long.

giving to caesar what is god's

Perhaps you have been hiding in a cave somewhere and haven't noticed that the United States is in the middle of a presidential election cycle.  This has indeed been the source of many stress-related illness, aggravated heart conditions, indignant prayers and overall social stupidity being paraded around - and not just at home, but abroad as well.  This is, at its core, not a bad thing since no matter how bad one side might perceive another there will be no uprisings or revolts, no coups or lockouts, only the resolve to move forward regardless of the situation.  But the majority of Americans can easily agree that these are very uncertain times (for many reasons).

And it seems that while you expect to see everyone from television news networks to (in)famous politicians to blog conspirators throw in their endorsements for their own candidates, it is now particularly intriguing to see how church leaders (and self-perceived church leaders) are also stuffing into the political bandwagons.  Especially in an internet age, it seems that more and more biblioblogs and theoblogs are using their outlets to endorse, support, or decry their own political candidates on the basis of their religious points of view.  Although there is nothing wrong with voicing an opinion from within Christian perspectives, this is beginning to be given as the outworking of theological systems.  In other words, the perception which is being presented is that the most "christian" thing to do is endorse so-and-so or such-and-such.  While I recognize that this is not new, I am concerned with the current rhetoric of political debate which is invading theologically-centered arenas.  I believe, quite firmly, that this is to the detriment of the kingdom.

Unfortunately, most people never investigate the roles of church and state further than quoting Jesus' quite famous dictum, "Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's" (Matthew 22:21).  It is rather interesting that the majority of those who often cite this phrase spend very little time investigating its implications.  While it might be wrong to use separatistic language of detaching church and state, it is more than appropriate to identify hierarchical connections which affirm the sovereignty of God regardless of the political landscape.  The reason why I am convinced of the damage being done to the work of the kingdom is that too many within the church seem to believe that the only way in which the work of the kingdom is going to advance is through various legislatures and executives (and even judicial bodies) being instilled within our country.  

But is not the mission of the church to proclaim the sovereign Lordship of Christ over and above every power which exists in the world?  Is the charge given to the church different today than it was in previous governments?  Will the power of God's people diminish if we do not elect the *right* person?  When I see how believers (on both sides of the aisle) equate a candidate with their theological points of view, then I see the diminishing effectiveness of the kingdom of God.  Also, I see half-baked rhetoric being thrown back and forth, filled with ignorance and quickly falling prey to the world's own characterizations and stereotypes (this happens when Christians call one president stupid, and decry another president to eternity in hell).

It should be no surprise that American evangelicalism is so impotent for advancing the work of the kingdom, when we seem to be devoted to nothing more or higher or nobler than the world which surrounds us.  There are ways to create social, political, economic and moral change as an outworking of the Spirit within the church.  But it does not come when we surrender our freedom to live and chain ourselves to the ways of this world.  One nation will not be the savior of this world; one nation will not be the final evil of this world.  More than anything else, governments are created to be governments but the church is called to be the church.  Both have their roles, and do not exist independent of the other - but one clearly calls out for a higher allegiance than is being demonstrated.

pauline pajama party

closing on repentance

In his book, The Role and Function of Repentance in Luke-Acts, Nave includes an interesting analysis of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31).  He connects this parable with the statement Jesus makes in 17:4, ". . .you must forgive them."  In his understanding of the text, the parable of the rich man (and his brothers) shows that had they repented of the way which they had treated Lazarus - in word and deed - then Lazarus "would have been required to forgive them" (191).  The fundamental point which Nave is presenting is that "repentance requires forgiveness," a thesis which Nave believes is an inclusio for the entirety of Luke (191).

It is interesting (although I might part company with some of Nave's wording) that there seems to be relational completion which comes from repentance and forgiveness.  Repentance without forgiveness still reflects a disrupted relationship - one that cannot properly heal and grow.  Although this goes a bit beyond Nave's specific exegesis, there is no mention of the ramifications of the failure to forgive someone who is repentant.  And his overall thesis supports the notion that it is for the edification of the community that this process be taken seriously.

Earlier in his discussion of Luke-Acts, Nave mentions that the entire notion of forgiveness as presented in the Gospel is directed toward the creation of a radically new community of God's people - at which point N. T. Wright would correctly remind us that this community/church is the new temple which Jesus was restoring (see Nave, 169).  Failure to participate in the proper modes of repentance and forgiveness tears down that which is being built, and keeps the kingdom from moving forward in its goal of the restoration of God's people.  Thus, it might be said that repentance begins and forgiveness completes the work of salvation and restoration.

Further notes: 1) the focus of repentance is both before God and interpersonally; 2) those who repent before God find immediate forgiveness and thus immediate participation in the restoration community; 3) the act of forgiveness disrupts interpersonal relationships and often hinders the realization of the kingdom; 4) the lack of receiving interpersonal forgiveness by a repentant individual does not hinder their participation in the kingdom.