My Kingdom Summary…in Luke

Here’s how I concluded my marathon paper entitled, ‘What is the Kingdom of God in Luke’s Gospel?‘:

On one level it is easy to see why this particular subject has generated so much debate and caused scholars to often have little in the way of consensus over some of the issues relating to the kingdom of God. In many ways it is difficult to give a definitive answer to the question posed at the beginning, even when limiting oneself to the kingdom as it appears in Luke’s gospel. However upon a careful reading of the text one can begin to put parameters in place and through these parameters begin to draw the outline of this dynamic kingdom of God. In closing then it would be helpful for us to briefly re-sketch our outline of the kingdom.

Luke paints for us the picture of a kingdom that is built, in part, upon the Old Testament and, to an even more limited degree, Jewish expectation of a liberating messiah who would establish a new age. He places Jesus at the center of his narrative as that liberator, but his act of liberation and restoration far surpasses any previous expectation. For Luke Jesus comes proclaiming a kingdom the purpose of which is to bring restoration to poor and beggarly Israel. Luke’s kingdom however is not limited to Israel but extends beyond to allow for people from the north, south, east and west to enter in. It is a restoration that doesn’t merely overturn the exile but goes to work on the many damaging effects of the fall. It is a kingdom that was present in the ministry of Jesus and that since the cross has been in effect, to some degree, and will continue until Christ returns and consummates the kingdom by complete restoration.

As Christians today we live in the middle of that timing process and as we do we would do well to heed the words of New Testament scholar, Craig L. Blomberg,

‘Understanding this combination of future and present elements of the kingdom gives us both hope and a certain realism about the Christian life and task. On the one hand, we dare not underestimate how much we can accomplish for God when yielded to his Spirit. He wants to create an outpost or colony of heaven – of the world to come – in our lives individually and corporately now in this age. Thus we become the salt of the earth and light of the world. On the other hand, we dare not underestimate the strength of the opposition. We will not Christianize the earth or establish God’s righteousness in any wholesale way in this life; that remains for Jesus himself to do after his return.’ (Jesus and the Gospels: 1997: 286)

Thoughts? Comments?

Marathon Paper

I’ve just finished probably the most difficult and draining paper I’ve ever researched and written: What is the Kingdom of God in Luke and how does Luke think it comes? I am now officially fed up with all simplistic answers to the question: What is the Kingdom of God? The reality is that its not an easy question and I think Jesus has deliberately left it out there like that. I suppose its quite ironic then that we throw the term around all the time as if we all know exactly what it means. I don’t think we do – so maybe we should be a bit more careful in our use of language. Here’s the crux of the matter (how the details work out I have no idea): Jesus is coming again one day to restore all things – something of that is going on in the present because of the cross - so get on board.

More Bock…this Time on the Kingdom

I’m really enjoying Darrell Bock’s wisdom and insight into the gospels. Here’s a quotation about how, from the relevant gospel texts, he thinks Jesus sees the kingdom of God:

“He apparently foresees a long-running program that was declared and initiated in his teaching and work, but that one day will culminate in a comprehensive judgment. It is to this ultimate goal that the kingdom is headed…The sense of these texts as a whole is that Jesus works within this history and yet will reshape it one day” (Jesus According to Scriputre, p.572)

Right Investment

Here’s a profound little comment that one of my pastors made on Sunday night:

“Invest now in the world to come“

Simple yet amazingly profound in light of some of the current debates don’t you think?

