Is Your Gospel the Gospel of Scripture?

Have you ever stopped to ask yourself: what is the Gospel?  What is it really?

For many of us, particularly those of us that have grown up within Evangelical circles, the question seems almost absurdly simple.  The Gospel is the “good news,” of course!

Good news, you say?  Good news about what? Good news for whom?  Is it good news for everyone?  And if so, why is it not always seen as “good” by those on the receiving end of the “news?”

 

Links and Joe

Sunday, 6 January 2013

Here are some links to various blog posts we found on the net this week.  While we may not endorse every idea espoused in them, we enjoyed reading them, and found them to be thought provoking.  So sit back, relax and enjoy some links and your favorite cup o’ joe this morning.

 

Top Ten Books Ryan Read in 2012 (Because Most of Them Were Assigned by Vanhoozer)

Here are ten books I read this past year provided in no particular order, with no pontificating on the nature of lists and the subjectivity of literary experience.

 

Advent: Hope for What?

Today, December 1, 2012, is the first day of Advent (the 24 day anticipation of Jesus’ coming or arrival).  Advent simply means coming or arrival, and the nuance of the term coming is appropriate.  Coming can refer to the historical event of Jesus’ first advent, the current remembrance of the incarnation or the future hope we have for Jesus’ second advent.  Traditionally, the Advent wreath has five candles, representing Hope, Joy, Peace, Love and Christ.  The first candle for this first week represents Hope.  As such, Advent is marked from the outset as a season of hope, but what do we hope for?

 

From the Ashes of War: The Gospel According to Mark – Part 3

Earlier this year, we started a new series on the Gospel according to Mark.  Today, as we continue to build upon the foundation that was laid in part 1 of the series, we turn our attention to the latter half of Mark 1:1.  As has already been argued, Mark is writing in the context of a war – a war that ultimately leads to the destruction of Israel and the failed last stand of the Jewish Zealots in the desert fortress of Masada.   For the Jewish people, many of whom had been longing for a Messiah for well over 400 years, all appears to have been utterly lost.  Rome had laid waste to Jerusalem and her beloved Temple; and those that actually survived the onslaught had been either scattered or enslaved.

 

From the Ashes of War: The Gospel According to Mark – Part 2

Mark 1:1 – On Empires, Osama Bin Laden, and the Smashing of Imperial Symbols.

Earlier this week, we started a new series on the Gospel According to Mark; and in the first article, it was argued that this Gospel is best understood in what we call the sitz im leben – or the “life setting” – in which it was written.  As you may recall, the “life setting” for Mark is a rather tumultuous time in ancient Judaism – a time in which the devastating might of imperial Rome had been brought to bear upon the tiny, isolated state of Israel.  Following the rather ill-advised revolt that was instigated by the Zealot leadership within Israel, more than 60,000 Roman troops had been dispatched into the region, the Temple had been destroyed, the people had been slaughtered or sold into slavery, and as for the capital city of Jerusalem itself, “there was nothing left to make those that came there believe that it had ever been inhabited.”[1]

This is the world into which Mark is writing. War had left Israel in a state of ruin, and the recently crowned, Roman Emperor Vespasian, was sitting securely on his newly established throne.

 

From the Ashes of War: The Gospel According to Mark – Part 1

Introduction and Background

For most of us who are relatively unaware of the history of the ancient world, to say that the Gospel of Mark was written sometime between 68 and 71 A.D. is to say very little.  But for those that know their history, this statement is actually quite stunning.  For if this Gospel was, indeed, composed during this era, than we know that it’s author was writing during one of the most tumultuous times in the history of the Jewish people – a time when everything the Jews knew and believed to be true came to a devastating end.

 

Would Tim Tebow – and Jesus! – Like you to Buy a Pair of Shoes or a T-Shirt from a Slave?

As many of you know, several days ago, a friend of mine posed a question on his blog in which he asked: “Is Tim Tebow a Hypocrite?”  What could only be ordinarily described as a “sleepy little site” was suddenly alive and booming with internet traffic.  And for two days, his “hit count” went through the roof as many evangelicals sought to defend Tebow and his “platform.”

