Monthly Archives: July 2013

Church life is Easter

Leave a Reply

Listening to our church sermon on Acts 12 (our talk recordings are here) it was impossible to miss the parallels between the attack on Jesus and the attack on the church. Within five short verses, Luke artfully associates Jesus’ Easter experience with the life of the Jerusalem church. Here are the details that establish the link.

  • Herod
    When Jesus was arrested, Pilate drew a Herod – Herod Antipas – into the trial (Luke 23:7-8). In Acts 12, it’s another Herod – Herod Agrippa – who arrests Jesus’ apostles (Acts 12:1). The Herodian family can’t keep away from mischief!
  • Unleavened Bread
    Jesus’ last days before crucifixion were in the days of Unleavened Bread (see Luke 22:1, 7). The arrests in Acts were at the same time of year (Acts 12:3)
  • After the Passover
    Herod’s initial plan was to bring Peter out from prison “after Passover” (Acts 12:4). Compare this with the plans for Jesus’ arrest (“not during the feast” Mat 26:5, Mark 14:2). In both cases the planned delay did not occur
  • Prayer
    Prayer is common in the whole Bible. Praying earnestly is very rare. It’s how Jesus prayed in the Garden (Luke 22:44), and how the church prayed for Peter (Acts 12:5)
  • Death & deliverance
    Jesus was crucified, yet was delivered from the tomb. In Acts 12 James is killed while Peter is delivered from death. The experience of the church was not simply one or the other – there’s both death and deliverance.

These similarities build up a picture. Luke, I believe, wants us to see that the attack on the church in Jerusalem was like the attack on Jesus in Jerusalem. It’s not an exact parallel in each detail, yet there is a definite likeness. Jesus uniquely lived out Easter. Jesus’ death and life is the hub of God’s work. The church is built on Jesus’ Easter ministry. And also the church embodies Easter. The shape of church life is Easter.

Why point this out? So we have right expectations.

In church, and in this world, believers are not immune to unpredictable hate. James was killed, but this was not a sign that Jesus somehow failed the church. Peter was freed, but this does not constitute a promise from Jesus to ‘get out of gaol free.’

Church life, in other words, is the same turbulent and confusing and troubling life that Jesus experienced as part of the first Easter. And church life is certainly the place where God himself is at work for good.

 


 

Words about words: reading

Leave a Reply

From Walter Percy, quoted in The Gospel and The Mind (p.105).

“If you do not learn to read, that is, read with pleasure, that is, make the breakthrough into the delight of reading‒you are going to miss out.” And I don’t mean that you are going to miss out on books or being bookish. No, I mean that, no matter what you go into-law, medicine, computer science, housewifing, house-husbanding, engineering, whatever‒you are going to miss out, you are not going to be first-class unless you’ve made this breakthrough. You are going to miss out, not only on your profession, but on the great treasure of your heritage, which is nothing less than Western civilization.

 


 

100% gossip

Leave a Reply

Gossip is:

  • 100% right and 100% useless
    ‘I know what’s wrong with them’
    and
    ‘I’ll tell you, but I won’t do a thing to help’
  • 100% leadership and 100% slavery
    I decide to tell you
    and
    I follow my malicious desire
  • 100% friendly and 100% hateful
    ‘We draw so much closer together when we talk openly’
    and
    ‘Gee, he’s stupid’
  • 100% tasty and 100% bitter
    ‘Here’s some juicy news’
    and
    ‘Hearing that leaves a bitter taste in the mouth’
  • 100% public and 100% secret
    ‘I can’t keep this to myself’
    and
    ‘Promise not to tell’
  • 100% creative and 100% destructive
    ‘I can guess what she’s thinking’
    and
    ‘Let’s break her’
  • 100% mixed and 100% pure
    Envy, hatred, jealousy, judgementalism, divisiveness, spite, …
    and
    Unalloyed sin

 


 

Taking refuge

1 Reply

Yesterday Australia and Papua New Guinea announced an agreement for processing refugees who arrive in Australian waters by boat, but have no visa. Yesterday also, my social media streams overflowed with people outraged and embarrassed and who – in so many ways – were able to position themselves in the best possible light.

My social media skills fail me here, because I don’t know how to sum up my thoughts in no more than 140 characters. This post is my effort to think a bit more clearly about the whole refugee issue.

Here are some points about which I am pretty certain.

