The substance of Psalm 24

This is a provisional attempt to briefly summarize my understanding of the reality to which Psalm 24 testifies. I'd appreciate critical feedback or suggestions:

The reality attested to by the final form of Psalm 24 is a protological/eschatological narrative in which God's own destiny consists in communion with a righteous people in the context of new creation, a reality proleptically experienced in the temple yet consistently interrupted by the presence of cosmic and human evil and thus the need for divine militant intervention. Despite the requirement of wilful human participation in this reality, it is ultimately God himself who not only creates the space of new creation but also the people to inhabit it.

Even this is not the "rock bottom" reality to which Psalm 24 witnesses, as it is only the economic unfolding of the eternal ontological being of God himself. Thus, the reality to which Psalm 24 witnesses is not the "narrative" of God's activity but the eternal substance of his being himself. But I'm writing this for an Oxford Psalms conference so I have to watch my language.

Eine Andacht für meine Schwiegereltern (Psalm 34)

My parents-in-law are so-called "Russian Germans," descendants from German immigrants to the Volga region in the 17th Century. These immigrants set up independent rural communities where their language and religion was preserved and where they prospered economically. During the Russian Revolution they suffered a first wave of persecution. Their crimes where manifold: they were private land owners, they were wealthy, they were largely religious, and they were German (for Stalin, ethnicity was already a problem to be eradicated before the onset of WWII). Through a process of brutal intimidation, murder, rape and forced expropriation these communities were gradually decimated and sent into forced labour. My wife's father was already born in a Siberian work camp (1938). The outbreak of the Second World War gave more fuel to the fire. In addition to the aforementioned crimes: the Germans were now "the enemy," by definition "Nazis." My wife's mother-in-law was born in the Ukraine in 1939, after expropriation and expulsion but before deportation to Siberia. I won't recount their fascinating tales (though a book ought to be written at some point). Their persecution continued right up until the 1970's (they were only allowed to leave their villages after the '50s, but even then their religious faith and ethnicity hindered them from progressing in society), when, after years of struggle, brave demonstration and international pressure, my wife's parents joined the first wave of "returnees" to Germany in 1977 (Germany is the only country in the world apart from Israel to have a "law of return"). They had to leave everything behind, including savings, and start from scratch.

Last year my mother-in-law celebrated her sixtieth birthday in the midst of a large and blessed family (6 children; the 10th grandchild - courtesy of us - is on the way :)). I did the "Andacht," based on Psalm 34, and this is what I said (their names have been changed):

Psalm 34, 1-11.18-20.23

Ein Psalm Davids—als er seinen Verstand vor Abimelech verstellte, dieser ihn vertrieb und er wegging.

Ich will den herrn loben allezeit;

sein Lob soll immerdar in meinem Munde sein.

Meine Seele soll sich rühmen des Herrn,

daß es die Elenden hören und sich freuen.

Preiset mit mir den Herrn

und laßt uns miteinander seinen Namen erhöhen!

Als ich den Herrn suchte, antwortete er mir

und errettete mich aus aller meiner Furcht.

Die auf ihn sehen werden strahlen vor Freude,

und ihr Angesicht soll nicht schamrot werden.

Als einer im Elend rief, hörte der Herr

und half ihm aus allen seinen Nöten.

Der Engel des Herrn lagert sich um die her, die ihn fürchten,

und hilft ihnen heraus.

Schmecket und sehet, wie freundlich der Herr ist.

Wohl dem, der auf ihn trauet!

Fürchtet den Herrn, ihr seine Heiligen!

Denn die ih fürchten, haben keinen Mangel.

Reiche müssen darben und hungern;

aber die den Herrn suchen,

haben keinen Mangel an irgendeinem Gut.

Wenn die Gerechten schreien, so hört der Herr

und errettet sie aus all ihrer Not.

Der Herr ist nahe denen, die zerbrochenen Herzens sind,

und hilft denen, die ein zerschlagenes Gemüt haben.

Der Gerechte muß viel erleiden,

aber aus alledem hilft ihm der Herr.

Der Herr erlöst das Leben seiner Knechte,

und alle, die auf ihn trauen, werden frei von Schuld.

Liebe Lilly, lieber Peter,

David wurde von Samuel schon im 1. Sam 16 als König gesalbt, nachdem Gott Saul für seine Sünde verworfen hat. Ab diesem Zeitpunkt war David in Gottes Augen schon der wahre König von Israel. Nichtdestotrotz, hat es lange gedauert bevor diese Wirklichkeit sichtbar werden konnte. Inzwischen wurde David von Saul durch ganz Israel gejagt. David musste viel in seinem Leben leiden, und ich kann mir vorstellen, dass es ihm schwer gefallen ist zu glauben, dass er der wahre König war. Er war der König, aber für lange blieb es nur eine Verheißung. Er war schon gesalbt, aber noch nicht eingesetzt. Dieser Psalm ist in dieser Situation enstanden—diese spannungsvolle Zeit zwischen der Verklärung seiner Königschaft und das sichtbare Eintreten dessen Wirklichkeit. Die Geschichte können wir nachlesen im 1. Sam 21:10-15:

Und David machte sich auf und floh an jenem Tage vor Saul und kam zu Achis, dem König von Gat. Da sprachen Achis' Knechte zu ihm: Ist das nicht David, der König des Landes? Ist das nicht der, von welchem sie im Reigen Sangen: “Saul hat seine Tausend geschlagen, David aber seine Zehntausend!” Diese Worte nahm sich David zu Herzen und fürchtete sich sehr vor Achis, dem König zu Gat. Und er verstellte sich vor ihnen und raste unter ihren Händen und kratzte an den Türflügeln, und ließ den Speichel in seinen Bart fließen. Da sprach Achis zu seinen Knechten: Ihr seht doch, daß der Mann verrückt ist? Was bringt ihr ihn denn zu mir? Fehlt es mir etwa an Verrückten, daß ihr diesen Mann hergebracht habt, damit er gegen mich tobe? Sollte der in mien Haus kommen?