As I watched that little scenario unfold, I began to think about putting up a post on this site asking the same question.  Only, my interest was not so much an examination of Tebow’s actions in light of Matthew 6, but an examination of why celebrity drives evangelicals in the same way that it seems to drive others in society.  I had a genuine concern that when we elevate gifted young celebrities to a position of spiritual authority, we run the risk of their personal stories running afoul, as did the story of Ben Roethlisberger.  Not surprisingly, my post ignited this blog, much in the way that my friend’s post had done on his site.

Today, as I continue to ponder this issue, I want to approach my initial concern from another angle.  I want you to look at this recent ad for Nike and I want you to tell me what you think.

For me, two things jump out almost immediately.  First, this ad is part of a larger group of ads that feature some of the very best athletes of our generation.  From LeBron James to Dwayne Wade to Manny Pacquiao, this campaign is built on the idea that we are witnessing extraordinary athletes that are doing things worthy of our attention and adulation.  And than there is Tim Tebow.  Tim currently has a regular season quarterback rating of 72.9, which establishes him as the 27^th best starting quarterback in a league with only 32 starters.  Clearly, he is not featured in this campaign because of his enormous talent.  He is not Payton Manning.  He is not Tom Brady.  He is not even Aaron Rodgers.  Tim is in this campaign because he is an enormously polarizing figure, whose popularity and notoriety stems from the fact that he is an outspoken evangelical Christian.  So there is an undeniable sense in which his “platform” for Christ is opening doors to lucrative contracts.  This alone should give us pause to think.

The second thing I notice is that the language and imagery being used in this campaign is undeniably Christian. “We are witnesses” is part of what we call the core “Christian kerygma.”  In other words, of all the things that are said in the earliest Christian sermons found in Acts (and elsewhere), “we are witnesses” is one of the six most common themes[1] that are being preached as the Gospel is being brought forth into the world.[2]  But here, the language and imagery of the Christian faith is not being used to testify to the work of Christ.  It is being explicitly co-opted for the sake of buying and selling products.  Consider, if you will, the following ads for Manny Pacquiao and Tim Tebow.  You will need to click on them to read the fine print.

Are you comfortable with this?  Are you comfortable associating sacred language and imagery with an advertising campaign designed to generate money for a transnational corporation?

Perhaps you are.  Perhaps you are not.  But what about when this Christian language and imagery is used by a company that has a prolonged history of utilizing underpaid labor – and even virtual slaves – in human sweatshops to produce its goods?

This is what I’m talking about when I am questioning the wisdom of giving a young, Christian celebrity a spiritual “platform.”   Today, on January 11^th, the day we set aside to focus on the human trafficking pandemic, we pause and force ourselves to ask tough questions.  For the Gospel must be good news for all, including those in this recent 2008 video who were forced to labor under atrocious and inhumane conditions.

---

[1] In cases where the exact words are not used, the concept is captured by similar language.

[2] Acts 5:32 and Acts 10:39 are excellent examples of this language.

 

A “Bastard” in a Fatherless Age … (part 2)

Yesterday afternoon, I introduced you to the world of the half-breed Timothy, bastard son of the Jewish disciple, Eunice, who herself was seen as a prostitute by the community around her.  It was an ugly world to be sure; and if you haven’t taken the time to read about it, I would highly suggest that you do so now before continuing forward with this discussion.

A “Bastard” in a Fatherless Age … (part 1)

Today, I want to continue forward in our exploration of the remarkable life of Timothy because I believe that there are staggeringly beautiful gems to mine down in the deep shafts of “incidental words.”  So why don’t we start by talking about the age of Timothy.  Read with me the words of the Apostle Paul found in 1 Timothy 4:12:

“Don’t let anyone look down on you because you are young, but be an example to the believers in what you say, how you behave, in love, faith and holiness.”

