My daughter was three hours late. I hit rush hour traffic on the way home. So half a day at the airport lasted 10 hours! Ah well...
Andy asks why Colossians Remixed is irritating - which is a fair question. The first thing to say is that if you haven't read it, you should. It is passionate, well-informed and full of insights into the text that you won't find anywhere else.
My irritation with it is that in places it seems very laboured. This is especially the case in the targums that litter the exposition. I know what they're trying to do but I'm not sure they pull it off and I find myself skipping pages which I don't like because I fear I might miss something helpful. And I found their reconstruction of Nympha's life a tad twee - I know how hard it is to do this kind of thing convincingly because I tried something similar in the second chapter of A Rough Guide to the New Testament, a story that didn't make it into the second, enlarged edition of that book, Discovering the New Testament!
But it's also the case where the authors allow themselves to be interrupted by someone with questions. For example, the chapter on truth is cast this way (p115ff in my edition). The exchange could actually have been dealt with a well-footnoted half a page rather than a 15 page chapter. I find it distracting rather than illuminating. And I felt it repeated a load of stuff they covered in a dialogue about targums in chapter 2. Walsh makes the point about truth brilliantly with his co-author, J Richard Middleton, in the incomparable guide to to modern thinking and living, Truth is Stranger than it used to be.
It could just be me - and I'll happily be put right on this(!) - but I felt that if Walsh and Keesmaat had focused more closely on the text of Colossians and helped the reader to make the connections with the world they evoke so brilliantly in the first couple of chapters, it would have been a storming book.
Harry O Maier does this in part in his essay 'A sly civility: Colossians and Empire' in JSNT 27.3 2005. He shows how the language of empire pervades the letter to the Colossians and how the author subtly undermines and subverts it for his own ends.
That being said, I do still think Colossians Remixed is a very good and will be urging people in my church to read it.
Friday, August 31, 2007
Beating the airport blues
Well, here I am at the airport. Haven't blogged for a while because I've been rushed off my feet - something Christians the world over feel apparently, according to new research brought to my attention this morning by Christian Research.
I'm sitting in an airport waiting for my daughter to arrive back from her holiday. I knew I was in trouble when she sent a text saying that she wasn't now due to take off for half an hour ,five minutes after she was supposed to have landed here. Ah the joys of international travel!
So, a chance to catch up. I've been reading quite a lot about the link between the New Testament and the Roman Empire. This is partly in preparation for a series we're doing in Colossians this month - based on Walsh and Keesmaat's Colossians Remixed (a book by turns brilliant and irritating) - and partly to clear the ground ahead of my meeting next week with my MA supervisor.
So, I've read papers by Harry Maier on imperial language in Colossians and by Justin Meggitt on the influence of imperial rhetoric and imagery on the New Testament. Maier's piece is fascinating and well written but he holds to a view of the authorship of Colossians that seems a tad unnecessary, not to say contradictory. He argues that it's pseudonymous (that is, not written by Paul but by someone else in his name), along with lots of scholars. The particular view of the letter's origins that he holds to is that of 'pseudonymous co-authorship with Paul in the early 60s' (a case first made by Eduard Schweizer). How can it be pseudonymous if Paul was at least its co-author? Isn't that what it says at the beginning of the letter, that it comes from Paul and Timothy? Might not Timothy have had a significant role in shaping the letter in co-operation and consultation with the imprisoned apostle?
I'm becoming increasingly interested in the power of images in the empire and in particular the kind of art that adorned the walls of the homes in which the early followers of Jesus met. This feeds into my desire to grapple with the effect of domestic space and arrangements on the shape of the early Jesus movement - not just its social shape but also its theological shape.
I've also begun reading Ian McEwan's Atonement - I know I should have read it long before the film came out but I just haven't got round to it.
I'm sitting in an airport waiting for my daughter to arrive back from her holiday. I knew I was in trouble when she sent a text saying that she wasn't now due to take off for half an hour ,five minutes after she was supposed to have landed here. Ah the joys of international travel!
So, a chance to catch up. I've been reading quite a lot about the link between the New Testament and the Roman Empire. This is partly in preparation for a series we're doing in Colossians this month - based on Walsh and Keesmaat's Colossians Remixed (a book by turns brilliant and irritating) - and partly to clear the ground ahead of my meeting next week with my MA supervisor.
So, I've read papers by Harry Maier on imperial language in Colossians and by Justin Meggitt on the influence of imperial rhetoric and imagery on the New Testament. Maier's piece is fascinating and well written but he holds to a view of the authorship of Colossians that seems a tad unnecessary, not to say contradictory. He argues that it's pseudonymous (that is, not written by Paul but by someone else in his name), along with lots of scholars. The particular view of the letter's origins that he holds to is that of 'pseudonymous co-authorship with Paul in the early 60s' (a case first made by Eduard Schweizer). How can it be pseudonymous if Paul was at least its co-author? Isn't that what it says at the beginning of the letter, that it comes from Paul and Timothy? Might not Timothy have had a significant role in shaping the letter in co-operation and consultation with the imprisoned apostle?
I'm becoming increasingly interested in the power of images in the empire and in particular the kind of art that adorned the walls of the homes in which the early followers of Jesus met. This feeds into my desire to grapple with the effect of domestic space and arrangements on the shape of the early Jesus movement - not just its social shape but also its theological shape.
I've also begun reading Ian McEwan's Atonement - I know I should have read it long before the film came out but I just haven't got round to it.
Monday, August 20, 2007
Planning ahead
Finished Galatians yesterday with a sense of some satisfaction that it was worthwhile series from which we all learned a great deal.
Today I've been plotting the programme for the next year. We'll be spending a long time with Matthew, looking at Ephesians, 1 Peter and the life of David as told in 1 and 2 Samuel, as well as spending some time working on the Search for Significance material, thinking about clustering from 1 Corinthians 11-14, wallowing in art for advent and reminding ourselves of the meaning of the sacraments. It's varied and promises to be engaging and stimulating.