Der wahre König Israels sucht Zuflucht vor dem Falschen. Er muss sich vor den Heiden verrückt verhalten, um überhaupt überleben zu können. Was für ein Paradox! Wieso lässt Gott das zu? Irgendwie ist Davids Erfahrung ein geheimnisvolles Muster für alle Kinder Gottes —Königskinder, die so leben müssen, als ob diese Wirklichkeit gar nicht stimmen würde. Laut der Bibel, sind alle von uns in diesem Raum Gottes Kinder. Wir werden eines Tages leuchten wie die Sterne und neben unserem Vater auf Thronen sitzen. Er wird uns eine Krone geben und reine, weiße Kleider. Diese zukünftige Wirklichkeit gilt uns jetzt. Wir sind jetzt Könige, auch wenn es nicht so aussieht. Auch wenn es leicht ist zu glauben, dass die dunklen Mächten dieser Welt die wahren Herrscher sind. Dieses können wir von David lernen: nicht aufzugeben, an unsere wahre Identität zu glauben; “am Ball” bleiben, in Gehorsam und Vertrauen, bis die Wirklichkeit eintritt.

Aber David hat uns viel mehr zu sagen! Wir können viel mehr von ihm lernen. Nicht nur hat er an der Verheißung festgehalten, trotz seiner alltäglichen Erfahrungen, er hat auch immer wieder “geschmeckt, dass der Herr gut ist” (Ps 34, 9). Auch bevor er König wurde, hat er erfahren, dass der Herr ihm antwortete und ihn errettete (V. 5). Wie David müssen wir oft durch das finstere Todestal gehen, bevor wir endlich ans Ziel kommen. Aber, wie wir in diesem Psalm sehen, gab es immer wieder Hoffnungszeichen. Der Herr handelt! Auch jetzt, vor der Vollendung aller Dinge, kann Gott uns erretten “aus aller unser Furcht” (V. 6). Auch im Jammertal des Lebens gibt es genug Gelegenheiten für unsere Gesichter zu strahlen (V. 6). Wir sind nicht allein und dürfen erfahren, dass Gott wirklich bei denen ist, “die ihn fürchten”.

David hat mal gelitten, mal gejubelt. Und was tut er, wenn er jubelt? In diesem Psalm sehen wir, dass er an diejenigen denkt, die elend sind! Wie er sagt: “Meine Seele rühme sich des Herrn; die Elenden sollen es hören und sich freuen” (V. 3). Seine Heilserfahrung wird zum Anlass, diejenigen zu ermutigen, die immer noch im Dunkeln sitzen. Er kann ihr Leid vielleicht nicht theologisch erklären; er kann keine einfache Antwort geben, wieso sie so elend sind. Aber er kann aus eigener Erfahrung sagen: “Bleib am Ball! Gebt nicht auf! Suchet den Herrn mit aller Kraft und er wird Handeln. Ich weiß es und verspreche es euch!” Und so wird David, durch sein Leid hindurch, zum Vorbild für Andere, die seinen schwierigen Weg noch nicht gegangen sind. Sie können auf ihn schauen und Hoffnung bekommen, dass Gott auch für sie eintreten wird.

Und das, liebe Lilly und Peter, seid ihr für uns. Ihr habt vielleicht nicht viel gelernt in der russischen Schule, aber ihr habt viel gelernt in der Schule des Lebens—und Gott war euer Lehrer. Deshalb danken wir euch, dass ihr, wie David, nicht aufgegeben habt, nie vergessen habt, wer ihr wirklich seid und dadurch ein Licht geworden seid für eine neue Generation. Ich hoffe und bete, dass wir das auch werden können für unsere Kinder. Die Welt braucht solche Menschen.

Interview excerpts with the Son of Hamas

Probably the most fascinating figure I have ever come across is Mosab Hassan Yousef, the eldest son of one of the founders of Hamas. After disillusion with Hamas' hypocrisy, Joseph (Yousef) went on a search for the truth ("who is my real enemy?" was his guiding question), and it led him to Christianity. The revolutionary moment for him was hearing from the lips of Jesus words he considered unthinkable: "Love your enemies as yourself." The story is long and I can't go into detail here (read his biography, which made it to the NY Times top 10; I've yet to get round to it). In short: he ended up spying for ten years for Israel's security body, Shin Bet, with the express intention of fulfilling Jesus' words: i.e. to save lives on both sides of the fence. He even negotiated with Shin Bet to have suicide bombers arrested rather than executed, risking his own life in the process. For me, one of the most fascinating and beautiful things about Joseph is the way he constantly emphasises the humanity of terrorists. In contrast to the simplistic and self-righteous attempt to explain them away by calling them "mad men," Joseph talks of them with love in his heart and a yearning for "their salvation," most of all salvation from their own ideology. In light of all this, the latest twist in his inspiring story is so perverse it could almost be in a comedy book rather than a tragedy: the US Inland Security wants him deported to the West Bank as a security threat. The reason: in his biography he describes how working for Shin Bet meant working within Hamas itself (seems obvious to me). Returning to Palestine would mean his execution of course, as conversion from Islam is a capital offence. The hearing, by the way, takes place to day. Pray for him.