The word I want to focus upon here is the word “young” (from the Greek word: neotes).  From the use of this word, we can rightfully conclude that Timothy, at the time of this letter, is somewhere between the age of 25 to 33.[1]  But there’s more to this puzzle.  Notice how Paul is advising Timothy not to allow anyone to look down upon him because of his youth.  Why is he doing that?  Well the answer is really rather simple.  In Jewish culture, men were not allowed to take leadership positions until the age of 30.[2]  So in all probability, Timothy is actually younger than 30 at the time of this writing, which explains Paul’s warning to him.

This is the Lytra Tell located in the modern state of Turkey.

Now the pieces are beginning to fall into place.  From history, we know that the First Epistle to Timothy was written sometime between 65 and 66 AD.  We also know, from history, that Paul’s second missionary journey (when he first found Timothy) began in 49 AD.  So if Timothy was under the age of 30 at the time when Paul advises him not to allow anyone to look down upon him for his youth, then we can rightfully conclude that Timothy was roughly 10 to 12 years old when Paul first encounters him in the small, out-of-the-way town known as Lystra.

Don’t gloss over that.  Timothy was 10-12 years old when Paul first looked at him and said: “In the Messiah, there is neither Greek nor Jew, Timothy.  Everyone is equal.  All the social layers and the hatred that this world constructs … it means nothing in Jesus, Tim.  Nothing!”

To me, this is utterly fascinating.  A few days ago, I walked you through the ages of the disciples chosen by Jesus and we concluded that all of them, with the exception of Peter, were under the age of 20.  Now, when it comes time for Paul to chose his disciples, he continues the tradition of his day and the tradition of Jesus; and he selects another “kid.”

Why is it that when it came time for the Kingdom of God to be announced throughout the ancient world, Jesus the Messiah and the Apostle Paul chose “children?”  And why is that much of our youth ministry is centered around keeping our “kids” safe and making sure that they are thoroughly entertained and not bored?

Somewhere along the way, there has been a radical disconnect between the potential that Jesus and Paul saw in “children” versus the immaturity that we see and foster through a prolonged adolescence that we currently extend into the late 20s.  Is it time for us to be begin to respect the capabilities of our “kids” by challenging them with deep, insightful teaching that actually equips them to become true disciples in this world?  Is it time for us to give them the best of our teachers as opposed to giving them the newly-minted seminary grads that are merely putting in time before they can become senior pastors themselves?  Is it time for a sea-change in how we do youth ministry?

---

[1] The Greek word neotes merely suggests youth.  But, the word is also used by Luke in his account of the “Rich Young Ruler.”  When we look at the parallel account of the “Rich Young Ruler” found in Matthew’s Gospel, we see that Matthew uses another word to describe the age of the ruler: neaniskos.  This word is a bit more specific, and it actually suggests a man anywhere from his mid-20s to his early 30s.

[2] The Code of Jewish Law (O.C. 581:1) instructs Jewish gatherings to look for certain qualities in those that would lead the services on the High Holidays.  Amongst these qualities is a minimum age of 30 because, as the Mishna Brura explains, a 30-year old is humble, soft-hearted, and capable of actually “praying from the heart.”

 

A “Bastard” in a Fatherless Age … (Part 1)

Today, I want to continue our discussion of youth and ministry by looking at a seemingly harmless little passage at the beginning of Acts 16.  Read with me for a moment:

“[Paul] also came to Derbe and to Lystra.  A disciple named Timothy was there, the son of a Jewish woman who was a believer, but whose father was a Greek.  The brothers in Lystra and Iconium spoke well of him. Paul wanted Timothy to accompany him, and he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in those places, for they all knew that his father was Greek.  As they went through the towns,they passed on the decrees that had been decided on by the apostles and elders in Jerusalem for the Gentile believers to obey.  So the churches were being strengthened in the faith and were increasing in number every day.”