I've also been thinking about my MA ahead of my first meeting with my supervisor (who might expect me to have thought about this rather more). I want to explore the influence of domestic space on the shape and thinking of the early church. Where did the first generation of Christians meet, how many gathered, when and how often? What social grouping did they come from?What effect did the location have on the shape the early communities took on - meals, art (I've just started reading a fascinating account of non-elite art in the Roman empire on the back of reading a very suggestive essay by David Balch). So if anyone has any pointers, suggestions, leads, help they'd like to offer, I'm all ears.
I'm listening to the bonus CD that came with Bonobo's latest album Days to Come - which is the songs from the album without the vocals and is wonderfully chilled for a Monday afternoon.
Today I've been plotting the programme for the next year. We'll be spending a long time with Matthew, looking at Ephesians, 1 Peter and the life of David as told in 1 and 2 Samuel, as well as spending some time working on the Search for Significance material, thinking about clustering from 1 Corinthians 11-14, wallowing in art for advent and reminding ourselves of the meaning of the sacraments. It's varied and promises to be engaging and stimulating.
I've also been thinking about my MA ahead of my first meeting with my supervisor (who might expect me to have thought about this rather more). I want to explore the influence of domestic space on the shape and thinking of the early church. Where did the first generation of Christians meet, how many gathered, when and how often? What social grouping did they come from?What effect did the location have on the shape the early communities took on - meals, art (I've just started reading a fascinating account of non-elite art in the Roman empire on the back of reading a very suggestive essay by David Balch). So if anyone has any pointers, suggestions, leads, help they'd like to offer, I'm all ears.
I'm listening to the bonus CD that came with Bonobo's latest album Days to Come - which is the songs from the album without the vocals and is wonderfully chilled for a Monday afternoon.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
In a galaxy so close to home...
I've been discovering Battlestar Galactica (not the dire 1970s Star Wars rip off but the new Sci Fi/Sky TV series) and it's riveting stuff.
I've read a couple of pieces on this series - which hasn't made it to terrestrial TV over here yet - which whetted my appetite so when I found the whole of season 1 ridiculously cheap in the HMV sale, I thought 'why not'.
The guy behind this revival cut his teeth on Star Trek - so the space sequences and battles are well done. But nothing prepares you for the politics of it. Here is mainstream US TV addressing issues of war with unseen enemies, suicide bombings, how much civil liberties can be sacrificed in the name of security, etc. One episode takes place on a prison ship where all the inmates are in cages wearing orange boiler suits. The scripts are sharp and the characters are pretty well drawn - at least they seem to be people of depth and contradiction.
Oh and everyone's religious. The humans worship a pantheon of gods, the cylons, who have now evolved 'human' characteristics, are fundamentalist monotheists. So, in the midst of battle, theological discussion ensures, people pray for deliverance, others stress that everything that happens is willed by God or the gods.
If you've not seen it, it's worth checking out.
I've read a couple of pieces on this series - which hasn't made it to terrestrial TV over here yet - which whetted my appetite so when I found the whole of season 1 ridiculously cheap in the HMV sale, I thought 'why not'.
The guy behind this revival cut his teeth on Star Trek - so the space sequences and battles are well done. But nothing prepares you for the politics of it. Here is mainstream US TV addressing issues of war with unseen enemies, suicide bombings, how much civil liberties can be sacrificed in the name of security, etc. One episode takes place on a prison ship where all the inmates are in cages wearing orange boiler suits. The scripts are sharp and the characters are pretty well drawn - at least they seem to be people of depth and contradiction.
Oh and everyone's religious. The humans worship a pantheon of gods, the cylons, who have now evolved 'human' characteristics, are fundamentalist monotheists. So, in the midst of battle, theological discussion ensures, people pray for deliverance, others stress that everything that happens is willed by God or the gods.
If you've not seen it, it's worth checking out.
Saturday, August 11, 2007
Making sense of the text
It's good to be back on the sermon treadmill! There's something about the weekly discipline of having a text that you must make sense of and find a message in for an expectant congregation.
We're still working our way through Galatians and one of the problems of having written about it is that I tend to assume preparing sermons on any passage will be relatively straightforward. If only!
This Sunday I'm preaching on 6:1-10 - often seen as a pot pouri of ethical advice with no coherent thread of thought. Working with it though once more, I wonder if I might have discerned a strand of Paul's thought that unifies these verses into a clarion call to build community by walking in the Spirit in the light of the coming judgment - and thus provide a fitting climax to his whole argument.
The thread runs as follows: having appealed to his hearers to keep in step with the Spirit since we have crucified our old natures and been made alive by the Spirit (5:24-26), we need to help each other walk the line the Spirit lays out for us (6:1-2). This means we have to be realistic about ourselves (3-5), recognise that we're as prone to fail as anyone and that we need one another.
In particular we need our teachers (6 - always a good thing for a preacher to come across!). So we bear one another's burdens - possibly focused on the causes and consequences of sin and failure that we help one another with) but we each carry our own load - which is what exactly?
The harvest we have sown (7-10). The load is what we carry into the presence of God on the day of judgment and can take justifiable pride in (as Paul was often saying - see Phil 2:16 and Rom 15:17 for example).
And what is that harvest? it's the result of doing good to one another and in the wider world (10). Making the most of every kairos (10 - opportunities) because the kairos (9 - proper time) is coming when we'll have to account for what we've done, who we've lived for and why.
And so the argument comes full circle. It starts with Paul telling us to look out for one another, bear the burdens that sin lays on us from time to time and it ends by telling us to be on the look out for opportunities to do good to one another - which I take to mean encourage, support, help, be there for our brothers and sisters in a way that means they are less likely to be overtaken by a sin (the word suggests an ambush).
Does that make sense? If so, then it seems to me that these verses give us a coherent picture of life in the Spirit in the community of Jesus' followers.
Living it's the thing, of course, though knowing what God wants of us is a good start.
We're still working our way through Galatians and one of the problems of having written about it is that I tend to assume preparing sermons on any passage will be relatively straightforward. If only!
This Sunday I'm preaching on 6:1-10 - often seen as a pot pouri of ethical advice with no coherent thread of thought. Working with it though once more, I wonder if I might have discerned a strand of Paul's thought that unifies these verses into a clarion call to build community by walking in the Spirit in the light of the coming judgment - and thus provide a fitting climax to his whole argument.