For more info, John Hobbins has a round up of relevant sites and videos here. "Joseph's" Facebook page is constantly being updated with the latest news (for example, Inland Security in the States want him deported as a threat) and his website has various videos and information. He even personally authors a blog here.

Today I just want to share some of the latest video excerpts that I've come across in Youtube. They're taken from a Christian conference (I don't know which one) and give you an insight into what really does seem to be the motivating and sustaining factor behind everything that he is doing. If you think that his "political" work can be separated from his "personal faith" (a peculiarly modern dichotomy), than which this powerful interview with CNN's Amanpour. I get the impression that even this hardened interviewer was taken aback, even moved ... . Whatever you think of his opinions, I don't think his voice can be ignored.

So here are the most recent videos:

First, an account of his relationship to his father:

Here he answers the question: "who is my real enemy?:

Here are some comments on "how God is working the the Middle East":

Here he's talking about Jewish and Palestinian converts to Christianity:

Here's an anecdote about worshipping with an Israeli soldier:

The heart of the Gospel is ontological

I named this blog "narrative and ontology" because of my interest in theological hermeneutics and my conviction that the church needs to emphasize both of these dimensions of Scripture. The text is kerygmatic, proclamatory, verbal discourse designed to do something. And the thing it does is point beyond itself to a reality, a "real" reality, something "ontological" and not just existential, psychological, or sociological. But at the end of the day, it's not the Bible but this reality that really matters. The Bible itself points beyond itself to what Childs called its "substance," its Sachverhalt, its res (Childs considers Biblical intertextuality to be "deictic"). Without the ontology the narrative is meaningless and I personally would lose all interest in the Bible.

So what is the Sache? I usually attempt to answer this by reference to the Church's traditional rule of faith. For an extended discussion on this go here. However, I read a quote this morning and then heard a sermon this afternoon which I think gets to the Sache (gets to the "point") far more succinctly. The quote is by Herman Bavinck:

The essence of the Christian religion consists therein: that the creation of the Father, destroyed by sin, is again restored in the death of the Son of God and recreated by the grace of the Holy Spirit to a Kingdom of God

Here, the substance of the Christian - I would say Biblical - faith really is ontological. It has to do with being. An eschatological being, perhaps, one that explodes all our current categories, but being nonetheless.

I then heard an impassioned sermon on this subject, fittingly preached on Easter Sunday, the day of the Resurrection. It's about Heaven, and Heaven is "Real." The preacher is Phil Hill and the congregation is the Arab Local Baptist Church in Nazareth. You can listen to it here.

[P.S. For thoughts on this issue in relation to the Piss Christ, go here].

Christianity in a word?

Margaret, author of the Biblioblog Magaret's Musings, has posted a fun question which has got (or is it gotten?) some fun answers: " What word would you choose to summarize Christianity?"

Here are some of the answers so far:

Love

Christ

fullness

reconciliation

forgiveness

LIFE

My own suggestion was

Eden

Pop on over an join in. She promises to share her own thoughts in forthcoming posts.

Update: A non-Christian friend of mine, whose opinion I cherish, shared the follow words off-line:

anti-Judaism / intolerance / persecution / divided / many-tongued / arrogant - etc. etc.

She was worried about these terms being "nasty," but I don't think they are. A true friend is one who doesn't shy from pointing out uncomfortable truths, hopefully for the sake of transformation for the better. Given that what she has said does in fact apply to vast swathes of what has been done in the name of Christ, I'm happy to just let them stand as a legitimate and important contribution to the discussion.

[HT to John Hobbins for pointing out her blog. He has is own post telling us why he loves it in A biblioblogger and she is grand]

Update: Since posting this I've actually taken the time to read the other posts on her blog and they are great! I recommend her post on rabid otters.

Christen brauchen Fleisch

I had a brief exchange with a member of my church the other day about the fact that Christians can grow in their faith, that there is a distinction between young and mature Christians, and that this growth involves intellectual growth, a better grasp of theology. My friend didn't quite understand, especially in regard to a quote from Heb 5:12 about "milk" and "meat" that I e-mailed him. For him, the gospel is actually very simple and he cites John 1:14 as evidence. Not only is this verse easy to grasp, he says, what more could we possibly need to know? He is a new Christian. Here is my attempt per Email to clarify the issue. Please do tell me where I'm going wrong! (And feel free to correct my imperfect German.)

