Clarion: Journal of Spirituality and Justice

The Rise of Christology from Pentecost to Colossae - Clare Hannis

The Question

Using Acts 2-3 and Colossians 1-2 as test cases, this article will explore the character of Christological development through the first generation of Christianity. This article will compare and contrast the Christology of Acts 2 to the Christology of Colossians 1-2, then ask wow it is that faithful Jewish monotheists could accept Paul’s conception of such a high Christology? How might the ‘Colossian heresy’ have contributed to the development of a higher Christology?

Introduction

What we believe about Jesus, and the story of Jesus that we tell to others, is crucial because Jesus is the centre of our faith – the Christ of Christianity – and because in western culture, Jesus is often undermined or dismissed. The question that Jesus asked Peter in Matthew 16, v15 is asked of us today: who do we say that He is?

The difference in the Jesus portrayed in Peter’s speech in Acts 2 and the ‘Christ hymn’ of Colossians 1 indicates dramatic Christological development: from a man sent and raised from the dead by God to the image of the invisible God, in whom all things are created and reconciled. Scholars have sought to explain why and how this was possible within the context of Jewish monotheism.

This essay will assert firstly that the focus of Jewish belief on the identity of God, rather than an ontological framework of nature or essence allowed Christianity to develop from within Jewish monotheism. Secondly, it will be argued that the distinctiveness of Jesus’ resurrection and ascension, and Christian revelation such as that experienced by Paul, enabled the early church to see in Jesus the unexpected answer to their messianic expectations. The essay will then consider the context of the Christ hymn, arguing that as an encouragement to the Colossian church to stand firm against those questioning Jesus it is a reminder to us today of the need to know who He is and to not be swayed.

Test cases

Acts, chapter 2

Acts is believed to have been written by Luke in AD.62 and records a selected history of the early Church following Jesus’ resurrection.[1] Peter’s speech in chapter 2 draws on Joel, Daniel and the Psalms to justify the use of the titles Lord and Messiah in relation to Jesus by showing the scriptural precedents for Jesus fulfilling Messianic expectations.

In showing Jesus to be the Messiah the speeches in chapter 2 and chapter 10 emphasise Jesus’ relationship with the Father. Jesus has been anointed by the Father (10:38), God has attested Jesus to us through wonders and signs that He did in mankind’s midst (Acts 2:22-23), raised Jesus up (2:24 and 32; 10:40), exalted him to His right hand and sent the promise of the Holy Spirit (2:33). 

CLICK HERE to download the full article

---

[1] ESV study bible, (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway, 2007) 2,073

[2] Tom Wright, Acts for everyone, part 1: Chapters 1-12. (London: SPCK, 2008), 39

Echoes - Brian Zahnd

I’m trying to listen to echoes these days — the return of earlier sounds. I need to hear the distant echoes of an earlier Christianity. I am beginning to understand how important it is to maintain an ongoing conversation with the Christians who have lived before us. We must resist the tyranny of the present. If we ignore the echoes of the past we doom ourselves to an unrecognized ignorance. It’s only because of our connection with our technological past that we don’t have to reinvent the wheel every generation. Likewise, if we maintain a connection with our theological past we don’t have to reformulate the essential creeds every generation. When I encounter people obviously confused about the nature of the Trinity, I think, don’t you know we settled this in 325? Of course, they may very well not know! Or if they do know, they don’t care. They have no respect for the past. To them it’s just old — and old means obsolete. Which is, of course, a ridiculous notion peculiar to the modern era.

One of the problems with contemporary revivalism is its egocentric obsession with the present and its woeful ignorance of the past. For too much of my life my idea of church history went something like this: The church started off great with Pentecost, jumped the tracks a couple of centuries later, got back on track with the Reformation, and really took off with Azusa street. The arrogance is appalling. It’s why most modern revivalist movements seem to follow this implicit dictum: Re-found the church and prepare for Armageddon.Contemporary revivalist movements always seem convinced that they’re the first generation to recover “apostolic purity” and the last generation before the return of the Lord. They misappropriate 1 Peter 2:9 as they brashly claim “we are the chosen generation.” Without a clear memory of church history we become the Alpha and Omega in our imagined self-importance. Christian amnesiacs could benefit from some echoes — the echoes of Athanasius and Aquinas, Irenaeus and Erasmus, Clement and Kierkegaard. The Holy Spirit has never abandoned the church. Every generation had those who heard and spoke what the Spirit said to the church. We should pay attention to their echoes.

