_awakening

The Gospel of New Creation.

"The power of the gospel lies not in the offer of a new spirituality or religious experience, not in the threat of hellfire (certainly not in the threat of being "left behind"), which can be removed if only the hearer checks this box, says this prayer, raises a hand, or whatever, but in the powerful announcement that God is God, that Jesus is Lord, that the powers of evil have been defeated, that God's new world has begun. This announcement, stated as a fact about the way the world is rather than as an appeal about the way you might like your life, your emotions, or your bank balance to be, is the foundation of everything else. Of course, once the gospel announcement is made, in whatever way, it means instantly that all people everywhere are gladly invited to come in, to join the party, to discover forgiveness for the past, an astonishing destiny in God's future, and a vocation in the present. And in that welcome and invitation, all the emotions can be, and one hopes eventually will be, fully engaged."

[Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church, p. 227]

Saved For What?

One of the things i love most about Tom Wright, is his ability to see the big picture and articulate in ways that captures the imagination, bringing together the larger narratives of scripture into a clear vision. Case in point, his thoughts on what it really means to be saved:

As long as we see salvation in terms of going to heaven when we die, the main work of the church is bound to be seen in terms of saving souls for that future. But when we see salvation, as the New Testament sees it, in terms of God's promised new heaven and new earth and our promised resurrection to share in that new and glorious embodied reality - what I have called life after life after death - then the main work of the church here and now demands to be rethought in consequence. [Surprised by Hope, p. 197]

In other words, how we envision "salvation" has much to do with what we see as the work of the church in this world. If it truly merely about "going to heaven" [which the New Testament does not see as the focus], the work of the church can easily be reduced to a future-oriented, escapism. At odds is whether the present really matters. Is salvation merely for the future? Wright summarizes it thusly:

Life after death, it seems, can be a serious distraction not only from the ultimate life after life after death, but also life before death. [Surprised by Hope, p. 198]

Salvation, as embraced by the first Christians, was not about "going to heaven someday," but about being raised to life in God's new heaven and new earth, the new creation. It was about a future rescue beginning to take place in this world, a saving not of the soul for some disembodied state, but the saving of the whole person, being raised as new creations, of which Jesus went before us in his resurrection.

For the first Christians, the ultimate salvation was all about God's new world, and the point of which Jesus and the apostles were doing when they were healing  people or being rescued from shipwreck or whatever was that this was a proper anticipation of that ultimate salvation, that healing and transformation of space, time, and matter. The future rescue that God had planned and promised was starting to come true in the present. We are saved not as souls, but as wholes. [Surprised by Hope, p. 198-9.]

This has all sorts of ramifications for us. If we see salvation as mere escapism, our goal is to take as many people with us away from this world of decay. This world is seen as something that is destined to be discarded, or better yet destroyed. Unfortunately this is not the picture we are given in scripture, as the end of Revelation notes that there will be a new heaven and a new earth, joined together once and for all here on earth, not somewhere else. God will be present with his people, here on a newly transformed earth. In a real sense, heaven actually comes here. Salvation, therefore, is not about escape, but about being raised to a new kind of life.

It is the story of God's kingdom being launched on earth as in heaven, generating a new state of affairs in which he power of evil has been decisively defeated, the new creation has been decisively launched, and Jesus' followers have been commissioned and equipped to put that victory and that inaugurated new world into practice. [Surprised by Hope, p. 204]

As it has been said, we have been saved not from something, but for something. We have been invited to join a movement - a movement of those who have been rescued and are in process of being made whole again, who in turn are about trying to make all things new again. They are people who are trying to put into practice what Jesus said when he taught his followers to pray, "Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven [or as it is in your realm, where things are as you want them to be]."

What if we saw it this way? Imagine the kind of things that could happen.

Heaven as Confrontation and Conviction.

"Note, though, something else of great importance about the whole Christian theology of resurrection, ascension, second coming and hope. This theology was born out of confrontation with the political authorities, out of the conviction that Jesus was already the true Lord of the world who would one day be manifest as such. The rapture theology avoids this confrontation because it suggests that Christians will miraculously be removed from this wicked world. Perhaps that i why such theology if often Gnostic in its tendency toward a private dualistic spirituality and toward a political laissez-faire quietism. And perhaps that is partly why such theology, with its dreams of Armageddon, has quietly supported the political staus quo in a way that Paul would never have done."

[Tom Wright, Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church, pp. 133-4]

A Short Introduction to the Hebrew Bible.

If you are looking for a great introduction to the Hebrew Bible, John Collins' book, A Short Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, is one of the best around. Concise. Insightful. Easy to read. That about sums it up. The good news is that the book is on Google books, which means that they have posted a large portion of it online for your perusal. You can check it out here. [And I highly recommend that you do...] Enjoy.