Bezüglich Heb 5,12. Zuerst würde ich gerne darauf hinweisen, dass der Hebräerbrief an Christen gerichtet ist. Also Menschen, die sich schon für Jesus entschieden haben. Sie werden um ihres Glaubens Willen verfolgt und laufen Gefahr, dieses Glauben zu leugnen. Dem Autor des Briefes geht es darum, ihnen zu beweisen, wie gut sie es in Jesus haben. Also: es gibt mehr als das, was sie gedacht haben. Dieses "Mehr" ist der Inhalt des Briefes und sollte ihnen helfen, in ihrem Glauben im Angesicht Verfolgung zu beharren. Im direkten Zusammenhang von Heb 5, 12, zum Beispiel, geht es darum dass Jesus nicht nur zu uns gesandt wurde, dass er lebte, starb, und auferstanden ist, sondern auch, dass er jetzt zur rechten des Vaters sitzt und für uns betet. Das ist ein Beispiel für das "Fleisch," was die Hebräer noch nicht begriffen haben. Vielleicht könnte man sagen, dass Milch genug ist für jemand der sich zum ersten Mal für Jesus begeistert ist (junge Christen sind in der Regel super begeistert), wenn es aber schwer wird, braucht man mehr Eiweiß. Dafür braucht man eine tiefere Theologie. Was man glaubt hat Einfluss darauf, wie man lebt, was man hofft usw. Hier ist ein Zitat zu Heb 5, 11 aus einem englischen Kommentar:

The "milk" of the Word refers to what Jesus Christ did on earth—His birth, life, teaching, death, burial, and resurrection. The "meat" of the Word refers to what Jesus Christ is now doing in heaven. [nach Heb 5, 12, z.B.] We begin the Christian life on the basis of His finished work on earth. We grow in the Christian life on the basis of His unfinished work in heaven.

Of course, even the maturest adult never outgrows milk. As believers, we can still learn much from our Lord’s work on earth. But we must not stop there! We must make spiritual progress, and we can do this only if we learn about Christ’s priestly ministry for us in heaven. (See Heb. 13:20–21 for a summary of what the Lord wants to do for His people now.)

Dies ist nur ein Teilantwort auf deine Frage, "Was ist Fleisch"? Der Verfasser des Briefes gibt weitere Beispiele in den darauf folgenden Versen.

Hilft das? Es geht nicht darum, dass wenn man im Glauben wächst man entdeckt das alles doch nicht so ist, wie man gedacht hat (obwohl das zum Teil durchaus passiert; wir projezieren immer unsere eigenen Bedürfnisse auf Gott). Es geht darum, dass das Evangelium sehr umfassend ist (guck mal, wie groß, vielfältig, und manchmal schwierig die Bibel ist!). Das Leben ist eine Herausforderung, und manchmal braucht man mehr um überstehen zu können. Ich profitiere sehr momentan, z.B., von der Gedanke, dass "Himmel" letzendlich die Vollendung dieser Schöpfung ist, und nicht ihre Abschaffung durch eine unkörperliche Wirklichkeit.

Dazu würde ich sagen, dass es nicht nur mehr gibt, im Sinne von extra Information oder einem größeren Zusammenhang. Es gibt auch mehr im Sinne von einer Tiefendimension. Etwas, was zuerst einfacht erscheint, kann Vieles vergebergen. Lass uns deine Bibelzitat angucken:

14 Das Wort wurde Mensch und lebte unter uns. Wir selbst haben seine göttliche Herrlichkeit gesehen, wie sie Gott nur seinem einzigen Sohn gibt. In ihm sind Gottes vergebende Liebe und Treue zu uns gekommen.

Dieser Text ist für mich überhaupt nicht einfach. Ein Paar Beispielfragen: Was war das Wort bevor es Mensch wurde? Wieso musste es Fleisch werden? Und war es vorher ein "es" oder schon immer ein "er"? Und wie kann ein Mensch ein "Wort" sein? Und wie sieht ein Wort aus bevor es/er Mensch wird? Und was hat Fleischwerdeung mit Liebe zu tun (geschweige denn Treue)? Und welche Herrlichkeit wurde von Johannes gesehen? Ich dachte Jesus wäre nur ein Zimmerman. Oder ist das genau seine Herrlichkeit? Oder war es vielleicht seine Verklärung? Und wieso durfte Johannes das sehen aber ich nicht? Ist das Fair, dass ich von einem Zeugniss abhängig bin, ohne selbst die Herrlichkeit Jesu sehen zu dürfen? Und wieso ist das Wort/der Mensch ein Sohn? Wieso nicht Tochter, oder etwas Anderes? Ist das bedeutsam? Was hat "Vergebung" mit "Inkarnation" zu tun? Ich dachte, dass Vergebung am Kreuz stattgefunden hat und nicht beim Geburt. Und wenn diese vergebende Liebe damals gekommen ist, was hat das mit heute zu tun? Kommt er immer noch? Aber wenn ja, er kommt gewiss nicht auf der selben Art und Weise wie damals, weil er nicht mehr "unter uns" lebt. Zumindest nicht als Mensch - nur in seinem Geist (sein Vertreter). Wie im Hebräerbrief steht, Jesus ist eigentlich nicht mehr hier, er ist da, und wir warten auf ihn. Also, Johannes freut sich, dass Jesus gekommen ist, aber wir warten immer noch?