The thread runs as follows: having appealed to his hearers to keep in step with the Spirit since we have crucified our old natures and been made alive by the Spirit (5:24-26), we need to help each other walk the line the Spirit lays out for us (6:1-2). This means we have to be realistic about ourselves (3-5), recognise that we're as prone to fail as anyone and that we need one another.
In particular we need our teachers (6 - always a good thing for a preacher to come across!). So we bear one another's burdens - possibly focused on the causes and consequences of sin and failure that we help one another with) but we each carry our own load - which is what exactly?
The harvest we have sown (7-10). The load is what we carry into the presence of God on the day of judgment and can take justifiable pride in (as Paul was often saying - see Phil 2:16 and Rom 15:17 for example).
And what is that harvest? it's the result of doing good to one another and in the wider world (10). Making the most of every kairos (10 - opportunities) because the kairos (9 - proper time) is coming when we'll have to account for what we've done, who we've lived for and why.
And so the argument comes full circle. It starts with Paul telling us to look out for one another, bear the burdens that sin lays on us from time to time and it ends by telling us to be on the look out for opportunities to do good to one another - which I take to mean encourage, support, help, be there for our brothers and sisters in a way that means they are less likely to be overtaken by a sin (the word suggests an ambush).
Does that make sense? If so, then it seems to me that these verses give us a coherent picture of life in the Spirit in the community of Jesus' followers.
Living it's the thing, of course, though knowing what God wants of us is a good start.
Friday, August 10, 2007
New books
My copy of Dick France's commentary on Matthew in the NICNT series arrived yesterday. Dick was one of my NT lecturers at LBC and an inspiring and godly exegete, so I'm looking to getting stuck in to his 1000+ page tome.
Matthew will form the basis of the church's teaching programme from October to Easter, so it's good to have such a substantial dialogue partner with which to launch into the text. He will be supplemented with Luz (his slim Cambridge introduction) and Stanley Hauerwas' theological commentary which is full of spikey and suggestive stuff.
I also received L Anne Jervis' At the Heart of the Gospel: suffering in the earliest Christian message, a book that explores Paul's reflection on suffering in 1 Thessalonians, Philippians and Romans. A first glance suggests it's going to be very helpful.
Matthew will form the basis of the church's teaching programme from October to Easter, so it's good to have such a substantial dialogue partner with which to launch into the text. He will be supplemented with Luz (his slim Cambridge introduction) and Stanley Hauerwas' theological commentary which is full of spikey and suggestive stuff.
I also received L Anne Jervis' At the Heart of the Gospel: suffering in the earliest Christian message, a book that explores Paul's reflection on suffering in 1 Thessalonians, Philippians and Romans. A first glance suggests it's going to be very helpful.
Thursday, August 09, 2007
Back from hols
I'm back from la belle France - and what a fab holiday we had: warm sunshine, great food, wonderful scenery, historic sites and not a phone call for a fortnight!
I read some books (as you do) - in particular Cormac McCarthy's truly stunning novel The Road. I read it in two sittings. It's an amazing portrait of the redemptive power of a father's love for his son set against the backdrop of a post-apocalyptic America. The prose is spare and tight and the characterisation utterly convincing. It's a novel that lingers long after the final page has been turned.
I also read Dennis E Smith's From Symposium to Eucharist: the banquet in the early Christian world. Compared to McCarthy, this was like wading through treacle. There's lots of good stuff on Paul but his Jesus Seminar fixation made reading the section on the gospels utterly unrewarding.
We also listened to the Cherry Ghost album Thirst for Romance lots of times. It's lovely - what the Smiths would have sounded like if they'd grown up (Simon Aldred who is Cherry Ghost is in his mid-30s). Songs full of sharp observation and witty one-liners. Well worth checking out.
I read some books (as you do) - in particular Cormac McCarthy's truly stunning novel The Road. I read it in two sittings. It's an amazing portrait of the redemptive power of a father's love for his son set against the backdrop of a post-apocalyptic America. The prose is spare and tight and the characterisation utterly convincing. It's a novel that lingers long after the final page has been turned.
I also read Dennis E Smith's From Symposium to Eucharist: the banquet in the early Christian world. Compared to McCarthy, this was like wading through treacle. There's lots of good stuff on Paul but his Jesus Seminar fixation made reading the section on the gospels utterly unrewarding.
We also listened to the Cherry Ghost album Thirst for Romance lots of times. It's lovely - what the Smiths would have sounded like if they'd grown up (Simon Aldred who is Cherry Ghost is in his mid-30s). Songs full of sharp observation and witty one-liners. Well worth checking out.
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
Into the great blue yonder....
Well, I nearly made it; I nearly cleared my in-tray. But such things aren't meant to be...!
So, we're off on holiday first thing tomorrow, leaving just my Ministry Today article unfinished - but I have been granted an extension deadline by the lovely editor which is wonderful.
All we have to look forward to for the next fortnight is sun, pool, wine, fine cuisine, sleep and reading - with a little site seeing thrown in to keep the blood circulating. It's a tough Job but someone's got to do it...
No more blogging until early August.
So, we're off on holiday first thing tomorrow, leaving just my Ministry Today article unfinished - but I have been granted an extension deadline by the lovely editor which is wonderful.
All we have to look forward to for the next fortnight is sun, pool, wine, fine cuisine, sleep and reading - with a little site seeing thrown in to keep the blood circulating. It's a tough Job but someone's got to do it...
No more blogging until early August.
Monday, July 23, 2007
Fresh light on Philippians
I finished re-reading Peter Oakes' Philippians: From Letter to People (Cambridge 2001) last night. And what a wonderful book it is.
It's a revision of his Oxford DPhill completed under Tom Wright in the mid-90s, so in places it's very demanding. yet it has a lightness of touch and sure-footedness that lots of dissertations lack. I learned tons from it the first time I read it and a whole load more the second time.
I've always been drawn to Philippians - its passion, realism, portrait of Jesus and the life of faith have hooked me from early in my Christian life. But Peter's book took me to a whole new appreciation of the letter.