Tim Chester on the Kingdom of God

As always Tim Chester is extremely helpful on something I’ve been trying to get my head around. In chapter 5 of ‘Good News to the Poor‘, Chester discusses the relationship between social involvement and the kingdom of God. One of the fundamental questions he tackles is whether or not the kingdom of God is to be identified with social advances within history. Chester argues that no, it shouldn’t be. And so he says:

“…if we are to be true to the bible, we must maintain that salvation does not exist in history beyond the church and that in the New Testament the kingdom of God comes only as Christ is acknowledged as king.” (p.74)

Much of social advancement today is being tagged as God at work growing his kingdom. Like Chester I’m not convinced this is the most helpful way to categorize it – nor do I think it is consistent with the New Testament. If the kingdom is to be manifest then Christ is to be installed as King – without the King there is no kingdom. I would argue, as Chester alludes to later, that social advancement in this world that takes place apart from Christ being acknowledged as King is rather a case of the common grace of God being manifest.

Now this thinking might run contrary to lot of thinking in ‘missional’ circles – even in evangelical missional circles (that’s why in one sense I’m glad Tim Chester, a recognized missional voice, said it first). However at the moment I remain unconvinced by the text of accepting a wider view of the kingdom that embraces social advancement that takes place apart from the acknowledgment of Christ as King. I would maybe suggest that the ethics and ideals of the kingdom of God can be spread into areas that may not necessarily have entered into the kingdom. This will happen as kingdom members – Christians – live out the kingdom within close proximity of those who are outside of the kingdom. I think this spread is unavoidable, in a theoretical sense, since all Christians are called to live by kingdom ideals and ethics.

Chester concludes the chapter with the following words:

“Some Christians see advances in social justice in history as the coming of God’s kingdom, but in the New Testament the kingdom comes through the gospel as people submit to God’s word. God’s kingdom will be supreme over all things when Christ returns, but in the meantime it comes secretly and graciously through God’s word. The social dimension of salvation is anticipated in history in the life of the Christian community.” (p.81)

That thing called ‘Church’

During 2007 I had interactions with numerous church pastors and planters, both in the flesh and on the web. Through these I’ve become convinced that I need to get my ecclesiology clear in my head over the course of 2008. So I’m going to concentrate my studies in this area. Here’s a list of some of the questions I want to have a look at (feel free to point me towards literature that deals with any of the questions below):

According to the New Testament what do you have to have, as absolute minimum, for a church to exist?

What is the relationship between the church and the Kingdom of God?

What is the relationship between the church and social concern (as opposed to the relationship between Christians and social concern)?

What is the relationship between the church (local) and culture?

Is the Knox-Robinson view of church too narrow?

What does over-realised eschatology look like in the church?

What does under-realised eschatology look like in the church?

How do the above two questions relate to the plausibility of the homogeneous unit principle?

What do those same two questions have to say about the depth of gospel community a church should be attempting?

Are multi-site churches theologically viable?

I think these questions are crucial to not only ponder but begin to give solid biblical answers to if a new group of young leaders aim to plant and grow fresh expressions of church that reflect the pattern of the New Testament.

The Kingdom, the Church and Confusion

I must admit that after reading Michael Horton’s article I’m beginning to feel a bit confused. I’m battling to figure out the parameters of this whole discussion. These are my big questions at the moment:

1. How do we define the term ‘Kingdom of God’?

2. What is the relationship between the Kingdom of God and the Church?

3. Depending upon your answers to the above questions: What exactly is the church’s obligation towards mercy ministries?

4. Is Horton’s approach compatible with the concept of being ‘missional’?

5. Alternatively, does Horton’s approach redefine the concept ‘missional’?

Anyone want to have a go at suggesting answers to some of these questions? (Try not to make comments too long – my attention span is very short at the moment).

Why I DON’T Want to be Involved in Church Planting

(Following on from my last church planting post – this a list of reasons as to why I’m absolutely terrified about getting into church planting…)

I’m terrified that my work ethic is pathetic and that church planting requires people who work to the max.

I’m terrified that my life will on be on display to an entire body of Christians – I don’t want to let them down.

I’m terrified of the responsibility of having to teach the Bible with the deepest integrity every single week.

I’m terrified of displaying authentic orthopraxy.

I’m terrified of loving people, especially those who tick me off.

I’m terrified of all the massive social concerns our country faces.