I hear the echoes of my earlier sisters and brothers as I muse upon their time-tested wisdom. In an age of pragmatism where the mystics are muted, the echoes of the ancient Christian mystics are good for my soul — mystics like Julian of Norwich and John of the Cross. John talks to me about the dark night of the soul, while Julian shares her revelations of divine love. They tell me secrets — secrets I may never have discovered on my own. John says, “it is love alone that unites the soul with God,” while Julian whispers, “all will be well, and all will be well, and all manner of things will be well.” I need to hear those echoes.

CLICK HERE to continue reading

The Cost of Community - Jamie Arpin-Ricci

At the end of His most central teaching, Jesus says that the wise person is the one "who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice".  For nearly two thousand, these words- the Sermon on the Mount- have stood as the foundation for some of the most transformative movements and individuals in Christian history.  From St. Francis of Assisi to Martin Luther King Jr., the Sermon on the Mount has produce radical faithfulness that has changed the world.

In this challenging and accessible exploration of the Sermon on the Mount, Arpin-Ricci invites readers into the community of Christ where we are transformed into genuine disciples.  Using the fascinating life of St. Francis of Assisi and the journey of his own inner city church community, Arpin-Ricci lays out a model of discipleship that is much needed in the church and world today.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Cost-Community-Francis-Kingdom/dp/0830836357

 

Here is Jamie's podcast interview with our friends from Beyond the Box:

Worshiping Wrath? Martin Little

Worshipping Wrath: Is There Place for God's Anger in Congregational Worship?

Martin Little[1] 

In 2013, the worship committee of Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) voted to remove the Getty/Townend hymn 'In Christ Alone' from its newly published hymnal, the denomination's official sung worship collection.  What swung it was the line, “'Til on that cross as Jesus died / The wrath of God was satisfied.”  An attempt to include an amended version saying 'the love of God was magnified' was refused outright by the songwriters, so the committee vetoed the song.  As a 'sign-of-the-times' headline, the story made several mainstream news outlets.[2]

Do we have a problem with wrath?  Should we?  I am going to address the context of worship as both a way into, and an application of, how Christians deal with the concept of the wrath of God.

A wide spectrum of views exists on the wrath of God, but I see two broad approaches.  One might be called the 'personal' view or 'anthropomorphic' view: wrath is an emotion (at least analogous with human feelings) that God 'feels' because he is a person.  Wrath is also associated with the effects of this feeling: God's righteous acts of direct judgement.  Authors like John Stott are quick to point out that the wrath is not some capricious lashing out, but rather a steady, constant and just opposition to sin.[3]  Those who accept this view of wrath tend toward a penal view of the Atonement, though there are notable exceptions.[4]  

We could call the other stream the 'impersonal' or 'cosmic' view: wrath is the inevitable consequence of sin, to which God consents or 'gives us over'. This language of 'giving over' has a good biblical pedigree, notably in Isaiah 64 and Romans 1. Crucially, this view of wrath is seen to develop throughout Scripture.  A.T. Hanson demonstrates that in the OT, wrath is often personal and anthropomorphic.  But this gradually gives way to the impersonal view that he says dominates the NT.[5]  A version of this is developed by my tutor at Westminster Theological Centre, Brad Jersak, who describes wrath as the result of 'divine consent' - God allowing us the freedom to sow and reap the destructive consequences intrinsic to sin.[6]

When we worship God, we typically speak of his majesty, his power, his goodness, and - the crowning essence of his nature - his love.  His wrath doesn't often get a look in. Theologically though, both these approaches to wrath seek to reconcile God's wrath with his love.

CLICK HERE to download Worshipping Wrath

---

[1] This paper was originally presented at Kingdom Theology Conference 2014: 'Where Hope and Loss Meet: A Theology of Tragedy and Promise', Westminster Theological Centre / Trinity College Bristol, Cheltenham, UK, 21 June, 2014.  I am grateful to Rev. Dr Brad Jersak for editing the first draft of this paper, and for his helpful suggestions.

[2] For example, see Bob Smietana, 'Presbetyrians decision to drop hymn stirs debate', usatoday.com, August 5, 2013 usatoday.com, August 5, 2013 <http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/08/05/presbyterians-decision-to-drop-hymn-stirs-debate/2618833/>.  For further reflections on the hymn selection process, see the article by the chair of the committee, Mary Louise Bringle, "Debating Hymns", christiancentury.com, May 1, 2013. <www.christiancentury.org/article/2013/debating-hymns>.