Wie du geschrieben hast, Joh 1, 12 ist eigentlich doch einfach. Ein Mensch lernt Gott in Jesus kennen und gibt ihm sein Leben aus Dankbarkeit. Aber wie in menschlichen Beziehung, ist dieser Schritt nur ein Anfang. Man muss weiter gehen und diese Person kennelernen, diese Person in seiner Gesamntheit, und das heißt seine Identität als Gott und Gesalbter Israels, als eine Antwort auf unseres Flehen, als ein Teil von eines umfassenden Heilsplans. Du hast sicherlich den Spruch gehört: die Bibel ist flach genug, dass ein Baby dadrin spielen kann, aber tief genug, dass ein Elefant dadrin ertinken kann.

Ein paar andere Bibelstellen zum Thema "Milch" und Wachsen: 1 Kor 3,1-3; Heb 6, 1; 1 Pe 2, 2. 21, falls du weiterlesen willst.

Alexamenos worships God

... the early church had the temerity to point to this event—the crucifixion of their leader—as the mighty act of God. What utter foolishness![1] Little wonder that the church was mocked by its opponents. A drawing scratched on a wall (graffito) from the early Roman Empire shows the body of a man with the head of an ass nailed to a cross, and a man worshipping it. Scrawled below is the mocking caption, “Alexamenos worships god.” Apparently some slave or child was poking fun at someone with this early cartoon. How stupid, how absurd, to worship a crucified god! The claim that Jesus’ death was a mighty act of God must have seemed utter foolishness anywhere within the first-century Roman world.[2]

[1] “In a world which longed for personal salvation, and which was full of gods and lords claiming to meet that need, how utterly absurd and indeed revolting to claim that a Jew from a notoriously troublesome province of the Empire who has been condemned as a blasphemer and executed as a traitor was the Saviour of the world! How on earth could anyone believe that”? (Lesslie Newbigin, “Context and Conversion,” International Review of Mission 68 (1978): 301)

[2]Bartholomew, C. G., & Goheen, M. W. (2004). The drama of Scripture: Finding our place in the biblical story (161). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.

Update: The following fascinating quote was posted in the comments:

This image is quite arresting and made me think of an ancient Roman misconception regarding the ‘image’ (or rather lack thereof) of God in the Jerusalem Temple. Tacitus, among others, jibed that the Jews worshiped the head of a donkey in their temple. I was not aware that this was extended to a lampooned crucified Jesus as well. F.F. Bruce described the occurrence of both in a 1984 article, of which I quote the following:

F.F. Bruce, “Tacitus on Jewish History” - Journal of Semitic Studies 29(1984)1: 33-44
The quote is from p. 38:

The belief that the image of an ass, or at least of an ass's
head, was venerated in the inner shrine is attested elsewhere.
Apion of Alexandria {ca. A.D. 30) asserted that the Jews kept a
gold ass's head in their sanctuary: it was discovered there, he
said, when Antiochus Epiphanes plundered the temple {Contra
Apionem, 2.80). Another writer, Mnaseas, tells how an
Idumaean named Zabidus stole the gold head from the sanctuary
by a trick {Contra Apionem, 2.112-14). According to Diodorus
{History, 34, fragment), what Antiochus discovered was the
statue of a bearded man (presumably Moses) mounted on an
ass. These tales were at least less sinister than another retailed
by Apion, how Antiochus discovered in the temple a Greek,
who was being fattened for a cannibalistic rite which the Jews
celebrated annually {Contra Apionem, 2.89-96).
As for the ass-god legend, it was in due course transferred
from the Jews to the Christians, as we know from Tertullian -
"for in fact, with other people, you have imagined that our god
is an ass's head" {Apology, 16.1) - and also from the well-known
Palatine graffito of a crucified man with an ass's head, with the
Greek caption: "Alexamenos worships his god".

What did Jesus leave behind?

In response to my post Why is Jesus taking so long? the following query was made:

One question I have is what exactly Jesus came to accomplish---what did he establish that did not exist before?

I gave the first part of an answer in my post If the Messiah came, why do death and evil remain? It has something to with cosmology and the Holy Spirit. Bartholomew and Goheen, whose book The Drama of Scripture has provided the basis of these posts, give a further clarification to this answer, this time in terms of the church, "the people of God."

The church’s new life is based on what God has done in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. In Christ’s death, God has defeated the powers that rule “this present age”—sin, evil, and death. In Christ’s resurrection the “age to come” has begun, with its promise of life, love, and peace (Romans 6:1–11). The church’s new life is also empowered by the Spirit, which lives within the community of believers and constantly brings new life to it (Romans 8; Galatians 5). This, says Paul, is the new life of the Christian, begun by Christ’s work on the cross, lived out in the Father’s kingdom, and shaped by the Spirit’s power.

At the heart of this new life is a new relationship to God, which Paul describes in terms of righteousness, reconciliation, and adoption. First, since God is the righteous Lawgiver and Judge, we who follow rebellious Adam are estranged from him by our sin; we too are guilty. But Paul proclaims the good news that (for those who have faith in Jesus) our “guilty” verdict has been overturned. There is a new verdict: we have already been declared righteous—on the basis of the death of Jesus Christ (Romans 3:21–31; Galatians 2:15–16; 3:6–14).As far as the Christian is concerned, God’s final judgment has already taken place! With our guilt removed, we stand in a right relationship to God.