I’m terrified of working with other Christians who don’t agree with me.

I’m terrified of trying to balance out a humble orthodoxy.

I’m terrified of the possible limits to which my body, mind and emotions will be stretched.

I’m terrified of building my own empire.

Why I Want to be Involved in Church Planting

(I haven’t put a lot of thought into the order – but here goes…)

I’m convinced that God is the creator of the universe and Jesus is his son and King.

I’m convinced that the creation needs to respond rightly.

I’m convinced that God will judge those who do not respond to his rule.

I’m convinced that God not only rules but that he is also in the business of rescuing us from that wrong relationship.

I’m convinced that the church is the correct expression of the gathered people who respond correctly to God’s rule and rescue.

I’m convinced that the church is to herald this great rescue and call for submission to God’s rule.

I’m convinced that God dearly loves his church – as a groom loves his bride on their wedding day.

Those are my convictions – here are my persuasions:

I’m persuaded that too many ‘churches’ today have neglected the above convictions.

I’m persuaded that too many ‘churches’ today have substituted the above convictions for other ideals and motivations.

I’m persuaded that too many ‘spiritual’ people today despise the bride – wife beaters!

I’m persuaded that too many churches today lack authenticity.

I’m persuaded that fresher expressions of the church are needed to brighten up the landscape.

I’m persuaded that the urban centers of South Africa are significantly under-churched by churches which hold the above convictions.

To Judge or not to Judge…

I’ve been working on the Sermon on the Mount as part of a post grad program and have found it wonderfully satisfying as well as troubling at the same time.  Jesus’ words are both immensely encouraging and go right to the heart of hypocritical religion.  As I study it more, His words seem to stick to me as I slowly begin to realise my own religious hypocrisy.  One such text that has taken me aback is Matthew 7:1-6.  Jesus begins simply enough:  

“Judge not, that you be not judged.” 

This is his guiding principle for the text; if one of his followers displays judgment then they will be judged.  Before we go further, we need to realise that Jesus was critiquing the deficient righteousness of the Pharisees (cf. 5: 17-48) urging his followers to capture the true meaning of righteousness as putting Christ’s commands into practise.  So we have Jesus warning the disciples that if they display the same kind of critical, harsh judgemental attitude that the Pharisees did by condemning others then they are in danger of the greater judgement (see v2). This he helpfully illustrates in v3-5 where he uses the word picture of a man trying to help his brother remove the speck from his eye.  But Jesus condemns him as a hypocrite!  Why?  Because of the log in his own eye; this was the fault of the Pharisees who condemned others for their failings while not being able to see the greater problem of their own hearts, hearts hardened to God and others.  And so Jesus warns his followers to not fall into that trap of hypocrisy; Christians do not have the right to condemn a man, which is God’s ultimate job.  Ours is to love our neighbour and love God which is the sum of the Law (cf. 7:12).   

But don’t we see Jesus judging others?  The disciples are told to judge false teachers by their fruits so is this a contradiction? No, for the opposite extreme of being judgemental/condemning is just as bad a mistake.  That extreme is to suspend all faculties of critical thought and action.  This would mean to let sin go unpunished within a church community, this would mean allowing false teaching that wrecks faith to go unchallenged and that is why v6 is included in the context. It is puzzling and needs some research but the picture is that of a warning that Christians are not to give what is holy (the pearl) to what is unholy (the dogs and pigs) for they may turn and attack!  The pearl I take it is that is the Gospel message (cf. Mat 13:44-45) which must at some point NOT be given to these “animals”.  The animals come to represent those who are particularly opposed to the Gospel and its implications, who would at any opportunity seek to revile and mock Christ whenever they are given the message. 

