Millennialism – three different understandings of what John is talking about in Revelation 20
1) Pre-Millennialism – this is an interpretation of Revelation 20:4-6 that posits that the Parousia (return of Jesus to earth) will occur before a literal thousand year reign of Christ. This is the position of those in the Darbyist tradition (I'll explain Darbyism a little later), which includes the Rapture, the Great Tribulation, the battle of Armageddon and that all of these things will happen before the 1,000 year reign of Christ. Here's how this plays out in the world: there is no hope for humanity as it relates to moral improvement - the world is not going to get better (in fact, John Nelson Darby believed that the established Church was a failure and was complicit in the moral degradation of humanity); concern for the environment is pointless - if God is simply going to destroy the world in the "end times", there is no need for caring for the earth. That may be a slightly unfair caricature, but if you truly believe that the world is fundamentally evil and that God will soon destroy it, where is the motivation for the care of the earth? For the pre-mil Darbyist, the Christian's chief concerns are: (1) not being left behind when the Rapture comes; (2) preaching salvation to the lost before it's too late; (3) leaving this evil world behind; (4) discerning the "signs of the times" - meaning, understanding how current events might be interpreted through the lens of "Biblical prophecy". There are all kinds of problems with this as it relates to appropriate Biblical interpretation and how we understand the nature of apocalypse and prophecy.
2) Post-Millennialism – this is an interpretation of Rev. 20:4-6 that posits that the Parousia and the last judgment will occur after a thousand year reign of Christ through the Church. Post-mils believe in a gradual movement towards social holiness/perfection. There are many post-mils that teach that Christians must rise to the heights of political and social power to ensure progress towards the millennium. How this plays out in the real world: from a conservative point of view, post-millennianalism is most clearly expressed in what is called "Dominionism", which holds that the job of the Church is to establish theocratic systems of government that might precipitate the millennium; from a more 'liberal' point of view, we find an expression of post-mil thought in what has been termed the "Social Gospel" and the idea that the Church might bring about the Kingdom of God through social action. These are the most blatant examples - expressions of post-millennialism are not necessarily as stark as choosing between Dominionism and the Social Gospel. However, in both cases, political involvement by Christians for the purpose of making real the reign of Christ and the bringing about of His Kingdom on earth by his followers is assumed. It should be noted that this has been the predominant position of Christians for much of the history of the faith. It should also be noted that post-mils don't believe in the Darbyist system, which includes the Rapture, the Great Tribulation, the Antichrist, etc. A good summation by Stanley Grenz: "…postmillennialists view the millennium as a long era of universal peace and righteousness that comes as the result of the preaching of the gospel, the saving work of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of individuals and the Christianization of the world."
3) Amillennialism – this is an interpretation of Rev. 20:4-6 that posits that there will be no literal 1,000 year reign of Christ. Like the post-mil position, a-mils believe that there will be no rapture, no tribulation, no Armageddon, but unlike post-mils, a-mils believe that there will be no 1,000 year reign of Christ. The millennium spoken of in Revelation 20 is symbolic of Christ's reign on earth (or his advancing Kingdom) in the Church. The position here is that Jesus is presently reigning at the right hand of God and is with the church as he said at his ascension. The return of Christ to earth will be sudden and unexpected. The return of Christ, the resurrection of the dead, and the judgment will be (basically) a singular event. How this plays out in the real world: many in the a-mil camp (or in denominations that are predominantly a-mil) are not as aware of or knowledgeable about eschatology - this perhaps led many Christians in historically amillennial traditions to get caught up (as it were) in the Left Behind phenomenon a few years back. Many Christians in amillennial traditions don't hear much teaching about eschatology or those Scriptures that are eschatological in focus (the 2nd half of Daniel, the Olivet discourse in Matthew, Revelation, etc.).
Several things should be noted:
- These are merely thumbnail sketches of some very complex theological systems of thought. I have most likely not done justice to the depth of thought that has gone into these "systems". Quite frankly, I distrust any "system" that claims to have a full understanding or accounting of God's purposes for the world and for the future of the world. I also feel that endless debates or fixed certainty about what God will do or must do distracts from the church's call to be at work in the world on behalf of the poor, the suffering, and the lost.
- Many Christians are probably a mix of the above, in some ways. I think it's perfectly fine to be a Christian and not be able to know precisely how you interpret Revelation 20:4-6. I'm not swayed by passionate end-times obsessives who (a) demand that Christians know exactly what they believe about this topic, and (b) further demand that Christians agree with their positions.