Second, since we were once estranged from God by our sinful rebellion, we need to be reconciled to him. Reconciliation, long thought to become available only at the end of time with the coming of God’s kingdom, is a gift freely offered even now (2 Corinthians 5:18–19; Colossians 1:20).Reconciliation removes the sin that has put God’s world p 193 at enmity with him and leads to peace. This means the restoration of the shalom and harmony of God’s original created order for the whole world and especially for humankind (Romans 5:1). Third, we who are born into the sinful race of Adam are restored to God by receiving his gift of adoption (Galatians 4:4–5; Ephesians 1:4). The same Spirit that lived in Jesus is poured into our own lives and enables us to call God “Abba, Father,” as Jesus did (Romans 8:14–15).

This is the church: a people who live in a new world with a new identity and a new relationship to God. Thus, Paul commands the church to live more and more the new life of God’s kingdom, to “take off” the old self (as if it were soiled clothing) and to put on the new (Ephesians 4:22–24; Colossians 3:9–10). In other words, they are to bid farewell to the way of life that was shaped by their experience of “this present age” and to embrace a new way of life as part of “the age to come.” And with this new life comes a call to a new kind of obedience to God’s law in every part of life, an obedience rooted in love.

Bartholomew, C. G., & Goheen, M. W. (2004). The drama of Scripture: Finding our place in the biblical story (192–193). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.

If the Messiah came, why do evil and death remain?

That's a question Paul was forced to asked, being steeped in the Rabbinic theology of his day. Here is his answer, according to Bartholomew and Goheen (see also my two other posts: Disappointment with Jesus (I) and Why is Jesus taking so long? (II).):

But if the old has passed away [the 'olam hazeh in the crucifixion] and the new has come [the 'olam haba', in the resurrection], why do evil and death remain in the world? Paul’s letters are charged with the same tension between the “already” and “not yet” aspects of the kingdom of God that we have seen in Jesus’ own teachings, but with some differences in emphasis. For Paul, the kingdom is here already in that Jesus’ death brings an end to the old and his resurrectioinaugurates the new. The Spirit is described as a deposit (or down payment) on the coming kingdom (2 Corinthians 1:22; 5:5; Ephesians 1:14). A deposit is not merely an IOU or promise for the future; instead, it is a real payment given now as a guarantee that in the future the rest will be paid. The Spirit is also pictured as firstfruits, the first part of the harvest, ready to be enjoyed now, and tangible evidence that the remainder of the harvest will also come (Romans 8:23).

The kingdom has not yet arrived for us in its fullness. We remain in a world that has not yet been fully delivered from the influence of evil, demonic power (2 Corinthians 4:4). We are still surrounded by the darkness of sin and rebellion against God (Ephesians 2:2–3), even while we anticipate the full revelation of God’s kingdom in which those things shall be no more. Thus, in Paul’s thought there is no clearly marked threshold between “the present age” and “the age to come.” We live in the “in-between” time, in which the two ages overlap. Paul goes on to explain that these two ages are allowed to coexist within God’s plan so that the church’s work of mission—the gathering of the nations to the God of Israel—can be accomplished before the final revelation of the kingdom. In fact, God gives this in-between time to the church as its own, to fulfill its calling as his witness to the coming of the kingdom.[*]

[*]Bartholomew, C. G., & Goheen, M. W. (2004). The drama of Scripture: Finding our place in the biblical story (190). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic [footnotes have been removed]

Why is Jesus taking so long? (II)

In my last post I made the potentially impious statement that I was "disappointed" with Jesus. The cause of my disappointment had to do with the expectations that my acquaintance with the Old Testament had raised for me. Wasn't the coming Messiah supposed bring about a world of universal shalom, both between humans and within creation? Just like Israel in exile (or in fact in most of its history), I want my own fig tree!

Luckily, it looks as if this disjunction between promise and fulfilment is found within the New Testament itself, as witnessed to by the reactions of John the Baptist and Jesus' own disciples (see my post). But why is there a disjunction in the first place? Here are Bartholomew and Goheen's interpretations of Jesus' parables of the kingdom:

Mark 4 and Matthew 13 offer an important selection of these stories. They are introduced with Mark’s phrase “The kingdom of God is like …” and Matthew’s “The kingdom of heaven is like …” (meaning the same; Matthew, writing to Jews reticent about using the name Yahweh, refers to God indirectly by naming the place from which he rules). In this series of parables, we learn the secret of the kingdom.

1. The kingdom does not come all at once. Though the Jews have expected the kingdom to arrive in fullness immediately, or at least very soon after the Messiah appears, this does not happen. Sometimes as Jesus talks about the kingdom, he speaks of it as if it is present already; at other times he suggests that it is coming in the future. Many of his parables help to explain this seeming contradiction. The parable of the sower and weeds teaches that in the present the kingdom comes by the “sowing” of the gospel. In the future the weeds will be separated from the wheat (Matthew 13:24–30, 36–43). The parables of the mustard seed and the yeast suggest that though the kingdom at present is small and seems insignificant, it will in the future be glorious and impossible to ignore (13:31–33; Mark 4:30–32). The parable of the net teaches that in the present all sorts of fish are gathered in to the kingdom, but in the future there will be a great separation (Matthew 13:47–50).

Thus, the kingdom Jesus describes is both present and future: already begun here, not yet here in fullness. But this is not a contradiction, and Jesus is not mistaken. How then can something as important as God’s kingdom have these two apparently opposite qualities? How does it stand in tension between “already” and “not yet”?