[3] John Stott, The Cross of Christ, (20th Anniversary Edition, Nottingham: IVP, 2006), 202.

[4] Clark Pinnock for example.  See Most Moved Mover: A Theology of God's Openness (Carlisle: Paternoster, 2001), 82-83.

[5] A.T. Hanson, The Wrath of the Lamb, (London: SPCK, 1957) passim.

[6] Brad Jersak, 'Wrath and Love as Divine Consent', Clarion Journal of Spirituality and Justice (July 23, 2012). The arguments here are developed in his forthcoming book A More Christlike God.

Scapegoat - Isaiah 53 -- David Rosenberg, 'A Literary Bible'

 

Isaiah 53  

David Rosenberg, 

A Literary Bible

 

Is there anyone to believe

what we've listened to

as we report it

 

who is there

who's actually seen the Lord's

arm around the shoulders

 

of the despised    this richness

incredible support

freely given to him

 

who would have believed 

seeing we were as unconscious of him

among us as a common tree

 

a weed tree in a lot

junk-strewn in a poor section

of the city

 

what could have been there

to attract us    no handsomeness

nothing to divert the eye

 

how could we even turn our heads 

for something so poor in our eyes

so uninspiring

 

he was a thing rejected

despised for being human

in an offensive suit of clothes

 

the clothes of suffering

a shirt of pain

a cloak of sorrow

 

a coat the solid color

of loss     worldly indifference

like leprosy written across his face

 

so densely it hurt to look

as if we'd only see

ourselves reflected in it

 

as in a dense layer of dust

over a window

in an ancient place we've long forgotten

 

we don't want to remember

we loathe that place

we despise weakness

 

and he meant nothing to us

a blight on our existence

we couldn't even condone his existence

 

but it was our

loss and our

pain he bore

 

our hidden fear and indifference 

he wore

openly for us

 

while we wrote him off as beneath us

as an example of God's vengeance

as being even our own self-vindication

Symbolism, Ritual and Revelation - by Archbishop Lazar Puhalo

I. Orthodox types and symbols 

When Donald Hebb released his seminal paper on neuroplasticity in 1947-1948, he radically changed the way learning was perceived. Perhaps we should rather say that he set in motion a whole series of developments that produced new and deeper understandings about the whole function of the brain, shed light on the mind and provided a profound insight into revelation and the meaning of ritual and symbolism. Orthodox Christians may find it interesting to note that the fathers and mothers of early monasticism had already perceived the principles of neuro-plasticity without having any of the physiological or scientific information about the brain. What they understood was the profound link between the spiritual, emotional and physical aspects of mankind.

God and His works are not to be understood by fallen human concepts and rationalism. God spoke to Israel offering iconic types and imagery that led the holy nation to a spiritual understanding of the awesome mysteries and did not permit them to identify their expectation with earthly and limited expressions. In the same way, our holy fathers offered an apophatic theology carefully setting signs, types and symbols to establish a boundary for us on the true path, but never delimiting the mystery in a frame of words that would diminish the Will of God and His revelation to the likeness of a legal document. No theology is according to the Orthodox Faith if it is not based on those valid types and symbols which we have received in our Sacred Tradition. In the Holy Seventh Ecumenical Council, the holy fathers clearly dogmatised that valid icons are the equivalent of true theology. Valid icons consist in types and symbols, not in interpretations of reality by the fallen human mind. All elements of a canonical icon are symbolic and contain a profound revelation; there are no naturalistic elements in this Liturgical art.

CLICKE HERE to download the full text of Symbolism, Ritual and Revelation

"Peace" - Sermon transcript - Josh Giesbrecht

This morning I get to speak on peace, the next-in-line of the fruits of the Spirit listed in from Galatians.

When I first saw the schedule, I thought, “Oh good, this should be a good fit.” … which I’ll explain with a story later.  But over the last few weeks it’s like the peace has been drained out of me, so this has been …interesting to prepare.

I expected that this was one of those things I could talk about the straight-forward way, focus on “spiritual” peace and not all of the other messy uses of the word. But apparently God didn’t want to keep things that simple for me.

So let’s start off by looking at all the complications.  Here are some uses of the word “peace”.

“Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you; I do not give it to you as the world does.”

 - John 14:27

“Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace but a sword.”

 - Matthew 10:34

We probably get the impression here that Jesus is using two different meanings of the word “peace” here. Maybe?