For the record, I'm an amillennialist. I figure that God's in control and He knows what He's doing. Besides, Jesus tells me not to worry about tomorrow - today's got enough worries of its own.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Monday, September 6, 2010
Revelation part 1
Revelation is probably the most misunderstood and unfairly maligned book of the entire Bible. I've been surprised by the number of people who have said the following (or something like it): "I'm not sure about reading that book. It's really scary!" My experience of Revelation is completely different. When I was in high school, I was pretty obsessed with end-times theology and was completely convinced of the validity of premillenial dispensational rapture theology (we'll break that down over the next few weeks). I've come a LONG way since then, basically due to my understanding of (a) Methodism; (b) Scripture; and (c) theology as a discipline. Next week, I'll blog some about the system of end-times thought that has been dominant in the US (otherwise known as Darbyism) and why that is inappropriate on several levels. Today, I just want to give a little introduction. (By the way, our study of Revelation will be at Johnsontown UMC in Thomasville on Tuesday's at 7:00 - everybody's invited!)
First, some helpful Scriptures to establish a framework. Matthew 24:36 - “But about that day and hour no one knows, neither the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father”; and Matthew 6:34 - “So do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will bring worries of its own. Today’s trouble is enough for today.” Jesus calls us to be present now, today. To work for God's Kingdom today, not to only look to the horizon for a way out. This theme will appear again.
As we move through this book, there are some important words that will recur. These terms also help to set up a framework of interpretation as we move ahead.
Eschatology – from the Gk. eschaton (means “the end”); the study of the end times
Parousia (Gk.) – the return of Jesus Christ to the earth; what we typically call the “Second Coming”
Apocalypse – does not mean destruction or cataclysm; an apocalypse is a revealing, kind of like pulling back the curtain to see what’s really going on in the world; think of the scene at the end of The Wizard of Oz when Toto pulls the curtain back revealing the little man posing as the Wizard - that's an apocalypse (some helpful advice: avoid any 'documentary' on the History Channel with the word "apocalypse" in it)
Millenialism – an interpretation of Revelation based on Revelation 20:1-6, there are three variants, which are related to the Parousia: pre-millennialism, post-millennialism, and amillennialism - we'll explore these in more depth next week
Jewish Apocalypse – a specific genre of writing that developed in the 2-3 centuries before Christ (the second half of the book of Daniel is a good example)
Revelation is in the genre of Jewish apocalypse and is characterized by the following: (1) a visionary journey or experience by the author in which mysterious or hidden things are dramatically revealed; (2) scenes of judgment extending to all of creation; (3) a clear separation between good and evil, there really is no ambiguity in who's good and who's bad; (4) symbolism that borders on outlandish, especially in regards to human institutions of power (more on this later); and (5) the ultimate triumph of God and His people after great struggle and adversity (at least on the part of people, God never really struggles to triumph - He speaks and it is done).
The best place to see an example of Jewish apocalyptic writing in our Bible is Daniel 7 - it would be helpful for what follows if you would read it. Here's a link: http://bible.oremus.org/?passage=Daniel+7. There, Daniel sees a vision of 4 beasts, each beast more terrible and powerful than its predecessor. It is important to note that Daniel's dreams are interpreted (in 7:16 and following). This would indicate that Daniel's visions are not strictly literal. They describe symbolically the empires of the earth:
1. A lion with eagles’ wings = The Babylonian Empire
- Winged lions show up in a lot of Babylonian art
- The plucking of the wings and reduction of the beast to a human indicates the defeat of the Babylonians and the fact that, after all, they’re just people
2. A bear with tusks = The Median Empire
- “Raised up on one side” – ready to attack
- Three tusks represent a ravenous appetite for treasure
3. A leopard with four heads and wings = The Persian Empire
- The wings may be referring to the speed of Persia’s conquests under Cyrus
- The four heads can either refer to Persia’s dominance in all directions (North, East, South, West), or to the four Persian kings mention in Ezra 1:1 and 4:6-7
4. A scary beast with ten horns and iron teeth = The Seleucid (Greek) Empire under Alexander the Great
- The ten horns represent the ten kings of the Seleucids culminating in Antiochus IV Epiphanes (his name means “Antiochus the fourth, the god manifest”; this guy was pretty crazy, so his enemies called him “Epimanes” which means “the mad one”, as a play on his name). I love this guy's name by the way, it's right up there with Tiglath Pileser.