So Jesus would have his followers love others by helping them and challenging them in their serving of God and men by not judging and condemning them.  Yet they must show some level of discrimination against serious opponents of the Gospel for the sake of the glory of God. So I take it that as we engage with non believers and believers we are to do so knowing our place, listening and loving.  Yet we cannot accept all that we hear without a critical eye or ear and must be ready to engage and challenge false living and teaching but always be focussing that critical eye to our own lives first (v5). Loving others means challenging their beliefs and life if it does not come in line with Christ’s ethic, but it’s how we do this that is immensely important!   

Thoughts on Zion

I did a short presentation today on the biblical theological concept of ‘Zion’ and without going into too much detail its safe to say that the term ‘Zion’ brings with it three main theological concepts for the New Testament believer: Divine-presence, rule and salvation. Its quite fascinating then that of the two occurrences of the term in the New Testament (outside of other Old Testament quotations that occur in the New Testament) one of them occurs in Hebrews 12:22 where the believer is told that in one sense he/she has already come to Zion. Now what does it mean that the believer has already come to Zion? Well if we’re consistent with our usage of this theologically-laden term then we have to say that in one sense the believer already enjoys the presence of God, his rule and the application of his salvation – we’ve already come to Zion. Revelation 14 suggests a further eschatological fulfillment of these truths, but they are also truths now for us. So how do we respond?

Well first off I think we like to ‘limit’ the presence of God and therefore, by implication and through following the natural course of things, his rule too. With our dividing up of our lives into ‘sacred’ and ‘secular’ compartments, which I’ve blogged about before, we actually deny the truths of Hebrews 12:22, or perhaps not deny but at least play down the significance of having come to Zion. By implication then we compartmentalize his rule too and so whilst we seek to uphold a sort of general morality, because we figure that as Christians we’re supposed to be good, its not a morality based upon the rule of God but more of an obligation. Now in one sense we should feel obligated to obey God simply because he is God – but knowing that God rules through his king Jesus, out of Zion (cf. Ps. 2), and knowing that we have now come to Zion and live in that kingdom, adds new meaning to what it means to live under his rule as his subject.  This impacts our third concept because it means that we’re not earning our salvation, rather we are living out the salvation already applied – the difference between religion and relationship with a king.

Love for God IS Love for People

In Mark 12 Jesus is confronted by a teacher of the law who had evidently been sitting in and around the conversations that we’re going on between Jesus and the other religious authorities that day. He’d noticed how Jesus had skillfully avoided their theological traps and turned numerous questions around so that the other religious authorities scrambling desperately for answers. This teacher was impressed and so wanting to see what Jesus was really about at his core he asked, ‘Of all the commandments, which is the most important?’

Jesus answers by quoting the ‘Shema’ from Deuteronomy 6 and outlines what he’s about by basically saying, ‘God alone is God, therefore love him with everything you have.’ What is striking is that he doesn’t leave it there, instead he adds another commandment, ‘love people as you love yourself’. The teacher only asked him for one but he gave two – why? Surely it must be because loving God is intricately wrapped up with loving people in this world. Whilst loving people is not all there is to loving God it is so closely connected that Jesus connects the two. Very simply, we cannot love God and not love people.

On Saturday I sat at a lunch table at a homeless shelter with a young guy from the Cape Flats, a Zimbabwean refugee and an elder Xhosa man far displaced from his home desperately looking for work. They were all very different from me, and to be honest conversation was hard and awkward, but Jesus says I have to love them, becuase I claim to love God. May we pray that God would give us the love for all his people that his Son so evidently displayed when he walked this earth.

The Kingdom in the Church

When it comes to loving and caring for people the majority of the texts in the New Testament seem to be primarily concerned that God’s people be concerned with each other. Whilst many of Jesus’ statements can be taken more generally, there is precious little in the epistles regarding love and concern for those outside of God’s people, outside of the church. This is a bit of an intriguing phenomenon that begs further study. Here however is a starting thought which you’re welcome to agree with, disagree with or expand upon:

God’s kingdom is about the rule of Christ, that rule will only be consummated completely when Christ returns, is declared to be lord of all and every knee, willingly or unwillingly bows in submission to him. At the moment though Christ rules by his Spirit which is to say he rules by his church, the one place on this earth, where his Spirit dwells. His church then are to display the kingdom of God to a watching world who have rejected God’s dominion.