Here’s a current-events usage that’s impacted me personally as a teacher:

“Premier Clark and I have been discussing how we can move forward on our goal for 10 years of labour peace for students in our public education system.”

– Education Minister Peter Fassbender

For those who don’t know, the BC government had tried to market this idea to the public over the last year.  It sure sounds great, doesn’t it?

But, to keep things simple, let me just say that this wouldn’t have been a “peace” created by coming to agreement on a fair middle-ground.  The 10-year deal was heavy-handed, and much of what they proposed amounted to dismantling the other side, silencing their opposition.  It was a threat, not a promise.  (Since then the two sides have made some progress, and no one’s talking about a ten-year deal anymore.)

“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called the children of God.”

 - Matthew 5:9

So we are told to be peacemakers…

CLICK HERE to download the rest of "Peace"

Dallas Willard and Gary Black Jr.'s 'The Divine Conspiracy Continued' -- review by Caleb Miller

Major events seem to come in threes.  2013 Brought us the death of several giants of the faith in Brennan Manning, Robert Capon, and Dallas Willard.  For many, Manning and Capon were there introduction to grace and the furious love of God.  Willard largely went unnoticed among many, and without the voicing of guys like Rob Bell and various others, his name would have been unknown by even more.  Thank God this wasn’t so.

I remember the first time I read “The Divine Conspiracy”. I kept thinking “this book ought to be required reading for anyone who professes Christ”.  In fact, it is one of the few books I recommend to nearly every person that asks me for a well rounded book about kingdom life.  Imagine my surprise when I opened an (unordered) review copy to see the words “The Divine Conspiracy Continued” staring back at me.  I immediately dove in.

Written with Gary Black Jr. over the final months of his life, Willard’s The Divine Conspiracy Continued is a bit different than the original. For those looking for a sequel, it is not. For those looking to go deeper, this is where you’ll want to go. Just like the first book ought to be required reading for believers, this new book ought to be required reading for anyone who wants to fill a leadership position - be it in the church or in the workforce. There is so much wisdom packed into the pages of this book, coming from the heart of a man who obviously thought out what it looks like to live the kingdom in our daily lives.

Want to know what the kingdom should look like in our daily humdrum? The Divine Conspiracy Continued is, at a minimum, the best place to start.

Andrew J. Sopko's 'For a Culture of Co-Suffering Love" -- review by Dr. Nicholas Frank

For A Culture of Co-Suffering Love: The Theology of Archbishop Lazar Puhalo, by Andrew J. Sopko, Archive Publication, Los Osos California, 2004. 148 pgs.

A review by Dr. Nicholas Frank, Reader.

 

Archbishop Lazar has enlightened Synaxis Press’ readership for more than a quarter century and enthralled audiences throughout his career as authorr, lecturer and preacher. His mental acuity and scope of interests have seemed at times so mercurial and wide ranging as to require an equally encyclopedic knowledge to grasp them. Always, Vladika Lazar’s point of departure is the gospel of the man-befriending GodMan, articulated in the patristic tradition, passed down through such as the late Metropolitan Antony Khrapovitsky. Andrew Sopko’s objective scholarship is able to convey in a comprehensive yet terse book the breadth of AVladika Lazar’s diverse works and place them succinctly in a thesis of Christian compassion. While followers of Bishop Lazar’s ministry, the Reader included, might have found his interests, from Patristics to astrophysics to physical anthropology to neuropsychiatry to existentialism, challenging if not exhausting, Sopko has little difficulty in keeping up. He is able to appreciate and describe Vladika Lazar’s work as a cohesive whole, consistent on a continuum, elucidating Orthodox Christian theology, and its mystical underpinnings in a manner which is less obtuse than sometime rendered; more welcoming to a wider world.

Barry Hankins' 'Francis Schaeffer and the Shaping of Evangelical America' -- review by Wayne Northey

Book Review of Francis Schaeffer and the Shaping of Evangelical America, Barry Hankins, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008, 272 pp.

My friend Ron Dart asked me to review this book.  As it turned out I read Ron’s well-marked copy.  In that it was published in 2008, there have been many reviews.  One from a peace theology perspective by Ted Grimsrud is excellent: Barry Hankins, Francis Schaeffer and the Shaping of ...  It summarizes in greater detail than I the three phases of Schaeffer’s ministry.

So what can I “add”?  Nothing. Well, a personal angle: which multiple thousands of contemporary Evangelicals can as readily do, Ron Dart included.  Nonetheless… I hesitated.  I delayed in reading the book; in beginning the review.