  1. Refugees need refuge
    This is basic, a foundation. Like most foundations, it’s not always at the centre of comment. Yet it needs the occasional reinforcement. I think Australia is well-placed to provide refuge for people in great need. And what an astonishing thing that the world has refugee conventions, workers dedicated to refugee care, international law, … Even though they don’t work perfectly, I thank God for these.
  2. Boat trips to Australia are unnecessarily dangerous
    SIEV-X is a famous example of tragedy in dangerous seas, but not an isolated one. I write ‘unnecessarily’ because there’s always danger, and I assume many people in flight have already been through much that is unsafe. Yet it would be good to eliminate this risk.
  3. Refugee camps hold people too long
    In my region, Albury-Wodonga, hundreds of Bhutanese refugees have been resettled after up to 20 years in camps. At first, I was incredulous at such a delay. An often-linked article this week says that asylum-seekers in Indonesia may wait 20-30 years for settlement in a third country. Wouldn’t it be good to see substantial change in this figure!
  4. I don’t know
    I don’t know international law. I don’t know how to formulate national policy. I don’t know what it’s like for the navy, customs and quarantine to implement boat policy. I have no insight into the motives of prime minister, opposition leader or others who speak up. I am the definition of ‘all care but no responsibility’ – the perfect place from which to pontificate.

So what?

  • So … I feel unable to form an opinion about the Australia-PNG agreement. It might be good. It might be bad. It could be both good and bad.
  • So … I’m not going to blame ‘the politicians’. We’re all involved: electors, media, politicians, employers, unions – everyone. The problem is not them, the problem is us.
  • So … I suggest we truly talk to those who have influence on refugee policy. Enquire and listen, then communicate. There’s the local federal parliamentarian. No doubt there are others, too. A good topic to keep raising: that Australia continue its humanitarian refugee intake.

Those who read the Bible have plenty of reason to sympathise with refugees. The Israelites, after Passover, we taught to remember that they were once aliens (Exodus 23:9). Jesus’ family fled to Egypt away from Herodian danger (Matthew 2:13-15). And Christians are people named as travellers and exiles who received needed mercy (1 Peter 2:9-12).

None of these verses make resolution of the refugee problem easy. Nor do they give us direct insight into policy. But they all spur Christians to compassion, mercy and the openness of love.

 


 

Thinking, New Testament-style

Leave a Reply

Some observations on thinking in the New Testament. Here are some of the ways the Bible expresses what thinking involves. Some of the associations and links surprised me – and certainly warn against viewing ‘thought’ as pure rationality in operation.

  • You love with your mind, as well as with heart and soul (Matthew 22:37,  Mark 12:30 also adds strength)
  • You think with your heart (Luke 1:51)
  • Arrogance is a manner of thought (Luke 1:51)
  • Body and mind together have desires, which are not under control but drive us – the ‘passions of the flesh’ (Ephesians 2:3)
  • A dark mind is a relationship problem. More than not knowing it is not knowing God (Ephesians 4:18)
  • Christian unity is a thought, being ‘of the same mind’ (Philippians 2:2)
  • Humility is a matter of the mind, having ‘the mind of Christ’ (Philippians 2:5)
  • A mind can be actively hostile, a long way from cool rational detachment (Colossians 1:21)
  • The mind – like the heart – is a place for God’s law to live, by God’s generous gift (Hebrews 8:10)
  • The mind is the place to prepare for action (1 Peter 1:13)
  • A prod towards remembering motivates endurance despite scoffing (2 Peter 3:1ff)
  • Understanding is a gift (1 John 5:20)

There is plenty more to add to this. Yet these verses alone are enough to expand our thinking about thinking.

To me, there are two major reflections on this. One, our thoughts are intimately connected to the whole of what we are (our desires, loves, beliefs, actions, etc). Two, our thoughts are never neutral or impartial. We always think from a perspective and from relationships. Those relationships may be loving, or they may be broken – supremely our thinking flows from our relation to God.

Our minds will not save us. Only the gospel can save our minds.

 


 

Science of the gaps

Leave a Reply

There’s a long-standing criticism of Christians that goes like this: whenever there’s something humans can’t explain, you say ‘See! That’s God at work’.

And fair enough too. What a silly argument. How does ignorance on the part of Person Y (me!) provide evidence for the existence of Person X (God)? All it proves is that there’s a hole in human knowledge – and that is not breaking news.

Honestly, though, I have only heard this argument for God a couple of times. The places it has come up have been informal chats among church folk. It’s is usually followed by an uneasy polite silence as everyone else considers how to change the subject.

Mind the gapIn contrast, I hear essentially the same argument more frequently against God.

Like this: there are holes in scientific knowledge, but we know that science has capacity to provide the answers. It’s science of the gaps. There’s a strong faith that the ‘scientific method’ is the single method capable of finding truth and certainty.

In my experience, the fields in which this mantra tends to appear are: ethics and society; the nature of mind, consciousness and personhood; questions of ultimate reality and purpose.