So when Christians love and care for one another with selflessness they display the kingdom to the outside. Hence the writers of the epistles are at pains to call Christians to love and care in community. Whatever the Christian’s call to social action, doing justice and showing love and mercy, it must begin with the church – that much is absolutely clear I think.

Who is the man?

I’ve been studying Romans at college this semester, it has honestly been the most challenging and engaging course i have done in my Theologocial training.  Today we looked at Romans 2:1-29, and again i was struck by how badly this book has been preached in many churches today. Paul’s argument is a monumental polemic for the fairness of God’s judgement. One of the questions that so many of the commentators ask is who Paul has in mind in v1.  The Gentiles? The Jews? Or is he addressing the moral pagan?  Yet, the identity of Paul’s hypothetical opponent in this diatribe and chapter falls into perspective in v5: ALL store up wrath for themselves, and judgement will be revealed at the coming of Jesus Christ.

 But what has really struck me is Paul’s emphasis on works, by our works shall God determine who finally enters his Kingdom (v6).  This is a critical point and i found it surprising that Wright in his commentary does not pick up on the NPP agenda at this point (ie following a works-righteousness theology) but rather follows Moo very closely.  So in his resulting illustration of the two groups we are left scratching our heads as Paul seems to allude to a works-righteousness theology as he seems to contrast a group who will receive glory (v7, 10) and who will be judged (v8-9)…if not for v5 which programs this whole section.  Which is why Paul can say that God shows no favouritism; because even if you look like v7 and 10 its really not enough!  Why? because of v5 we can never meet those standards! Which is why a new righteousness needs to be revealed (3:21ff).  (He goes on to blow the Jewish worldview to pieces in v12-29 by showing their historical hypocracy and how they are still in state of judgement).  And yet our works are such an integral part to our salvation; as the evidence of it. This i think is something that we as evangelicals will leave out so easily because we have reduced the Gospel to something that it is not.  We have confused the message of the Gospel with the mechanics of the Gospel.  And so we have concluded that the Gospel is justification by faith alone. This is the heart of the Gospel as how the Gospel works but in itself is not the Gospel.  The Gospel is the message of the Messiah, King Jesus, come to reveal the Kingdom of God.  This includes the great Judgment day as integral to the Gospel message. Which makes the Gospel much bigger than we tend to preach it!

This can be a massive paradigm shift for anyone who has not realised this and has incredible pastoral and envagelistic implications. But the key to preaching or teaching this text is to use Paul’s own polemical device keeping as the sting in the tail as it were in v16. The secrets of men will be judged. It does not matter what you look like on the outside (yet it does) because God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ!

Keller at his Best

The Resurgence have posted 4 articles by Tim Keller on the subject, ‘Ministry in the New Global Culture of Major City Centers‘. These four articles are bursting at the seams with serious reflection, insight and practical advice. If you minister in a major city anywhere in the world then you NEED to read these articles – Part I, Part II, Part III & Part IV

Missional Influences

‘Missional’ is a tag I use a lot for many of my posts and it also characterizes the type of ministry that I wish to be involved with in the future. I suppose its pretty near the forefront of what I think about all day when I think about ministry. Today I stopped and reflected as to how things came to be this way in my thinking. Which influences shaped my missional thinking. So I’ve decided to list a few (in no particular order – some are more recent influences, others influenced me a while ago. I’ve particularly not included Scripture as an influence because pretty much all of these influences below have helped me to reflect thoughtfully on the Word of God):