In the parables Jesus offers his bewildered followers a resolution of this “already-not yet” quality of the kingdom. With the coming of the kingdom, the Jews expect the present evil age to pass away quickly. The parable of the weeds teaches them that the power of evil continues alongside the new healing power that has come into the world in Jesus. The age to come overlaps with the old age; the powers of both are present.

2. In the present, the kingdom does not come with irresistible power. The Jews have expected that when God’s kingdom arrives, no enemy would be able to resist it. They remember Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in which a rock not cut by human hands (representing the kingdom of God) strikes a great statue (representing the world kingdoms of Babylon, Media, Persia, Greece, and in later interpretation Rome) and shatters it (Daniel 2). Daniel says: “The God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed.… It will crush all those kingdoms and bring them to an end, but it will itself endure forever” (2:44). Surely God will sweep his enemies away. Who can stand against the power of God?

But Jesus says: “Listen! A farmer went out to sow his seed” (Mark 4:3). And what a different picture emerges in the parable of the sower (4:1–20; Matthew 13:1–23). The Messiah does not come as a military conqueror but as a humble farmer. The kingdom does not arrive in irresistible power and force but by the message of the kingdom. The seed falls on the footpath, in rocky places, and among thorns—producing no fruit. In other words, listeners can reject the call of the kingdom and may well seem to be none the worse for it. Certainly no great rock hurtles from the sky to destroy those who refuse Jesus. The kingdom is hidden in a humble form and makes its way in the world in apparent weakness. In his ministry Jesus announces the message of the kingdom—the gospel—through his words, demonstrates it by his deeds, and embodies it in his life. The gospel is a seed, given to produce the fruit of the kingdom in the soil of receptive and believing hearts. Later Paul speaks of the gospel as the “power of God” (Romans 1:16), yet that power does not trample down or root out all resistance by force. The parable of the weeds gives us a picture of how this works (Matthew 13:24–30, 36–43). Jesus says: “The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat.” The wheat and weeds appear together. When the servants want to root out the weeds, the farmer forbids this, explaining that at the harvest he will separate the good plants from the weeds. Some people receive the word, and God’s power brings about the fruit of the kingdom, but others reject that message—and seem to suffer no harm.

3. The final judgment of the kingdom is reserved for the future. Jesus’ hearers expect God’s judgment to fall swiftly on the ungodly. The prophets spoke of a day when God would bring his kingdom in by judging his enemies in his wrath (Isaiah 63:1–6). Redemption and wrath are two sides of one reality: God saves his creation by judging the enemies that have ruined it (61:2; 63:4). But the parable of the weeds (Matthew 13:24–30, 36–43) shows the Jews that the judgment they expect does not fall immediately. The workers in the field want to root out weeds p 148 immediately (13:28), but the owner instructs his servants to allow both wheat and weeds to grow together. At the end of the age the judgment will indeed fall; until then the powers of God’s kingdom and of evil must continue together.

Many other parables similarly illustrate a judgment postponed: good fish will be sorted from bad (13:47–50) and sheep from goats (25:31–46). The master who has entrusted money to his servants will return to settle accounts (25:14–30). Five maidens keep oil for their lamps and are ready for the return of the bridegroom (25:1–13). Two men invest their master’s money wisely and are commended for it; another who merely buries his money is condemned as a “wicked, lazy servant” and thrown into outer darkness (25:14–30). Jesus’ true followers are those whose lives imitate his: they feed the hungry, clothe the naked, offer drink to the thirsty, and visit the prisoner. These faithful ones are invited into the kingdom of the Father. But another group whose lives show nothing of Jesus’ own life are sent away at last to eternal punishment (25:31–46). When Jesus speaks of the final coming of the kingdom in his parables, he stresses readiness and faithfulness in the present. One is to respond to the message of the kingdom and live a life centered in Jesus until the last day.

4. The full revelation of the kingdom is postponed, to allow many to enter it during the present age. Since the coming of the kingdom has already begun in Jesus, why does God not complete his work? Why does he delay the final judgment? Why hide his kingdom’s glory and power? When we find an answer to these questions, we can begin to understand our own place and calling in the biblical story, between Jesus’ inauguration of the kingdom and its final revelation. One of Luke’s parables offers such an answer (Luke 14:15–24). A banquet is being made ready: the table is set and laden with food and drink. But there the host pauses; the guests must wait yet a little while. The enjoyment of the banquet is suspended—but the host has a very good reason for the delay. It is so that the lost can also be brought in to share at the banquet table. All—and especially the poor, the lost, the forgotten ones—are invited and welcomed to share in the banquet that is God’s kingdom. “This gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come” (Matthew 24:14). When the Pharisees mutter that Jesus is welcoming all the wrong people, he tells them three parables: of a lost sheep (Luke 15:3–7), a lost coin (15:8–10), and a lost son (15:11–32). When the lost son (who has for a time wandered from his home and family) repents and turns back, the Father welcomes him with joy and favor.