Why?  I had long since thrown away all Schaeffer’s publications, all formerly devoured, some repeatedly, that had been published prior to 1974.  No later publications were read, though I saw the 1977 movie How Should We Then Live?, and perused the book by that title, that Hankins claims was Schaeffer’s “best (p. 167)”.  1974 was the year of a visit for several weeks to both Swiss and Dutch L’Abris.  It was also the year I had limped back (just after the two L’Abri visits) to Canada from a two-year short-term missionary experience in West Berlin that had gone spiritually sour.  Perhaps saying my nickname had been “Francis” amongst friends and missionary colleagues the previous few years might explain.  Schaeffer had begun that year to be a guru gone sour too.  In 1975, Schaeffer gave the commencement address to (Vancouver) Regent College’s “Diploma” graduating class of which I was part.  That cinched the disenchantment.  I have had no yen since to revisit Francis Schaeffer.

Why further?  I explored this in a larger context in a novel, Chrysalis Crucible, that started out as a reflective story on that question with reference to my Plymouth Brethren “quintessential fundamentalist” (Ernest Sandeen) upbringing.  The protagonist though fictional gets jokingly called “Francis” and does travel to L’Abri as well. 

Click here to download the rest of this Book Review

The Myth of Schism - David Bentley Hart

David Bentley Hart, "The Myth of Schism," Ecumenism Today: The Universal Church in the 21st Century. Edited by Francesca Aran Murphy, Christopher Asprey (Ashgate, 2008).

I. The Mythology of Division

The division between the Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches—officially almost a millennium old, but in many ways far older—has often enough been characterized as the ineluctable effect of one or another irreconcilable and irreducible difference: political (Caesars and Czars as opposed to princes and popes), cultural (Greek or Byzantine as opposed to Latin or Frankish), theological (divergent views of nature and grace or original sin), doctrinal (the filioque clause, papal infallibility, and so on), ritual (leavened bread and icons as opposed to azymes and statuary), ecclesiological (patriarchal pentarchy and sobornost as opposed to universal papal jurisdiction and monarchia), even ‘ontological’—to cite the somewhat hermetic language once employed by the Oecumenical Patriarch. (I hope that this last was a case of mistranslation, I must note, as I should be inconsolable if I discovered that we do not even now have being in common.) And, because these various distinctions have been drawn only rarely in a spirit of critical detachment, uncontaminated by some element of squalid recrimination, it has usually proved difficult to separate matters of real significance from those raised for purposes either purely polemical or ultimately frivolous. Every serious ecumenical engagement between the Orthodox and Catholic communions reveals depth upon depth of substantial agreement, and yet always fades upon the midnight knell, as each side ruefully acknowledges the perplexing refractoriness and stubborn persistence of differences that lie (apparently) deeper still. Always an abiding sense of some ever more determinative—and yet, curiously, ever more indeterminate—essential difference overshadows every conversation (however charitable) that attempts to span the divide. And this sense serves constantly to temper our elation over whatever meagre accords we strike, to imbue our continued division with an almost mystical aura of inevitability, and to resign us fatalistically to our failures and to the failure of our love.

God's Rest Ye Mary Magdalene (with lyrics) - Deborah Ermter

God’s rest ye Mary Magdalene 

And shelter from the Mob 

The judgments made by violent man 

Are not the thoughts of God 

Who came and told us “Do not judge” 

So we hung Him on a cross 

For His tidings of comfort and joy 

Comfort and joy 

Oh tidings of comfort and joy. 

 

God’s rest ye Drunken Sailor 

And stillness to the waves 

Silence to the lies you’ve heard: 

“You’re too strung out to save” 

I met a Man at Matthews’s house 

With healing in His veins 

Flowing Tidings of comfort and joy 

Comfort and joy 

Oh tidings of comfort and joy 

 

God’s rest ye Zealous Pharisee 

And love to all your fear 

The gift of Christ is truly free 

And has been all these years 

There is a balm in Gilead 

To give us ears to hear 

Hear His tidings of comfort and joy 

Comfort and joy 

Oh tidings of comfort and joy.

Bread on the Table - by Brian Zahnd

The church in Western Europe and North America is struggling with deep disappointment. We are disappointed with the failure of the Christendom project. The grand attempt to produce a continent of Christian civilization through the apparatus of the state is either dead or dying. It appears that secularism has already won in Europe and will win in North America. So we either deny it (more easily done in America), or we angrily blame scapegoats (those we claim have “compromised the gospel”), or we simply trudge along, a bit sad about it all.