- The first Seleucid kings had coins decorated with horns, which are symbols of divine power – (these will come up again in a big way in Revelation)
Revelation as uses beasts to describe the empires of human construction. This is a typical element in Jewish apocalypse. With symbolism being so prevalent in Revelation, the question comes - how shall we go about interpreting these symbols? Unlike Daniel, John does not have an interpreter to go to figure how the meanings behind some of the fantastic images and visions that are shown to him. Personally, I kind of like relying on the Holy Spirit, prayer, and patience to help in understanding, but that's just me…but here's some hopefully helpful thoughts about interpreting the symbolism.
1. Understanding the historic and literary context of the book. Revelation, like all of Scripture, is a product of its time and place as well as being a timeless work inspired by God. The book of Revelation has a historical setting and is rooted in the experience of Christians under the heel of the Roman Empire. Knowing the history is immensely helpful as we seek to understand. A major part of this study will be increasing our understanding of the Roman Empire and the persecutions that Christians were facing.
2. Understanding the reasons behind John's use of symbolism
a. Again, John is writing in the tradition of Jewish apocalypse
b. Revelation, in one sense, is a scathing critique of the Roman empire (and can serve to be a scathing critique of any earthly power, including America)
c. At its core, Revelation is about God's triumph over sin and evil; one surprising aspect of the book is how prominent scenes of worship are
3. It is helpful to understand the nature of apocalypse and prophecy; "prophecy" does not refer to telling the future, but to telling the future. The way prophecy "tells the future" is that the prophet says: "if you continue to do rotten awful Thing A, then rotten, awful Thing B will happen to you." For example, if a king mistreats poor people, then eventually his kingdom will fall. Or, if the people of God continue worship false idols, God's judgment will fall upon them. The prophet's job is to tell powerful people that their behavior and beliefs are rotten and that God will punish them if they persist. Prophets were not popular people. Revelation is a book of prophecy in the sense that it reveals to us the depravity of a broken humanity and the reality of God's judgment. Revelation is not a chronological ordering of events yet to come. More about that next week.
That's enough for now…I'll post more next week! The grace and peace of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit be with you!
First, some helpful Scriptures to establish a framework. Matthew 24:36 - “But about that day and hour no one knows, neither the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father”; and Matthew 6:34 - “So do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will bring worries of its own. Today’s trouble is enough for today.” Jesus calls us to be present now, today. To work for God's Kingdom today, not to only look to the horizon for a way out. This theme will appear again.
As we move through this book, there are some important words that will recur. These terms also help to set up a framework of interpretation as we move ahead.
Eschatology – from the Gk. eschaton (means “the end”); the study of the end times
Parousia (Gk.) – the return of Jesus Christ to the earth; what we typically call the “Second Coming”
Apocalypse – does not mean destruction or cataclysm; an apocalypse is a revealing, kind of like pulling back the curtain to see what’s really going on in the world; think of the scene at the end of The Wizard of Oz when Toto pulls the curtain back revealing the little man posing as the Wizard - that's an apocalypse (some helpful advice: avoid any 'documentary' on the History Channel with the word "apocalypse" in it)
Millenialism – an interpretation of Revelation based on Revelation 20:1-6, there are three variants, which are related to the Parousia: pre-millennialism, post-millennialism, and amillennialism - we'll explore these in more depth next week
Jewish Apocalypse – a specific genre of writing that developed in the 2-3 centuries before Christ (the second half of the book of Daniel is a good example)
Revelation is in the genre of Jewish apocalypse and is characterized by the following: (1) a visionary journey or experience by the author in which mysterious or hidden things are dramatically revealed; (2) scenes of judgment extending to all of creation; (3) a clear separation between good and evil, there really is no ambiguity in who's good and who's bad; (4) symbolism that borders on outlandish, especially in regards to human institutions of power (more on this later); and (5) the ultimate triumph of God and His people after great struggle and adversity (at least on the part of people, God never really struggles to triumph - He speaks and it is done).