You can read a review of the book here as well.

Weekend Readings.

A collection of updates, responses, postings, and the truly bizarre for your weekend reading pleasure. Enjoy.

Robert Cargill responds to his critics regarding why Christians should adopt the BCE/BC dating system.

Scot McKnight jumps into the discussion on Rob Bell and the corruption of the term "evangelical". I think he is measured and dead on right.

Christianity Today interviews Don Miller regarding his latest book and how to embrace life as a better narrative. I had the opportunity to hear Miller speak last weekend at Mariners Church. His thoughts on life as narrative are very insightful.

And finally, just when you thought "Christianity" couldn't get any stranger, or more disturbing, along comes this beauty from Sojourners. [Be sure you click through and watch the "Taking the Hill" video.]

Have a great rest of your weekend...

New to the Pile.

About a month ago I was meeting with my thesis adviser and good friend, Karen Winslow. I asked her if she knew about anything that had been written specifically focusing on the late Second Temple period history and the scrolls. At that point we rummaged through a few titles, but nothing grabbed my attention. Until now. Enter the recently released The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Hasmonean State by Hanan Eshel.

When I found out that it had just been released, I ordered a copy from the nice people at Amazon.com. Well, it arrived today... and it looks amazing. The book is a first of its kind, exploring the political history of the late Second Temple Period, including the latest scholarship from the Qumran scrolls. The book was originally published n Hebrew in 2004, but has been updated and expanded from that original work. For a better picture of the book, here's a listing of the chapter titles:

ONE: The Roots of the Hasmonean Revolt: The Reign of Antiochus IV
TWO: Questions of Identity: The “Teacher of Righteousness,” the “Man of Lies,” and Jonathan the Hasmonean
THREE: The Succession of High Priests: John Hyrcanus and his Sons in the Pesher to Joshua 6:26
FOUR: Alexander Jannaeus and His War against Ptolemy Lathyrus
FIVE: A Prayer for the Welfare of King Jonathan
SIX: The Pharisees’ Conflict with Alexander Jannaeus and Demetrius’ Invasion of Judaea
SEVEN: The Successors of Alexander Jannaeus and the Conquest of Judaea by Pompey
EIGHT: The Assassination of Pompey
NINE: The Changing Notion of the Enemy and Its Impact on the Pesharim

It looks so good... can't wait to dive in.

Foundations of the Just War [Chapter 1].

Brimlow begins his exploration of the issues of violence and nonviolence, but taking a look at the historical and philosophical foundations that gave rise to Augustine's thoughts on just war theory. He rightly notes at the very beginning of the book something that I think often goes unnoticed in the overall conversation; namely, that at least for the first two centuries CE, the early Christian church was exclusively pacifist. So much so that Brimlow notes "there is no record of any Christian writer approving of Christian participation in warfare until the time of emperor Constantine, circa 330, and no evidence of Christians serving in the army of the Roman Empire until 173." [p. 22]

So how did this consensus change? Brimlow points to Augustine as perhaps the first to begin to consciously formulate a justification for Christian involvement in warfare. Quoting Augustine's Contra Faustum:

"What is the evil in war? Is it the death of someone who will soon die in any case, that others may live in peaceful subjection? This is mere cowardly dislike, not any religious feeling. The real evils in war are love of violence, revengeful cruelty, fierce and implacable enmity, wild resistance and the lust of power and such like; and it is generally to punish these things, when force is required to inflict the punishment, that, in obedience to God or some lawful authority, good men undertake wars..." [Contra Faustum, 22, 74]

It is here that Brimlow proposes that Augustine makes what he calls a "fundamental mistake." For Augustine it is "the internal disposition of the soldier that makes warfare either right or wrong." In taking this position, according to Brimlow, Augustine "introduces a division in our conception of persons and what it means to be a disciple of Christ that plagues the church to the present." In the end "what matters, on Augustine's view, is the Christian's internal disposition: all is permissible if only we are disposed the right way." [p. 30]

Contrary to this position, Brimlow introduces Matthew 5.39 [also offering Augustine's interpretation, which at least according to Brimlow's rendering, is awkward at best]. While Augustine sees the words of Matthew 5.39 as not needing to be taken literally, but speaking to an internal disposition, Brimlow notes that what Jesus is doing is actually antithetical to Augustine's position. Jesus is rendering a new way of seeing retribution. "The internal disposition that the law recognized as making violence against the evildoer permissible is no longer valid. There is, therefore, no internal disposition that transforms violent responses to violence into permissible ones. Violence is not an option for Christians." [p. 31]

While I am not in complete agreement with Brimlow's understanding of the law and of Matthew 5.39, I do think he makes a pretty valid point. Augustine's thoughts on just war seem, at least on the surface, to be antithetically opposed to the teaching of Jesus. The thought I kept coming back to while reading was this: Augustine appears to be arguing for just war more from the position of a good Roman citizen, rather than on the basis of being a good disciple of Jesus. His argument is fundamentally based upon a philosophical standpoint, which sees the government as wholly good and just. If I'm reading Augustine correctly, when someone threatens what God has instituted as "good" or "just", then the Christian is required to act, even with violence. The question I had was this: Is the government always "just" in its motives?