His thesis is centred on a fresh reading of 2:6-11 but before we get there, he treats us to a fascinating recreation of the Philippian churches within the city and environs of the Roman colony. He rejects the notion that Paul's original readers were Roman citizens, preferring to see them as Greeks rather than Romans, subject people from the lower strata of society.
It was reading this book for the first time that rekindled my interest in New testament social history and has led to me signing up to write an MA on an aspect of it - probably something to do with the social status of the early Christians and how that affects the way we read the NT.
One of the things Peter really helpfully all through his dissertation is to keep asking 'how did the first hearers hear this letter? what did it mean to them?'
This is why he sees 2:6-11 as a complex interaction between Isaiah 45 and Roman Imperial ideology and in particular sees the portrait of Jesus in those verses (which Peter thinks were composed by Paul for the occasion) as offering an example of how to view suffering. In short, he argues that Paul is urging his first hearers to embrace the loss of status that accompanies standing alongside brothers and sisters who are suffering in the interests of maintaining the unity of the church. It is as these believers stand together in mutual support of one another that they will stay strong and faithful in the teeth of opposition.
So thanks to Peter for his hard work and elegant prose. He is a model of faithful scholarship.
It's a revision of his Oxford DPhill completed under Tom Wright in the mid-90s, so in places it's very demanding. yet it has a lightness of touch and sure-footedness that lots of dissertations lack. I learned tons from it the first time I read it and a whole load more the second time.
I've always been drawn to Philippians - its passion, realism, portrait of Jesus and the life of faith have hooked me from early in my Christian life. But Peter's book took me to a whole new appreciation of the letter.
His thesis is centred on a fresh reading of 2:6-11 but before we get there, he treats us to a fascinating recreation of the Philippian churches within the city and environs of the Roman colony. He rejects the notion that Paul's original readers were Roman citizens, preferring to see them as Greeks rather than Romans, subject people from the lower strata of society.
It was reading this book for the first time that rekindled my interest in New testament social history and has led to me signing up to write an MA on an aspect of it - probably something to do with the social status of the early Christians and how that affects the way we read the NT.
One of the things Peter really helpfully all through his dissertation is to keep asking 'how did the first hearers hear this letter? what did it mean to them?'
This is why he sees 2:6-11 as a complex interaction between Isaiah 45 and Roman Imperial ideology and in particular sees the portrait of Jesus in those verses (which Peter thinks were composed by Paul for the occasion) as offering an example of how to view suffering. In short, he argues that Paul is urging his first hearers to embrace the loss of status that accompanies standing alongside brothers and sisters who are suffering in the interests of maintaining the unity of the church. It is as these believers stand together in mutual support of one another that they will stay strong and faithful in the teeth of opposition.
So thanks to Peter for his hard work and elegant prose. He is a model of faithful scholarship.
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Clearing the decks for the summer getaway
We're getting into holiday mode as we set off for la belle France on Wednesday. I haven't taken the car for France for over ten years, so yesterday I was reminding myself of the rules - what do I need - and rushing to Halfords to stock up!
As ever, I have far too much to finish before going away and so have been making lists of things I won't finish but will need to pay attention to when I get back so that things will run smoothly in the autumn.
For instance, we're going to be basing a lot of our teaching and learning from October through to Easter next year in Matthew's gospel. I've been having a great time reading Luz, Hauerwas, Stanton, et al trying to get a handle on the structure and themes of the gospel (which I confess I don't know nearly so well as Luke). I was really excited late last week when I discovered that Dick France (my old NT tutor from LBC) has written the commentary on Matthew for the NICNT series and it's coming out this summer (see Amazon for details - it'll be well worth checking out and is a lot cheaper than Nolland or Luz).
However, despite all the background reading, I still haven't come up with a structure for a series that does justice to the gospel and takes in Christmas and Easter which I can share with the rest of my team.
I also have an article to finish for Ministry Today in which I'm reflecting on the influence of Jeremiah 29.7 on my ministry over the past nearly 20 years. I'm wondering about ministry as a particular form of exile; if the church is in some way in exile in our culture, do ministers in some way embody that exile and model how to live in it to their congregations?
More particularly, I am teasing some of my feelings about my current ministry and whether the tension between feeling at home and feeling displaced is helping me to be more creative, sympathetic to strangers, less prepared to put up with the status quo and possibly more dependent on God.
I'm hoping to get this finished by close of play on Tuesday (and still have had time to pack!)
As ever, I have far too much to finish before going away and so have been making lists of things I won't finish but will need to pay attention to when I get back so that things will run smoothly in the autumn.
For instance, we're going to be basing a lot of our teaching and learning from October through to Easter next year in Matthew's gospel. I've been having a great time reading Luz, Hauerwas, Stanton, et al trying to get a handle on the structure and themes of the gospel (which I confess I don't know nearly so well as Luke). I was really excited late last week when I discovered that Dick France (my old NT tutor from LBC) has written the commentary on Matthew for the NICNT series and it's coming out this summer (see Amazon for details - it'll be well worth checking out and is a lot cheaper than Nolland or Luz).
However, despite all the background reading, I still haven't come up with a structure for a series that does justice to the gospel and takes in Christmas and Easter which I can share with the rest of my team.
I also have an article to finish for Ministry Today in which I'm reflecting on the influence of Jeremiah 29.7 on my ministry over the past nearly 20 years. I'm wondering about ministry as a particular form of exile; if the church is in some way in exile in our culture, do ministers in some way embody that exile and model how to live in it to their congregations?
More particularly, I am teasing some of my feelings about my current ministry and whether the tension between feeling at home and feeling displaced is helping me to be more creative, sympathetic to strangers, less prepared to put up with the status quo and possibly more dependent on God.
I'm hoping to get this finished by close of play on Tuesday (and still have had time to pack!)
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Scripture meme
Andy (http://andygoodliff.typepad.com/) has tagged me to share a passage of scripture that I inhabit, keep returning to, feel haunted by, and this is it: 'Also, seek the peace and prosperity of the city to which I have carried you into exile. Pray to the LORD for it, because if it prospers, you too will prosper." (Jeremiah 29:7)
This is the verse that God used 30 years ago to call me into ministry at a conference on Christians and political. It is a verse that has shaped the way I view ministry, inspired me always to see that our calling as God's people to bless those around - to seek their shalom (as the Hebrew says), their welfare, well being and wholeness.