• • My good friend Sam who is now a church planter and pastor in Pietermaritzburg.
  • The writings of Steve Timmis and Tim Chester – Sam and I read ‘The Gospel Centered Church‘ together when I was still quite a new Christian.
  • The writings and talks of Tim Keller – I think most would agree that Keller is the unofficial bishop of missionals in the reformed tradition.
  • My studies in Biblical Theology – thanks especially to the writings of Graeme Goldsworthy for helping me to see God’s unfolding plan for his Kingdom.
  • A group of gospel-centered pastors in Kwa-Zulu Natal who took me through a 2 year apprenticeship programme. Thanks Grant, Ray, David, Michael, Wayne and Duane.
  • Christ Church Glenwood (the church Grant and Ray pastor) in Durban – I’d never seen a church like this before with such an emphasis on local mission, especially with the students of UKZN.
  • St. Stephen’s, Claremont – my current church continues to inspire me as they continue to be missionaries for Jesus in the Cape Town community.
  • Bishop Frank Retief – the current presiding bishop of CESA. His commitment to the gospel and church planting over so many years is astounding.
  • Phillip Jensen and the Sydney Anglicans - I’ve never been to Sydney but I’ve read a lot of Jensen’s books and listened to his talks and they’ve left me wanting to help people to come to truly know Christ.
  • Short term spells of working in townships and low income areas in Cape Town – when you’re there on the ground with them you can’t but help becoming missional.
  • The great friendships I’ve built up and discussions I’ve had with my colleagues from Sub-Saharan Africa – thanks Asaf, Leo, Velile, Jean-Blaise, Pastor Pirai, your stories have encouraged me to use whatever gifting I have to be missional here in Sub-Saharan Africa.
  • The wonderful self-sacrificial missionaries I met in Malawi last year – you redeemed the concept of ‘missionary’ for me.
  • The crew from U-Turn who work tirelessly with homeless folk everyday – you show that Jesus’ love is very practical.
  • Mark Driscoll – he makes me laugh and he loves Jesus and wants people to be in a right relationship with God.
  • Donald Miller – whether you like him or not ‘Blue Like Jazz‘ is brilliant – it helped me to treat people as human.
  • The Emerging conversation – I have a love/hate relationship with the EC, but the things I love in the EC I really do love.
  • The writings and talks of Don Carson – No one has helped me understand the gospel with more richness and fullness.
  • The Faculty of the Bible Institute of South Africa – you’ve taught me to love people.
  • My friends Mark and Anthony – you both often talk to me about ‘missional’ things. These times have been good, let’s pray that God will help us translate these conversations into faithful ministry on the ground.
  • The world of blogging – its been a lot of fun and I’ve learned stacks from taking part in it.
  • Emergent Africa – seeing your guys’ hearts on these issues has been a privilege.
  • My beautiful country – South Africa – she inspires me to see Jesus as her King.

What are your influences?

Transforming Gospel

I’m back in Cape Town and today I just spent a short time today with some really, really, godly, loving, kind and caring people and I was just struck by the transforming power of the Gospel. We’re such sinful rebellious people and I’m just amazed at how, over time, the truth of a crucified Jesus changes people in such a powerful and evident way.

I pray, that this Gospel will change me, I pray that it will break, bend and mould me into someone who loves and serves Jesus with every ounce of energy. To my mind, that’s the incarnation of the kingdom of God in this world.

No Kingdom of God?

I love to be on the lookout for new books on the subject of Biblical Theology, and so naturally I was excited to when Justin Taylor posted on the imminent arrival of a new book by edited by Scott Hafemann and Paul House entitled, ‘Central Themes in Biblical Theology: Mapping Unity in Diversity‘. The themes being tackled by various authors are:

Scott Hafemann, The Covenant Relationship
Tom Schreiner, The Commandments of God
Frank Thielman, Atonement
Stephen Dempster, The Servant of the Lord
Paul House, The Day of the Lord
Elmer Martens, The People of God
Roy Ciampa, The History of Redemption

It sounds like an exciting venture…BUT…notice the list of themes being tackled and ask yourself if there’s a ‘central’ theme missing?