Jesus tells many parables—at least forty—and we have looked at only a sampling. Yet in these few, the main themes of Jesus’ teaching are p 149 evident: the parables reveal what the kingdom is really like, in contrast to the misunderstandings of Jesus’ hearers.[*]

Though I can't confess to have understood everything about God's eschatological purposes (neither could Paul, cf. Rom 11:33-35), I do find it comforting to know that this structure of delayed fulfilment of promise, strengthened by proleptic foretastes in the meantime, reflects both Biblical reality (Abraham gets just a grave in the promised land; only Jacob's bones arrive there; Moses dies on the boarder, yet only after foretelling that Israel will forfeit everything anyway and have to go through exile before they can get it back again) and existential reality (read the Psalms; live a life of faith: God will do something, but when, how long, and how much?).

[*]Bartholomew, C. G., & Goheen, M. W. (2004). The drama of Scripture: Finding our place in the biblical story (146–149). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.

Disappointment with Jesus (I)

Around about six years ago I decided to read the New Testament as little as possible, focussing all my attention and energy on the Old. The aim was (and is!) to be able to see the witness of the New in all its particularity and difference. Christians tend to work in the other direction: we are thoroughly acquainted with the New and thus complain when the Old Testament doesn't seem to fit the paradigm. "Is the God of the Old Testament really Jesus' father?" Doing things the other way round raises a different question: "Is Jesus really the Son of the God of Israel?"

I've found the experience very instructive. For one thing, reading nothing but the Old has made me thirst for the New, not so much because the Old is inadequate but because it is so Israel-centered and I'm not a Jew. God has got some great things in store for his people, but who am I - a Gentile - to but in on the relationship?

Turning to the New, however, doesn't solve things quite so simply. One thing that haunts me is me is a constant feeling of disappointment. Here we have Jesus coming to fulfil God's promises to Israel, indeed the LORD himself has come to Zion, and yet ... where's the great harvest? I don't see the renewal of creation and the human heart that got Isaiah, Jeremiah, Moses - and yes, myself - so excited. Christmas is a particularly odd time for me. Here we have traditional readings (e.g. Isa 9:2–7; 62:1–5; 62:11–12; 52:7–10; Micah 5:2–5a) , praising the final coming of the King of Israel, but where is he now (up in Heaven waiting to come back again)?

C. Bartholomew and M. Goheen address this in their helpful book The Drama of Scripture: Finding our Place in the Biblical Story (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2004). Today I'll post their comments on the disappointment that Jesus caused (and perhaps still ought to cause ...), tomorrow I'll post their answer to this.

Jesus announces the arrival of the kingdom of God, demonstrates it in his actions, and gathers a kingdom community. However, this kingdom does not look at all like what the Jews expected. Jesus himself does not look like the Messiah of Old Testament prophecy as popularly understood. The world itself does not seem much changed by what this prophet from Galilee is doing and saying. Jewish expectations seem doomed to disappointment yet again. For anyone in first-century Israel who takes the claims of Jesus seriously, perplexity and bewilderment reign.

We glimpse this confusion in John the Baptizer when he is in Herod’s jail. John has preached that the kingdom of God is near, the final judgment about to fall. The ax is already in the hand of the Messiah, John says, and he is about to chop down any tree that does not produce good fruit (Luke 3:9). John fully expects this prophetic message to be fulfilled. He explicitly identifies Jesus as the one sent by God to set these things in motion (John 1:29–34). Then Jesus announces the arrival of the kingdom—and apparently nothing major happens. John expects the Messiah to bring down the wicked rulers of the earth and to release their righteous prisoners (Isaiah 40:23; 61:1). Yet John himself remains rotting in prison while Herod continues his unjust rule and immoral lifestyle. Pagan Roman soldiers infest the holy streets of Jerusalem. Idolatrous Rome rules the world with impunity; oppression, injustice, and unrighteousness reign. Have not the prophets promised that the kingdom of God will come with justice, peace, and the knowledge of God? John wonders if he misunderstood everything. He calls his disciples and sends them to Jesus with a question: “Are you the one who was to come, or should we expect someone else?” (Luke 7:19). Jesus answers by pointing to his miracles and his message of good news for the poor as signs that God’s redeeming power is present. Then he sends John’s disciples back with a promise: “Blessed is the man who does not fall away on account of me” (Luke 7:23). No doubt John holds on to his belief that Jesus is the Messiah. But until Salome30 has his head cut off for her mother’s sake, John is probably p 146 still confused about the kingdom and about his own role in announcing its coming (Matthew 14:1–12; Mark 6:16–29).

It is just this kind of confusion that Jesus addresses in the parables. His disciples struggle to understand how the promises of the prophets are being fulfilled in Jesus. It certainly doesn’t look like what they expect. Throughout the Gospels it is clear that the disciples just “don’t get it.” Jesus’ parables are told to explain the “secret” of this kingdom that has appeared among them in such an utterly unexpected way (Matthew 13:11). The parables help those who receive Jesus’ word in faith to understand the nature of the kingdom as it appears in Jesus. At the same time the parables veil the truth from those who refuse to believe (13:12–17; cf. Isaiah 6:9–10; Acts 28:26–27).

Mark 4 and Matthew 13 offer an important selection of these stories. They are introduced with Mark’s phrase “The kingdom of God is like …” and Matthew’s “The kingdom of heaven is like …” (meaning the same; Matthew, writing to Jews reticent about using the name Yahweh, refers to God indirectly by naming the place from which he rules). In this series of parables, we learn the secret of the kingdom (pp. 145-146).

Tomorrow I look at his parables as a response to this odd situation.