The church in the post-Christendom world is walking the Emmaus Road. Confused and disappointed. Just like those two disciples on the first Easter. (see Luke 24:13-35) The original Emmaus Road disciples had misread everything. Their disappointment was a result of their wrong expectations. They expected a conventional king after the model of the Pharaohs and Caesars. They expected Jesus to be a war-waging Messiah like King David or Judah Maccabeus. What they ended up with was a “failed” Messiah — a Messiah executed by the Romans. The movement in which they had invested all their hope had failed. So they walked the Emmaus Road with soul-crushing disappointment. This is when Jesus came and walked with them “in another form.” (Mark 16:12)

When Jesus in the guise of a wayfaring stranger remarked upon their evident sadness, the disciples told how they had hoped that Jesus of Nazareth was the long-awaited Messiah, the one who would redeem Israel. But that was all over. Their hopes had been dashed when their would-be Messiah was condemned by the priests and crucified by the Romans. Their movement had failed and disappointment had settled in.

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this post

Above Tide: The Haig-Brown Home by Ron Dart

Above Tide: 

The Haig-Brown Home: Where Literature, Ecology, Community and Religion Meet

It seems clear beyond possibility of argument that any generation of men can have only a lease, not ownership, the earth; and that one essential term of the lease is that the earth be handed on to the next generation with unimpaired potentialities. This is the conservationist’s concern.                      

 - Roderick Haig-Brown, Measure of the Year 1950

 

Haig-Brown was one of the pioneer conservationists in British Columbia, seeing earlier than most people the likely consequences of the careless destruction of our forests.                                         

  - George Woodcock

If it (Life) hurts you sometime, remember who you are and why you are and whence you came, and know that no hurt lasts forever and none is destroying you if you choose to build on it. Never stop or stoop to hurt back. Only go on to do and be and serve when you can.

         - Roderick Haig-Brown, Measure of the Year 1950

The death of Farley Mowat (1921-2014) reminded us of the passing of a literary ecologist. The origins of Greenpeace on the West Coast in 1971 alerted many to the fact that something was not right with our irrational and mindless abuse of the physical world. The ongoing environmental work by David Suzuki (b. 1936) since the 1970s-1980s on the nature of things has kept before the minimally alert the consequences of poisoning this fragile earth, our island home. But, before Farley Mowat, Greenpeace and David Suzuki, there was Roderick (1908-1976) and Ann (1908-1990) Haig-Brown.

Living the Christian Story - Free open seminary course - Brad Jersak et al

 

OpenWTC (Westminster Theological Centre) is offering a free 10-week online course, TH49X1: Living the Christian Story.

This course is designed to be accessed anytime, anywhere online from 23rd June onwards. Brad Jersak will be teaching the NT section.

To register for the course, click here:

To download the course syllabus click here:

Winnowed Wisdom - Ron Dart

Winnowed Wisdom (Adapted from the Christian and Jewish Traditions)

The Bishop and the Three Hermits

Once upon a time a bishop went to visit three hermits who were living on an Island. The hermits had been isolated for many years, and the bishop longed to offer them pastoral support. The boat trip across the water went well, and the bishop trekked to the three hermit’s simple dwellings. The bishop kindly asked about the prayer life and theological depth of the hermits. The prayer life of the hermits consisted of “We in Thee, Holy Three”. The bishop was somewhat concerned about deepening and broadening the prayer-theological life of the hermits, and the hermits, quite childlike, were delighted and excited to hear more from the bishop. The day came to an end, dusk arrived, and the bishop took to the shoreline, stepped into his coracle and headed back to his diocese on the mainland. The bishop was well into the water crossing when the three hermits came running across the water to the side of the coracle, confessing to the bishop, they had forgotten all he had told them. Each of the hermits apologized for their lapse. The bishop, somewhat surprised and shocked by the hermits appearance on the water, realized he needed their instruction-- “We in Thee, Holy Three”, when rightly internalized, could sail the ship of faith to many places.      

A Hasidic Tale

Once upon a time there was a charismatic Jewish Hasidic teacher who was known for his wisdom and insights. Wherever the teacher went, thousands visited the towns and villages he travelled to, just to hear him. There was a young man keen and committed to the deeper meaning of the spiritual journey, and he heard the Hasidic teacher was to visit a town near where he lived. The young man had a friend in the town and he arranged to spend the night at his place. The Hasidic teacher arrived in the village, and, as expected, thousands arrived to meet him and hear his insights. It was a busy time for one and all, but the young man never attended any of the spiritual teachings. The Hasid left the town and the friend of the young man asked him why he never attended any of the lectures. The young man answered, “I was more interested in how he tied the laces on his shoes”.