More recently, it has helped me explore the notion of exile - is the church in the UK somehow in exile and if so what does that feel like, what shape should such a church be morphing into if it is to be faithful to its call.
And just this year, God asked me to apply the verse to myself in my situation. I had a very strong sense that he was saying that I'd applied this verse to the church in general and churches I'd served in in particular, now I should apply it to myself, along the lines 'you're in exile, get over it, get on with what I've sent you into exile to do.'
Hence the reason I suggest this verse haunts me.
So, if I've got how this works, I tag
Sean Winter
Jonathan Sommerville
Catriona
Jim Gordon
Marcus Bull
This is the verse that God used 30 years ago to call me into ministry at a conference on Christians and political. It is a verse that has shaped the way I view ministry, inspired me always to see that our calling as God's people to bless those around - to seek their shalom (as the Hebrew says), their welfare, well being and wholeness.
More recently, it has helped me explore the notion of exile - is the church in the UK somehow in exile and if so what does that feel like, what shape should such a church be morphing into if it is to be faithful to its call.
And just this year, God asked me to apply the verse to myself in my situation. I had a very strong sense that he was saying that I'd applied this verse to the church in general and churches I'd served in in particular, now I should apply it to myself, along the lines 'you're in exile, get over it, get on with what I've sent you into exile to do.'
Hence the reason I suggest this verse haunts me.
So, if I've got how this works, I tag
Sean Winter
Jonathan Sommerville
Catriona
Jim Gordon
Marcus Bull
Saturday, July 14, 2007
That blythe spirit strikes again...!
Yes, as ever Stuart puts his finger on precisely what I am arguing for in relation to reading the Bible - that's why he teaches in a theological college and I'm just a minister(!).
A Christ centred, community focused reading inspired by the Holy Spirit is how I think our churches should read the Bible. And it is very Baptist - and that feels soooo good!
I guess one thing I'd add is that - as Sean Winter argued in his Whitely lecture (which I think I've just about understood!) - quoting the Bible is the beginning not the end of the process of teasing how God wants us to live.
This is what Paul was doing in Galatians 3-4: all the time he was asking his baffled hearers - torn between Paul and his rivals' view of the faith they shared - to think about their experience as individuals and as a community and to remember the teaching Paul gave them and the Bible stories it was based on and to work out for themselves how they should live in the light of it.
Of course, he hoped they'd see his perspective on things, but they did have to get there on their own. How very Baptist is that?!
A Christ centred, community focused reading inspired by the Holy Spirit is how I think our churches should read the Bible. And it is very Baptist - and that feels soooo good!
I guess one thing I'd add is that - as Sean Winter argued in his Whitely lecture (which I think I've just about understood!) - quoting the Bible is the beginning not the end of the process of teasing how God wants us to live.
This is what Paul was doing in Galatians 3-4: all the time he was asking his baffled hearers - torn between Paul and his rivals' view of the faith they shared - to think about their experience as individuals and as a community and to remember the teaching Paul gave them and the Bible stories it was based on and to work out for themselves how they should live in the light of it.
Of course, he hoped they'd see his perspective on things, but they did have to get there on their own. How very Baptist is that?!
Friday, July 13, 2007
How we read the Bible
I've just updated my profile - does this mean I'm a different person now?
I took delivery of Kevin Giles' The Trinity and Subordination: The Doctrine of God and the Current Gender Debate this week. This is a book I've wanted to read for some time and I might take it on holiday with me.
In his introduction he talks about the need to read scripture theologically. Athanasius, he reminds us (though I have to say, I don't know a whole lot about Athanasius to be reminded of), argued that we need to do theology with 'a profound grasp of what he called the "scope" of scripture - the overall drift of the Bible, its primary focus, its theological centre.'
Now I know just how tricky this is to do - I've read Thiselton and Goldingay and wrestled enough with what is the heart of the Old Testament or even the centre of Paul's theology to know that this is not straight-forward.
But I have found the idea really helpful in tackling Galatians 4:21-31 for this Sunday. This is the trickiest part of Galatians in many ways, the end of Paul's Bible study, the clinching demolition of his rivals' argument. And yet, having said 'do you hear what the Law says..,' he then proceeds to make the story of Sarah and Hagar say the opposite of what Genesis 21 appears to be saying and to ignore the fact that Abraham circumcised both is sons. What's going on?
Well, I think it has something to do with seeing the big picture - what Athanasius might call the scope of scripture - and not getting bogged down in the detail of subsets of the narrative. More than that, it's about seeing the big picture through the coming of Christ - seeing it summed up and fulfilled in him.
And crucially, it's about seeing all that in the light of our experience of God interpreted by scripture. as the Westminster Confession (not a document I quote often!) says: 'the supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are determined ... can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the scriptures.'
So in Gal 4:6-8 Paul speaks of both Jew and Gentile crying 'abba' Father because of the Holy Spirit erupting in their lives as a result of their trust in the faithful work of Jesus. If this has happened, then scripture ought to be able to tell them why. Hence the remainder of Paul's Bible study in 4:21-31 before he outlines how life in the Spirit works - interestingly focused on how we fulfil the law by being in Christ who fulfilled the Law through his life, death and resurrection and now enables us to do the same through the Holy Spirit working through us.
I've also been continuing to enjoy the new Editors album and The Ideal Condition, the first post-Orbital work by Paul Hartnoll - lovely stuff...
I took delivery of Kevin Giles' The Trinity and Subordination: The Doctrine of God and the Current Gender Debate this week. This is a book I've wanted to read for some time and I might take it on holiday with me.
In his introduction he talks about the need to read scripture theologically. Athanasius, he reminds us (though I have to say, I don't know a whole lot about Athanasius to be reminded of), argued that we need to do theology with 'a profound grasp of what he called the "scope" of scripture - the overall drift of the Bible, its primary focus, its theological centre.'