The best place to see an example of Jewish apocalyptic writing in our Bible is Daniel 7 - it would be helpful for what follows if you would read it. Here's a link: http://bible.oremus.org/?passage=Daniel+7. There, Daniel sees a vision of 4 beasts, each beast more terrible and powerful than its predecessor. It is important to note that Daniel's dreams are interpreted (in 7:16 and following). This would indicate that Daniel's visions are not strictly literal. They describe symbolically the empires of the earth:
1. A lion with eagles’ wings = The Babylonian Empire
- Winged lions show up in a lot of Babylonian art
- The plucking of the wings and reduction of the beast to a human indicates the defeat of the Babylonians and the fact that, after all, they’re just people
2. A bear with tusks = The Median Empire
- “Raised up on one side” – ready to attack
- Three tusks represent a ravenous appetite for treasure
3. A leopard with four heads and wings = The Persian Empire
- The wings may be referring to the speed of Persia’s conquests under Cyrus
- The four heads can either refer to Persia’s dominance in all directions (North, East, South, West), or to the four Persian kings mention in Ezra 1:1 and 4:6-7
4. A scary beast with ten horns and iron teeth = The Seleucid (Greek) Empire under Alexander the Great
- The ten horns represent the ten kings of the Seleucids culminating in Antiochus IV Epiphanes (his name means “Antiochus the fourth, the god manifest”; this guy was pretty crazy, so his enemies called him “Epimanes” which means “the mad one”, as a play on his name). I love this guy's name by the way, it's right up there with Tiglath Pileser.
- The first Seleucid kings had coins decorated with horns, which are symbols of divine power – (these will come up again in a big way in Revelation)
Revelation as uses beasts to describe the empires of human construction. This is a typical element in Jewish apocalypse. With symbolism being so prevalent in Revelation, the question comes - how shall we go about interpreting these symbols? Unlike Daniel, John does not have an interpreter to go to figure how the meanings behind some of the fantastic images and visions that are shown to him. Personally, I kind of like relying on the Holy Spirit, prayer, and patience to help in understanding, but that's just me…but here's some hopefully helpful thoughts about interpreting the symbolism.
1. Understanding the historic and literary context of the book. Revelation, like all of Scripture, is a product of its time and place as well as being a timeless work inspired by God. The book of Revelation has a historical setting and is rooted in the experience of Christians under the heel of the Roman Empire. Knowing the history is immensely helpful as we seek to understand. A major part of this study will be increasing our understanding of the Roman Empire and the persecutions that Christians were facing.
2. Understanding the reasons behind John's use of symbolism
a. Again, John is writing in the tradition of Jewish apocalypse
b. Revelation, in one sense, is a scathing critique of the Roman empire (and can serve to be a scathing critique of any earthly power, including America)
c. At its core, Revelation is about God's triumph over sin and evil; one surprising aspect of the book is how prominent scenes of worship are
3. It is helpful to understand the nature of apocalypse and prophecy; "prophecy" does not refer to telling the future, but to telling the future. The way prophecy "tells the future" is that the prophet says: "if you continue to do rotten awful Thing A, then rotten, awful Thing B will happen to you." For example, if a king mistreats poor people, then eventually his kingdom will fall. Or, if the people of God continue worship false idols, God's judgment will fall upon them. The prophet's job is to tell powerful people that their behavior and beliefs are rotten and that God will punish them if they persist. Prophets were not popular people. Revelation is a book of prophecy in the sense that it reveals to us the depravity of a broken humanity and the reality of God's judgment. Revelation is not a chronological ordering of events yet to come. More about that next week.
That's enough for now…I'll post more next week! The grace and peace of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit be with you!
Blogging Revelation
Starting tomorrow night, I'm leading a Bible study series at my church on Revelation. This will be the fourth time that I've taught this book and I like the knowledge that accrues from simply teaching a book of the Bible, especially one like this.
I've been battling back and forth in my head about whether or not I should blog about what I'm learning/teaching during this go-round with the book. There are some reasons why I'm hesitating:
1) Revelation and end-times theology in general are both controversial subjects and a lot of Christians are definitely not open to disagreement or differing interpretations when it comes to this stuff.
2) Mainline Protestants have not paid that much attention to this book in the past. Many moderate Christians would just as soon this book not be in the Bible. So there are a not a great deal of resources out there regarding this book (unless I'm totally missing something). That's probably just an excuse anyways.