Thoughts?

Wrestling Together.

So my copy of Robert Brimlow's book, What About Hitler?: Wrestling with Jesus's Call to Nonviolence in an Evil World, showed up yesterday and as promised, after checking out the book, here's the plan.

The book is divided into nine chapters, with each chapter beginning with a scriptural meditation followed by some of the author's thoughts. I thought that perhaps the easiest thing to do an initial post here on Sunday night exploring the scriptural meditation and thoughts, adding a few insights and questions, and then let it roll from there for the week. We'll look at a chapter a week, so the entire process will take us nine weeks. Make sense?

For those of you who do not have the book yet, or are still thinking about joining the conversation, here are the nine meditations/chapters which will guide our nine weeks together:

First Meditation - Luke 4.5-13
Foundations of Just War

Second Meditation - 1 Samuel 8.4-9
The Just War in Contemporary Thought

Third Meditation - Isaiah 6.1-10
The Good Wars

Fourth Meditation - 1 Corinthians 5.9-13
Terror

Fifth Meditation - Matthew 7.21-27
The Men Behind the Hitler Question

Sixth Meditation - 1 Corinthians 1.18-29
Success, Failure, and Hypocrisy

Seventh Meditation - Luke 12.22-32
The Christian Response

Eighth Meditation - Romans 7.14-25
Elaboration

Ninth Meditation - 2 Corinthians 4.7-12; 5.14-18
Elaboration Upon the Elaboration

Now for a few things to keep in mind for the discussion. Karen Winslow, one of my professors at APU, instilled in us the realization that the scriptures are filled with tension, meaning that the scriptures do not contain one monolithic voice, but do in fact present various perspectives that need to be held in tension with one another. This is perhaps no more true than with the issue of nonviolence in the text. That being said, be sure to show hospitality and grace to one another as there is bound to be opinions and thoughts expressed that not everyone agrees with.

Okay?

Alright. Our first post will be this Sunday. If you have the book already or it's on its way, great. If you just want to follow along and jump into the discussion on the blog, sweet. Let's see how this goes...

Latest Arrivals.

Yes, like an addict needing a fix, the brown smiley box has once again arrived at my doorstep bringing wondrous things inside. Here are the latest arrivals to the bookshelf:

What About Hitler?: Wrestling with Jesus's Call to Nonviolence in an Evil World
[Robert W. Brimlow]

Opening the Sealed Book: Interpretations of the Book of Isaiah in Late Antiquity
[Joseph Blenkinsopp]

Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church
[Tom Wright]

Christians at the Cross: Finding Hope in the Passion, Death, and Resurrection of Jesus
[Tom Wright]

The Passion: The True Story of an Event That Changed Human History
[Geza Vermes]

Resurrection, Immortality, and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism and Early Christianity
[George W. E. Nickelsburg]

Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ
[William Horbury]

Apocalypticism, Prophecy, and Magic in Early Christianity
[David E. Aune]

Rewriting Scripture in Second Temple Times (Studies in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Related Literature)
[Sidnie White Crawford]

[So, outside of a couple of reads, can you tell that I'm still in thick of my thesis project?]

A Little Reading Together, Perhaps?

Judging by the amount of hits over the past few days, as well as the discussion that followed, the post The Cross Lost seemed to arouse a bit of interest in the issue of non-violence...

So here's an idea.

Clint Walker brought up the book What About Hitler?: Wrestling with Jesus's Call to Nonviolence in an Evil World as a possible interesting read on the subject. Anybody up for reading the book together and then opening it up for a discussion here on the blog? Here's the description of the book from Amazon:

Must Christians always turn the other cheek and resist violence? Is it ever justifiable for Christians to retaliate in the face of evil? Philosopher Robert Brimlow struggles with these questions in What about Hitler? The author skillfully integrates meditations on scriptural passages, personal reflections on his own challenges to live nonviolently, and a hard-hitting philosophical examination of pacifism and just-war doctrine. Both Christian pacifists and defenders of just-war theory will appreciate this book.

I just ordered my copy. Anybody with me?