Now I know just how tricky this is to do - I've read Thiselton and Goldingay and wrestled enough with what is the heart of the Old Testament or even the centre of Paul's theology to know that this is not straight-forward.
But I have found the idea really helpful in tackling Galatians 4:21-31 for this Sunday. This is the trickiest part of Galatians in many ways, the end of Paul's Bible study, the clinching demolition of his rivals' argument. And yet, having said 'do you hear what the Law says..,' he then proceeds to make the story of Sarah and Hagar say the opposite of what Genesis 21 appears to be saying and to ignore the fact that Abraham circumcised both is sons. What's going on?
Well, I think it has something to do with seeing the big picture - what Athanasius might call the scope of scripture - and not getting bogged down in the detail of subsets of the narrative. More than that, it's about seeing the big picture through the coming of Christ - seeing it summed up and fulfilled in him.
And crucially, it's about seeing all that in the light of our experience of God interpreted by scripture. as the Westminster Confession (not a document I quote often!) says: 'the supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are determined ... can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the scriptures.'
So in Gal 4:6-8 Paul speaks of both Jew and Gentile crying 'abba' Father because of the Holy Spirit erupting in their lives as a result of their trust in the faithful work of Jesus. If this has happened, then scripture ought to be able to tell them why. Hence the remainder of Paul's Bible study in 4:21-31 before he outlines how life in the Spirit works - interestingly focused on how we fulfil the law by being in Christ who fulfilled the Law through his life, death and resurrection and now enables us to do the same through the Holy Spirit working through us.
I've also been continuing to enjoy the new Editors album and The Ideal Condition, the first post-Orbital work by Paul Hartnoll - lovely stuff...
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Who are you?
Following on from the mighty Who gig, I'm reflecting on questions of identity tonight at our midweek gathering. in particular looking at what Paul says on the subject in Galatians and why.
I'm intrigued by the suggestion Bruce Winter makes that when Paul speaks in 6:12 of his rivals wanting to 'make a good show', he could be using the word in a more technical legal sense of 'secure legal status.'
The argument is that Paul's rivals are pressing the gentile converts to get circumcised so that they will come under the umbrella of Judaism, a religio licita, and so be protected from having to participate in the imperial cult, something 4:8-10 suggests might be happening (or so argues Justin Hardin of Oklahoma Baptist University).
It's also possible that Paul's rivals are looking over their shoulders at increasingly militant Judean nationalists who are stirring up trouble for groups in Jerusalem who appear to be rather tolerant of gentiles.
Both these reasons could lie behind Paul saying his rivals were teaching what they did in order to avoid being persecuted for the cross (6:12b).
It all throws up the fact that identity - who we are, how we define ourselves in the the world - is a key issue for Galatians. In the ancient world identity came via family and place in the household, status (whether slave or free and whether born free or freed during one's lifetime), membership of voluntary associations that gave strong group identity and practice of religion (besides the imperial cult which everyone had to practice at certain times in the year).
For Paul our identity is derived from Christ - our crucifixion with him (2:20, 6:14), demonstrated in baptism where we join a community of equals from which we take on a new identity (3:26-29). we are children of God (4:6-8), defined by our trust in the faithful work of Jesus.
Reading Galatians provokes us to think about where our identity comes from - the world around us or our commitment to Jesus in the new community of equals we join by baptism?
I'm intrigued by the suggestion Bruce Winter makes that when Paul speaks in 6:12 of his rivals wanting to 'make a good show', he could be using the word in a more technical legal sense of 'secure legal status.'
The argument is that Paul's rivals are pressing the gentile converts to get circumcised so that they will come under the umbrella of Judaism, a religio licita, and so be protected from having to participate in the imperial cult, something 4:8-10 suggests might be happening (or so argues Justin Hardin of Oklahoma Baptist University).
It's also possible that Paul's rivals are looking over their shoulders at increasingly militant Judean nationalists who are stirring up trouble for groups in Jerusalem who appear to be rather tolerant of gentiles.
Both these reasons could lie behind Paul saying his rivals were teaching what they did in order to avoid being persecuted for the cross (6:12b).
It all throws up the fact that identity - who we are, how we define ourselves in the the world - is a key issue for Galatians. In the ancient world identity came via family and place in the household, status (whether slave or free and whether born free or freed during one's lifetime), membership of voluntary associations that gave strong group identity and practice of religion (besides the imperial cult which everyone had to practice at certain times in the year).
For Paul our identity is derived from Christ - our crucifixion with him (2:20, 6:14), demonstrated in baptism where we join a community of equals from which we take on a new identity (3:26-29). we are children of God (4:6-8), defined by our trust in the faithful work of Jesus.
Reading Galatians provokes us to think about where our identity comes from - the world around us or our commitment to Jesus in the new community of equals we join by baptism?
Monday, July 02, 2007
Baptisms
We had a wonderful baptismal service last night. Two young women testified to their faith in front of a packed church - lots of their friends came.
I preached on Galatians 3:26-29 and spoke about baptism being about putting on Christ and being part of a new community where are all equals - not only in terms of status but also contribution. I stressed that baptism was act of social defiance, going counter to the prevailing culture and pointing to a better way of living as individuals and communities.
I have Sean Winter to thank for taking this tack - it was well received over all. Indeed it all went fabulously well and I came home with a warm glow of it having been a good day.
The week got off to reasonable start. I've been preparing for the men's bible this afternoon - 1 Corinthians 13 - which has been hugely enjoyable.
I preached on Galatians 3:26-29 and spoke about baptism being about putting on Christ and being part of a new community where are all equals - not only in terms of status but also contribution. I stressed that baptism was act of social defiance, going counter to the prevailing culture and pointing to a better way of living as individuals and communities.
I have Sean Winter to thank for taking this tack - it was well received over all. Indeed it all went fabulously well and I came home with a warm glow of it having been a good day.
The week got off to reasonable start. I've been preparing for the men's bible this afternoon - 1 Corinthians 13 - which has been hugely enjoyable.
Friday, June 29, 2007
This week's listening and reading
Good week for music this week.
Having seen the Who on Tuesday evening (see previous post), I've been listening to the new offering from Editors, An end has a Start.