That's about it for my reasons. Kind of lame. So I'm gonna blog our journey through Revelation, starting with today's blog, which is a summary of what we'll be covering tomorrow evening. In order for these not to be incredibly long entries, I'm gonna hit the high points, or break it up with 2 entries over the course of a week.
I've been battling back and forth in my head about whether or not I should blog about what I'm learning/teaching during this go-round with the book. There are some reasons why I'm hesitating:
1) Revelation and end-times theology in general are both controversial subjects and a lot of Christians are definitely not open to disagreement or differing interpretations when it comes to this stuff.
2) Mainline Protestants have not paid that much attention to this book in the past. Many moderate Christians would just as soon this book not be in the Bible. So there are a not a great deal of resources out there regarding this book (unless I'm totally missing something). That's probably just an excuse anyways.
That's about it for my reasons. Kind of lame. So I'm gonna blog our journey through Revelation, starting with today's blog, which is a summary of what we'll be covering tomorrow evening. In order for these not to be incredibly long entries, I'm gonna hit the high points, or break it up with 2 entries over the course of a week.
Thursday, September 2, 2010
Thoughts About Stuff
There's a lot going on right now, in terms of sermon-writing, preparing Bible studies, meetings, along with the added stress of my 2-year-old son's upcoming surgery. So, my blogging has been sparse. I've had some good theological conversations over the last week or so, and perhaps just sitting down to write an entry will get the brain going. Here goes…
For those reading this who have known me for a while and have spent even a little time talking to me about theology, or the Church, you'll know that I tend to be very critical of what we call "American culture." I am increasingly unapologetically critical as I grow older and gain valuable experience. I used to say things like, "I really love my country, but…" or "I'm not saying that America's all bad, but…" as if I must avoid hurting America's feelings or something. Well, I figured something out: I love Jesus. It doesn't much matter how I feel about my country on any given day. Some days, I feel pretty dang upset. Other days, I feel pretty proud. While I was reading John Adams a few weeks ago, I was proud. When I watch the news, I feel angry and depressed. I shouldn't have to say "I really love my country and I'm so thankful to be living here" when I critique American culture from the standpoint of being a follower of Christ. My love of country has little to do with the truth of God Almighty. Now that that's cleared up…
In the book "Conversations with Barth on Preaching" (it feels like I've been reading this book for 20 years, though it is excellent), Bishop Will Willimon states on pg. 112: "We (Christians) are, in our speech, speaking against the presumed world of the majority". The Church is designed to be counter-cultural. Here is the danger of the current political rhetoric that we are seeing today. Equating America (or to use the language of today: "the Real America") with the Kingdom of God is extremely dangerous and is definitely idolatrous. One of my friends said it best: "God has not chosen a nation to perform the work of reconciliation in the world. God has chosen the Church." America is not an agent of God's will. That's the Church's job. And it's downright un-American to make a distinction between those citizens and those regions that you say are the "Real America" or "un-American". But I digress. Willimon is saying here that the Church is not tasked with simply being a shill for dominant cultural mores and expectations. We have a higher calling than being a mouthpiece and foot soldiers for the Republican party. We have a greater purpose than trying to convince people to vote for Democrats. We speak the truth of God, or at least strive to do so, not the sound bites of the moment. Our job as Christians is not to prop up American culture or American values, but to live and proclaim the truth of God.
Willimon continues: "Therefore, in our assertions, we will not find many interpretive allies in the weapons of the world. The world is accustomed to getting its messages from psychology, the vaunted ego, or clear-eyed reason. Our message requires a miracle to make it comprehensible." Wow. That's powerful stuff. And convicting. The Christian message presents a challenge to the way things are in the world, because Christians define themselves by a different set of criteria. We are not neurotics or depressed people or disordered people. We might suffer from those things and many of us truly do. But our identity is rooted in the Creator God, made possible by the grace of God given to us in Jesus Christ, revealed and fulfilled in us over time by the persistent work of the Holy Spirit. We are not our temporary dysfunctions. Nor are we designed to be individuals. Ah, the much-celebrated American individual. Rugged. Hard working. Never needs a hand out. With boot straps used to pull him or her self up. Probably wearing a cowboy hat. Can't you just smell the Stetson cologne? The American myth. Truth is, we do need a hand out. It's called "I'm a sinner. God help me." It's grace. And we are not designed to be individuals, we were made for each other, to love each other (a reality on made possible by the Holy Spirit). And clear-eyed reason? Paul, take this one away: "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart." Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the wise?...For God's foolishness is wiser than human wisdom, and God's weakness is stronger than human strength." God's weakness was not an abstraction for Paul - it is the cross of Jesus. That's the strength of God revealed. And, to the world, it does not make sense. Which is why Willimon says that it takes a miracle for the Christian message to be comprehensible. Each conversion to the Christian faith is a miracle.