The weaknesses of Science of the gaps are many. Here are three:

  • Lack of knowledge is empirical evidence that science doesn’t (yet) know everything. It’s against evidence to counter by saying, ‘But science can know everything.’
  • It doe not allow for complementary true explanations. When a family wants to know why a car accident happened, the laws of physics don’t help. Yes, physics gives a true picture of momentum, force, etc. But the family wants to know about drunk drivers, blinding sun or illegal mobile phone use.
  • It’s impossible to prove the basic assumption. We only prove that science can know all things after science knows all things. In other words, the starting assumption is itself non-scientific.

In science (as in Christianity) it pays to ‘Mind the gap’.

 


 

Apostle Peter – proselyte

Leave a Reply

A proselyte is a convert, someone who adopts a new faith or religious life. In the Bible, there are proselytes to Judaism (see Matthew 23:15, Acts 2:11). It must have been quite a commitment to make such a change. Whatever else it involved, we know that the men needed to be circumcised!

The word proselyte comes from a pretty standard, non-religious, Greek word (προσερχομαι, proserchomai). This verb can mean to move towards, or to cross over. This seems to be the sense of proselyte: he or she is someone who has ‘crossed over.’

The New Testament includes major early church arguments about how to receive forgiveness from Jesus. In particular, how can Gentiles receive the blessings of Christ? Since Jesus is the Jewish Christ, it might be that non-Jews must submit to the Jewish law to receive Christ’s benefits. Some argued that the process for non-Jews looks like this:

Pagan → Proselyte → Trust Jesus

This makes some sense. God spent centuries teaching the Jewish people to be distinct and remain faithful to the law he spoke to them. How could the Lord so quickly change things? Acts shows the early Christians struggling with this. A serious test is in chapter 10, when God speaks to the Roman centurion Cornelius.

As the scene unfolds, God surprises everyone. Cornelius does not have to become a proselyte. In contrast, it’s as if the apostle Peter himself becomes the proselyte.

Firstly, about Cornelius. Upon hearing the gospel, God pours out his Holy Spirit directly on the Gentiles (verse 44). And the Jewish believers reacted with amazement that the Spirit was ‘even for the Gentiles’ (verse 45). God’s actions show the true process for pagans to come to Jesus:

Pagan → Trust Jesus

But what about Peter? How could he be said to be a proselyte? I think this is because Peter is the one who crosses over. Cornelius physically remains in his place (Caesarea) and Peter is sent by God away from the house he’s in. In some perplexity, Peter states to Cornelius that Jews usually don’t make this kind of trip (Acts 10:28). When Peter says it is unlawful for a Jew ‘to visit anyone from another nation’ he uses the proselyte verb προσερχομαι (proserchomai). But God made him do it!

This moment is a huge change for Peter, for the church, and for the world. From this point onwards, those who trust the Lord are ever crossing over to invite all people to faith in Jesus. Peter goes to Cornelius. Paul and Barnabas go to Crete and Asia Minor. And no one ever need become Jewish before bowing before the Jewish Christ.

It’s not that Peter changed his beliefs. He still announced Jesus’ death and resurrection, and that Jesus judges and forgives (Acts 10:39-43). Yet Peter – and all Christianity with him – had crossed over to become a faith that ignored cultural barriers. We have a ‘crossing-over’ type of faith and love for neighbour. In fact, it is against the work of God to grimly hold on to personal distinctives (see the word from God in the verse I quote below).

Peter became a proselyte to outreach, a proselyte to direct engagement and love, a convert to Jesus’ direct welcome of people of all kinds. Peter became a proselyte that we might become proselytes too.

What God has made clean, do not defile! (Acts 10:15)

 


 

In praise of reading out loud

Leave a Reply

I don’t know how many times I’ve read the book of Job, yet I know that this is a book often in my mind.

This poetic account of a righteous and rich man suddenly deprived of his material blessing always raises life’s big questions. Who is truly blessed? What on earth is God doing? Who is right, who is evil? What is empathy? How helpful – and how dangerous – is theological knowledge?

Family Read AloudRecently I have been reading Job in a new way. Around the dinner table, we have been reading Job as a family – a Bible study for those between 5 and 45 (and visitors who share a meal with us). We don’t skip any chapters – every word is read out loud.

This reading out loud is amazing. I find it so much easier to spot unfolding ideas as they develop over many chapters. Previously, the speeches of Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar were all a blur to me. After our reading, it’s so much easier to see how their antagonism to Job grows in intensity.

Again and again we are all saying, ‘That’s just like what we read a few chapters ago.’ And we can spot how Job and his ‘friends’ argue against each other: often using similar words and phrases but in violent disagreement. We’re picking up subtlety, irony and sarcasm.

It’s definitely true that the kids under 10 contribute to our discussions – they make valuable observations and help us all. I’m convinced that a major reason for this is reading the poetry out loud.

So, this post is in praise of reading the Bible out loud. Read passages together. Read poetry. Read long passages, even multiple chapters. Don’t make apologies, but start with the assumption that all who hear will hear something true. The expectation we start with directly shapes the result we finish with.