Editors were last year's surprise band. Coming from nowhere, almost unnoticed, their album The Back Room was stunning, full of edgy Joy Division-esque short, snappy songs driven by sharp guitars and Tom Smith's rich baritone.
The new album sees them stepping up a gear, the songs becoming more expansive, the arrangements more varied. The writing is excellent, Smith dealing with death, hope, social breakdown and love with a neat turn of phrase and a perceptive take on life.
It's the perfect accompaniment to Peter Oakes' Philippians book (now halfway through) and Andrew Clarke's Secular and Christian Leadership in Corinth ( a third of the way into).
Having seen the Who on Tuesday evening (see previous post), I've been listening to the new offering from Editors, An end has a Start.
Editors were last year's surprise band. Coming from nowhere, almost unnoticed, their album The Back Room was stunning, full of edgy Joy Division-esque short, snappy songs driven by sharp guitars and Tom Smith's rich baritone.
The new album sees them stepping up a gear, the songs becoming more expansive, the arrangements more varied. The writing is excellent, Smith dealing with death, hope, social breakdown and love with a neat turn of phrase and a perceptive take on life.
It's the perfect accompaniment to Peter Oakes' Philippians book (now halfway through) and Andrew Clarke's Secular and Christian Leadership in Corinth ( a third of the way into).
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
The kids are alright
Went to see the Who last night at Wembly - ably supported by the Charlatans - and they were amazing. Having joked earlier in the day when asked who was supporting them and replying 'their zimmers', it was one of the freshest, tightest and most energetic performances I've seen in ages. And yes, they did play all three CSI theme tunes!
They played a selection of greatest hits and a medley from last year's Endless Wire album (those songs suggest that Pete Townshend has lost of none of his song writing faculties).
As well as great playing from a band that included Ringo Star's boy on drums, the show incorporated wonderful video material, the best of which was montages from the Who's 40+ year career.
There were spine-tingling moments such as 'Won't get fooled again' which was almost revivalist in its passion, the audience rising to the anthem of not being taken for a ride by those who promise change. Daltry was singing this the evening before Gordon Brown takes over at number 10 and I wondered for a moment how many prime ministers have come and gone while the Who have been singing that song.
Other great moments included the opener, the Seeker, wonderfully up-to-date 30 years on, Townshend's solo performance of a couple of tracks from Quadrophenia, showcasing the fact that he is an extremely tidy guitarist and the show's closer, just Daltry and Townshend singing a song - I assume off the recent album - about growing old and being reconciled to one's past, Daltry holding aloft a mug of tea!
The Who have been around as long as I've been a music fan - longer actually - and to some extent have provided a smattering of the musical accompaniment to my journey. The video backdrop reminded me of the heady days of the late 60s and especially the early 70s when both surviving members of the band had hair and there was an optimism abroad that this music might be the soundtrack to lasting and significant social change. It was poignant to see the video to their latest work still pre-occupied with the themes of war and social isolation that informed their best work of 30 years ago.
But it wasn't a lecture, a history lesson or a meditation on human frailty and duplicity, it was a storming gig and my ears are still ringing this morning with the joy of it.
They played a selection of greatest hits and a medley from last year's Endless Wire album (those songs suggest that Pete Townshend has lost of none of his song writing faculties).
As well as great playing from a band that included Ringo Star's boy on drums, the show incorporated wonderful video material, the best of which was montages from the Who's 40+ year career.
There were spine-tingling moments such as 'Won't get fooled again' which was almost revivalist in its passion, the audience rising to the anthem of not being taken for a ride by those who promise change. Daltry was singing this the evening before Gordon Brown takes over at number 10 and I wondered for a moment how many prime ministers have come and gone while the Who have been singing that song.
Other great moments included the opener, the Seeker, wonderfully up-to-date 30 years on, Townshend's solo performance of a couple of tracks from Quadrophenia, showcasing the fact that he is an extremely tidy guitarist and the show's closer, just Daltry and Townshend singing a song - I assume off the recent album - about growing old and being reconciled to one's past, Daltry holding aloft a mug of tea!
The Who have been around as long as I've been a music fan - longer actually - and to some extent have provided a smattering of the musical accompaniment to my journey. The video backdrop reminded me of the heady days of the late 60s and especially the early 70s when both surviving members of the band had hair and there was an optimism abroad that this music might be the soundtrack to lasting and significant social change. It was poignant to see the video to their latest work still pre-occupied with the themes of war and social isolation that informed their best work of 30 years ago.
But it wasn't a lecture, a history lesson or a meditation on human frailty and duplicity, it was a storming gig and my ears are still ringing this morning with the joy of it.
Monday, June 25, 2007
Scottish thoughts
Back from Scotland. We has a really wonderful time - the sun even shone for part of a day!
We received fabulous hospitality from Margaret and Andrew; Stuart guided us effortlessly around the working bits of our trip (thanks to them for their kindness and generosity); and it was good to catch up with friends and family.
The Scottish Baptist College's thanksgiving service went really well and what I said seemed well received (I had been somewhat wound up about it...) And cafe church at St Ninians in stirling was a blast. People joined in the conversation about shining as stars (from Philippians 2) and helped one another dream about the difference they could make in their neighbourhood.
This is what cafe gatherings are all about, it seems to me. It's a more democratic way of being church and Stuart is right (on his blog) to suggest that you wouldn't get an 'I have a dream speech' at a cafe church. This is not to say that the person leading a cafe-style gathering doesn't need to prepare and be pretty clear what they want to communicate and how they want the conversation to go.
But I find the unpredictability of the cafe format exhilarating. While I have prepared what I want to say, the table talk can often raise issues that I hadn't thought of or which force me to explain or unpack an idea I've just shared. this means people get what I'm trying to say and have begun to work with it. It also means that I learn. It was great to hear the insights of people yesterday as they processed what I'd said and applied what I'd shared to their lives.
We received fabulous hospitality from Margaret and Andrew; Stuart guided us effortlessly around the working bits of our trip (thanks to them for their kindness and generosity); and it was good to catch up with friends and family.