Ron Dart

Dimensions of Love: Christology from Pentecost to Colossae - Martin Little

For you utter many blasphemies, in that you seek to persuade us that this crucified man was with Moses and Aaron, and spoke to them in the pillar of the cloud; then that he became man, was crucified, and ascended up to heaven, and comes again to earth, and ought to be worshipped.[1]

            Christian apologist Justin Martyr placed these words into the mouth of his Jewish opponent Trypho in the second Century.  Whether an accurate reflection of contemporary Jewish feeling or no, Trypho's objection vocalizes a question that has long puzzled scholars: how could monotheistic Jewish faith have given birth to the Trinitarian Christianity we know today?  And how did the first Century church come to worship a 'crucified man'?  This essay traces some possible answers to this dilemma, and suggests ways in which we might view the Christological question in a new light.

Christological Polyphony 

            The New Testament contains a chorus of Christological voices, often harmonious and occasionally dissonant.[2]  Important among such voices are Luke/Peter in Acts 2, and Paul in Colossians 1-2.  Engaging with these texts today, we listen also for the voices of the communities in which they emerged, voices of interpreters down the centuries, and voices that make up our own contemporary frame of reference; for '[r]eading is always contextual'.[3]  Finally there is the daunting and enticing possibility of hearing the voice of God himself in the midst of them all. 

Lines of Development 

            Mapping Christological development in the NT is problematic because there is little scholarly consensus regarding the chronology of the texts.[4]  Wright dates Colossians in the early 50s C.E.; if this is accurate, then the ideas contained in the letter surface between the eventsof the 30s described in Acts 2 and their final writing up by Luke, possibly as early as the 60s.[5]  Even allowing for Lukan reworking of Peter's sermon, it is conceivable that the text authentically preserves something of the apostles' post-resurrection conceptions of Jesus.[6]  It is then legitimate to speak of a 'development' of Christology from Pentecost to Colossae, but articulating a linear progression goes too far beyond the evidence.[7]  What we can say with confidence is that the NT texts are products of the same nascent Christian thought-world, of which Paul, Luke and Peter are part.[8]

CLICK HERE to download Dimensions of Love - Martin Little

---

[1] Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho,48:1.

[2] James D. G. Dunn, Christology in the Making: A New Testament Enquiry into the Origins of the Doctrine of the Incarnation (London: SCM, 1980), 62.

[3] Brian J. Walsh & Sylvia C. Keesmaat, Colossians Remixed: Subverting the Empire (Downers Grove: IVP, 2004), 18.

[4] Dunn, Christology, 61.

[5] N.T. Wright, Colossians and Philemon: An Introduction and Commentary (TNTC 12, Downers Grove: IVP, 2008), 39; Victor E. Vine, "The Purpose and Date of Acts", Expository Times 96:45 (1984), 45-47.

[6] C.K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Acts of the Apostles Vol. 1 (ICC Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1994), 133.

[7] Paula Fredrikson, From Jesus to Christ: The Origins of the New Testament Images of Jesus (New Haven: Yale, 1988),19.

[8] See N.T. Wright, Christian Origins and the Question of God Vol. 1: The New Testament and the People of God (London: SPCK, 1992),357-358.

Understanding Biblical Violence - An 'Oikonomic Approach' — Andrew P. Klager

When we consider depictions of divine behaviour in the Old and New testaments, quoting a string of verses to support our favoured portrayal of God typically reveals more about the person who enlists these passages than it does about what the Bible actually says. We can all engage in cafeteria hermeneutics—choosing only those verses that appeal to our theological taste buds—but this is missing the forest for the trees. What’s absent, then, is a cohesive interpretive framework for providing at least a bit of consistency. 