And one last Willimon quote: "Every Sunday we are issuing a declaration of war against some of the most cherished idols of our culture." Yes.
And one more from John Howard Yoder: "If moral discernment is not cultural critical, it has lost its connection with the gospel of grace and has fallen into the ratification of things as they are and choices as I want them."
For those reading this who have known me for a while and have spent even a little time talking to me about theology, or the Church, you'll know that I tend to be very critical of what we call "American culture." I am increasingly unapologetically critical as I grow older and gain valuable experience. I used to say things like, "I really love my country, but…" or "I'm not saying that America's all bad, but…" as if I must avoid hurting America's feelings or something. Well, I figured something out: I love Jesus. It doesn't much matter how I feel about my country on any given day. Some days, I feel pretty dang upset. Other days, I feel pretty proud. While I was reading John Adams a few weeks ago, I was proud. When I watch the news, I feel angry and depressed. I shouldn't have to say "I really love my country and I'm so thankful to be living here" when I critique American culture from the standpoint of being a follower of Christ. My love of country has little to do with the truth of God Almighty. Now that that's cleared up…
In the book "Conversations with Barth on Preaching" (it feels like I've been reading this book for 20 years, though it is excellent), Bishop Will Willimon states on pg. 112: "We (Christians) are, in our speech, speaking against the presumed world of the majority". The Church is designed to be counter-cultural. Here is the danger of the current political rhetoric that we are seeing today. Equating America (or to use the language of today: "the Real America") with the Kingdom of God is extremely dangerous and is definitely idolatrous. One of my friends said it best: "God has not chosen a nation to perform the work of reconciliation in the world. God has chosen the Church." America is not an agent of God's will. That's the Church's job. And it's downright un-American to make a distinction between those citizens and those regions that you say are the "Real America" or "un-American". But I digress. Willimon is saying here that the Church is not tasked with simply being a shill for dominant cultural mores and expectations. We have a higher calling than being a mouthpiece and foot soldiers for the Republican party. We have a greater purpose than trying to convince people to vote for Democrats. We speak the truth of God, or at least strive to do so, not the sound bites of the moment. Our job as Christians is not to prop up American culture or American values, but to live and proclaim the truth of God.
Willimon continues: "Therefore, in our assertions, we will not find many interpretive allies in the weapons of the world. The world is accustomed to getting its messages from psychology, the vaunted ego, or clear-eyed reason. Our message requires a miracle to make it comprehensible." Wow. That's powerful stuff. And convicting. The Christian message presents a challenge to the way things are in the world, because Christians define themselves by a different set of criteria. We are not neurotics or depressed people or disordered people. We might suffer from those things and many of us truly do. But our identity is rooted in the Creator God, made possible by the grace of God given to us in Jesus Christ, revealed and fulfilled in us over time by the persistent work of the Holy Spirit. We are not our temporary dysfunctions. Nor are we designed to be individuals. Ah, the much-celebrated American individual. Rugged. Hard working. Never needs a hand out. With boot straps used to pull him or her self up. Probably wearing a cowboy hat. Can't you just smell the Stetson cologne? The American myth. Truth is, we do need a hand out. It's called "I'm a sinner. God help me." It's grace. And we are not designed to be individuals, we were made for each other, to love each other (a reality on made possible by the Holy Spirit). And clear-eyed reason? Paul, take this one away: "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart." Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the wise?...For God's foolishness is wiser than human wisdom, and God's weakness is stronger than human strength." God's weakness was not an abstraction for Paul - it is the cross of Jesus. That's the strength of God revealed. And, to the world, it does not make sense. Which is why Willimon says that it takes a miracle for the Christian message to be comprehensible. Each conversion to the Christian faith is a miracle.
And one last Willimon quote: "Every Sunday we are issuing a declaration of war against some of the most cherished idols of our culture." Yes.
And one more from John Howard Yoder: "If moral discernment is not cultural critical, it has lost its connection with the gospel of grace and has fallen into the ratification of things as they are and choices as I want them."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)