The Scottish Baptist College's thanksgiving service went really well and what I said seemed well received (I had been somewhat wound up about it...) And cafe church at St Ninians in stirling was a blast. People joined in the conversation about shining as stars (from Philippians 2) and helped one another dream about the difference they could make in their neighbourhood.
This is what cafe gatherings are all about, it seems to me. It's a more democratic way of being church and Stuart is right (on his blog) to suggest that you wouldn't get an 'I have a dream speech' at a cafe church. This is not to say that the person leading a cafe-style gathering doesn't need to prepare and be pretty clear what they want to communicate and how they want the conversation to go.
But I find the unpredictability of the cafe format exhilarating. While I have prepared what I want to say, the table talk can often raise issues that I hadn't thought of or which force me to explain or unpack an idea I've just shared. this means people get what I'm trying to say and have begun to work with it. It also means that I learn. It was great to hear the insights of people yesterday as they processed what I'd said and applied what I'd shared to their lives.
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Off to Scotland
Linda and I are off to Scotland in the morning.
I'm speaking at the graduation service of the Scottish Baptist College tomorrow evening. I'm really looking forward to it - though I am also gripped by entirely understandable panic!
Then we hope to see family, catch up with friends, see some sites and generally relax before pitching up at St Ninians church in Stirling on Sunday morning where I'm going to talk about new ways of being church in a sort of cafe-style, conversationally-based morning service.
So, no blogging until next week.
I'm speaking at the graduation service of the Scottish Baptist College tomorrow evening. I'm really looking forward to it - though I am also gripped by entirely understandable panic!
Then we hope to see family, catch up with friends, see some sites and generally relax before pitching up at St Ninians church in Stirling on Sunday morning where I'm going to talk about new ways of being church in a sort of cafe-style, conversationally-based morning service.
So, no blogging until next week.
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
cafe church thoughts on baptism as relocation
It's good to know there's lots of people out there thinking about this issue. I've found all the contributions really helpful.
It was cafe church on Sunday and we did a very simple meditative evening on location, location, location. Taking Romans 6 as our spring board, we thought about our life of faith in terms of location and journey. We ended by signing a covenant, committing ourselves to being family to one another, helping each other walk in newness of life (the words came from Gathering for Worship). Of course, we didn't link signing the covenant with joining the church!
The interesting thing for me was the reaction of most of the worshippers - a mature crowd as most of our young adults were away at the wedding of one of their own. Many said it was the best cafe church we'd ever had. some talked of the profound way it helped them to think about their journey. One person said it took them back to their baptism and made them think about what it had meant then (a long time ago) and what it means now.
I think through the course of this conversation - both through this blog and with my team and others in church - I have become much more aware of how important baptism as a theological tool was to Paul as he explained the life of faith to his converts around the Eastern end of the empire.
Unpacking Romans 6 on Sunday evening, we looked at baptism as emigration - moving from one location (the land of sin and death) to another (the land of grace and resurrection). We looked at Jesus as the means of that emigration - the one able to pay the fare, get the exit visa, manage the crossing. We reflected on Paul's likening of baptism to the exodus (cf 1 Cor 10:2) and hence of the baptised being God's new pilgrim people, walking the journey of freedom from slavery to the promised land - in our case the redeemed world (Romans 4:13, 8:17).
All this being true, the obvious response was that we committed ourselves to journey together, watching over one another in love. I have been struck time and time again as I have read Paul over the past few weeks how close the link is between personal response in baptism and the group life of the followers of Jesus. There is no personal response to Jesus without equally personal commitment to his followers.
So, I left Sunday evening thinking that we must forge a closer link between baptism, discipleship and our life together and that the most obvious way of doing this was to link 'membership' to some kind of commitment to walk together as disciples.
For me this offers the opportunity to empty membership of all the stuff that associates it with status, being an insider over against outsiders, being more important to the church than attending non-members, while at the same time filling membership with helpful connotations of covenant commitment to God and one another, of active participation in the life of the church so that we are built up and help to build up others.
The only hurdle left is: how do you introduce such thinking into a pretty traditional baptist church that has at best an ambivalent attitude to embracing change?
It was cafe church on Sunday and we did a very simple meditative evening on location, location, location. Taking Romans 6 as our spring board, we thought about our life of faith in terms of location and journey. We ended by signing a covenant, committing ourselves to being family to one another, helping each other walk in newness of life (the words came from Gathering for Worship). Of course, we didn't link signing the covenant with joining the church!
The interesting thing for me was the reaction of most of the worshippers - a mature crowd as most of our young adults were away at the wedding of one of their own. Many said it was the best cafe church we'd ever had. some talked of the profound way it helped them to think about their journey. One person said it took them back to their baptism and made them think about what it had meant then (a long time ago) and what it means now.
I think through the course of this conversation - both through this blog and with my team and others in church - I have become much more aware of how important baptism as a theological tool was to Paul as he explained the life of faith to his converts around the Eastern end of the empire.
Unpacking Romans 6 on Sunday evening, we looked at baptism as emigration - moving from one location (the land of sin and death) to another (the land of grace and resurrection). We looked at Jesus as the means of that emigration - the one able to pay the fare, get the exit visa, manage the crossing. We reflected on Paul's likening of baptism to the exodus (cf 1 Cor 10:2) and hence of the baptised being God's new pilgrim people, walking the journey of freedom from slavery to the promised land - in our case the redeemed world (Romans 4:13, 8:17).
All this being true, the obvious response was that we committed ourselves to journey together, watching over one another in love. I have been struck time and time again as I have read Paul over the past few weeks how close the link is between personal response in baptism and the group life of the followers of Jesus. There is no personal response to Jesus without equally personal commitment to his followers.
So, I left Sunday evening thinking that we must forge a closer link between baptism, discipleship and our life together and that the most obvious way of doing this was to link 'membership' to some kind of commitment to walk together as disciples.
For me this offers the opportunity to empty membership of all the stuff that associates it with status, being an insider over against outsiders, being more important to the church than attending non-members, while at the same time filling membership with helpful connotations of covenant commitment to God and one another, of active participation in the life of the church so that we are built up and help to build up others.
The only hurdle left is: how do you introduce such thinking into a pretty traditional baptist church that has at best an ambivalent attitude to embracing change?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