And yet, neatly packaged solutions to the inconsistency of divine behaviour in the two testaments fail to enter the struggle and remain there if need be. Why, for example, does God seem to authorize genocide (1 Sam. 15), while also preaching peace, love, mercy, and 70x7-fold forgiveness (Mt. 5)? What is the take-away here, and what are we called to imitate and obey? When we ponder Old Testament prescripts through a Christlike lens, is it ever a happy occasion to smash a baby’s head against the rocks (Ps. 137:9)? Do any of us stone fortunetellers (Lev. 20:27) or think that God has an evil spirit (1 Sam. 18:10)? Was it that “Satan stood up against Israel, and incited David to count the people of Israel” (1 Chr. 21:1) or was “the anger of the LORD … kindled against Israel, [so that] he incited David against them, saying, ‘Go, count the people of Israel and Judah’” (2 Sam. 24:1)? If I’m in a tussle with someone and my wife tries to defend me by grabbing my opponent’s nether regions, should I cut off her hand (Dt. 25:11-12)? Or, am I supposed to gradually learn how to love my enemies, pray for those who persecute me, bless those who curse me, forgive my transgressors 70x7-fold, and refuse to fight back—even heal those who are harmed by others who come to my defense—when I face suffering and the prospect of death, all without a weapon in my hands (Mt. 5:43-48)? None of this is meant to discount Scripture or disrespect it, but it does reveal the need for a more consistent hermeneutical framework to make sense of it.

Armageddon Left Behind - by Brian Zahnd

What’s Left Behind by Nancy Eckels

Jesus is not a conductor handing out tickets to a paradise beyond the stars. Jesus is the carpenter who repairs, renovates, and restores God’s good world. Far too many American Christians embrace a faulty, half-baked, doom-oriented, hyperviolent eschatology, popularized in Christian fiction (of all things!) that envisions God as saving parts of people for a nonspatial, nontemporal existence in a Platonic “heaven” while kicking his own good creation into the garbage can! Framed by this kind of world-despairing eschatology, evangelism comes to resemble something like trying to push people onto the last chopper out of Saigon.

Our looming Armageddons are always a possibility but never an inevitability. Armageddon is only inevitable if we listen to the propaganda that comes croaking from the dragons, beasts, and false prophets of nationalism, empire, and war. (See Revelation16:13–16.) Jesus wept over Jerusalem because their fate could have been avoided. If they had believed in Jesus as the messianic Prince of Peace instead of a messianic Lord of War, Jerusalem could have actually become the City of Peace. Instead, they chose the path that led to a hellish nightmare of siege, famine, cannibalism, destruction, and death.

Repairing the world. Healing wastelands. Laboring to make a dying world livable again. This is the vision of the apostles and prophets. This is the prophetic paradigm the people of God are to coordinate their theology and lives with. We are not to be macabre Christians lusting for destruction and rejoicing at the latest rumor of war. It’s high time that a morbid fascination with a supposed unalterable script of God–sanctioned–end-time–hyperviolence be once and for all left behind.

A secret ... CLICK HERE to read more

Compunction and Tears as Prayer - by Fr. Michael Gillies

"The fullness of prayer is the gift of tears."

- St. Isaac the Syrian

 

Growth in prayer comes through discipline and routine and the recitation of fixed prayers.  This recitation of fixed prayers, hymns and psalms is often referred to generally as psalmody or one's rule or office of prayer.  Learning to attend to psalmody can bring an experience of "sweetness." Sweetness in prayer is the term used by St. Isaac (and many other Orthodox spiritual writers) to describe peaceful joy and communion with God in prayer--or at least that is what I think he means by sweetness.  

 

However, psalmody is not the end, it is the means.  Psalmody is a training ground, a place where we can learn to concentrate our attention by paying attention to our thoughts in prayer.  More specifically, in psalmody we attend to thoughts and learn to control them, forcing ourselves to attend to what is true, pure, good and beautiful emerging from our hearts as we reflect on the words of the prayers and psalms.  In psalmody we also learn to attend to compunction, to feel the pain (literally, the puncture) of our heart.  This pain is the mother of the pure prayer that emerges from undistracted thoughts--what St. Isaac calls "unwandering concentrated prayer."  When this feeling overcomes us we can no longer say prayers because this unwandering concentrated prayer is the prayer that overtakes prayers.

 

St. Isaac says, "When prayer gives you her hand she will take the place of your office."  

 

Compunction is the pain of heart, or the broken and contrite heart, that God does not despise.  Sometime, however, we wonder: is the pain of heart that I am experiencing godly compunction? Are the tears the "gift of tears" that the holy Fathers and Mothers talk about?  Certainly there is such a thing as selfish tears, tears of self pity and anger.  There are also tears of laughter and sentimentality.  In my experience, it is usually easy to identify selfish tears.  What I cannot identify in my own experience are tears that are godly, that are a gift given by God and offered to God as prayer.

 

CLICK HERE to read more