Now, are you ready for the story behind the story?  Here’s how it works.  When you and I read this account, we see some odd biographical details that don’t mean a whole lot to us.  We know that Timothy is part Greek, so we know that he has not been circumcised and we know that Paul, for reasons we will not discuss today, needs for him to be circumcised.  We also know that after this, Paul travels around with Timothy, and that the churches are growing stronger every day.  And that’s as far as most of us in the 21^st century get because we don’t understand the ancient Jewish culture.

So today, I’m going to unpack a bit of that ancient culture for you; and to make sure that I have your complete and total attention, I’m going to put this in words that you understand.  Assume for a moment that you are an African American kid.  How would you feel if I said to you:

“Your Mama’s nothing but a two-bit whore!  And you – you’re nothing but a nigger! Now get out of here, you little bastard!”

Offended yet?  Good!  You should be!  “Nigger” is an offensive word.  It’s a word that is filled with hate!  It’s a word that should have no place in our culture.  It’s a word that spits on the “image of God” that is placed in hundreds of millions of people around the globe.  Now how about someone calling your mama a “whore?”  Are you comfortable with that?  How about being called a “bastard?”  How does that feel?  How does that sit with you?

You see, in order to really understand what is happening at the beginning of Acts, you need to understand what the author is saying when he tells you that Timothy’s mother was a Jew and that his father was a Greek.  In the ancient world, this means that Timothy is a mamzer (From the Hebrew word: ממזר‎).[1]  But what does that mean?  If I had tried to explain the meaning of that word using “clean” English, it would have meant nothing to you.  But when I tell you that this word mamzer has all the power of the hatred that filled my example above, you can begin to truly understand the remarkable nature of this passage.

So what did it mean for Timothy to live as a mamzer in his society?  Well, for starters, it meant that everyone around him viewed his mother as a prostitute.[2]  It meant that every one around him saw him as “defective,” “corrupted,” and “spoiled” by “strange, alien” DNA.[3]  He was a half-breed in a society that lamented half-breeds; and he was a bastard child with no legitimate father willing to call him his own.  In a world where the Jews were wrestling with what it meant to be “outsiders” themselves, Timothy was the ultimate “outsider.”

• Unlike other Jewish children, Timothy wasn’t circumcised on the eighth day of his life because he really wasn’t part of the community.  (Genesis 17:12)

• Unlike other Jewish children, Timothy wasn’t allowed to go to the Tabernacle or the Temple because mamzers were forbidden.   (Deuteronomy 23:2)

• Unlike other Jewish children, Timothy was cut off from his people because his mother’s failure had left him on the outside of the covenant.  (Genesis 17:14)

• And lest Timothy think that things would somehow get better for his children, he lived with the knowledge that this status would be passed on to his children for 10 generations to follow.  (Deuteronomy 23:2)

Yes … Timothy was the ultimate outsider, reviled by a religious community whose leadership had called down curses upon those who were inter-marrying and giving birth to mamzers (Nehemiah 13:23-27).   So what do you think it meant for him, when he first heard the words of the Apostle Paul:

“For in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God through faith … There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female– for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.”  (Galatians 3:26-28)

What do you think, reader?  What does this mean for us as Christians?  Are we to be looking for the ones that conform to our expectations?  Or are we to be looking for the ones that are broken, and marred with jagged scars?  Do our youth ministries make a place for kids like these?  Or do we want them to “get better” before they come to us?  Are we ready to deal with the ramifications that come from ministry to kids with pain?  Are we ready for the disruption? Or do we simply want to do life with a little interruption as possible?

---

[1] Mamzer is also sometimes spelled mumser based upon the Yiddish variation.

[2] The Greek Septuagint translated ממזר as the “son of a prostitute” (from the Greek: ek pornes), while the Latin Vulgate translated it as de scorto natus meaning “born of a prostitute.”

[3] According to the Brown Driver Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon, mamzer is derived from the root m-z-r, meaning “spoiled or corrupted.”  As per the Talmud, mamzer is a blended noun that joins mum (meaning “defect”) and zar (meaning “strange” or “alien”)