For a number of years I taught a course at Point (ACC at the
time) titled Life and Literature of Paul.
It was a fun course to teach – albeit a challenging one – and I was grateful
for the opportunity to teach it. I decided that one of my personal goals would
be to try and figure out “what made Paul Paul.” I still don’t think I can
completely answer that question, but I’m confident I learned some things about
him.
About a week ago, HarperOne published Paul: A Biography by N.T. Wright. As is always the case with his
work, Wright’s biography is amazing. Some of what I think I learned in teaching
that class has been confirmed by Wright’s biography. Then, I’m reading lots of
stuff that makes me think “Why didn’t I think of that?”
One of the best things about the scholarship of N.T. Wright
is that he actually believes in the church and its mission to the world. That
means when you are reading him, even his more academic stuff, there is always a
connection to the real world of trying to follow Jesus in a world that is so
challenging.
Here’s an example. He is describing the early Christian
community in Antioch of Syria in the days before Barnabas goes to Tarsus to get
Saul. Actually, the chapter on Antioch in the book is worth the price of the
book. This is one of the best of many good comments in the chapter:
If a community like the one in
Antioch was to keep its balance as a group of Jesus-followers in that world of
clashing cultures, its members would need to grasp two things. On the one hand,
they would have to put down roots firmly into the Jewish traditions, into the
scriptures. On the other hand, they would have to think through what precisely
it meant that Israel’s Messiah, the fulfillment of those same scriptures, had
been crucified and raised from the dead. (page 92)
In Wright’s imaginative telling of what could have been “the
story line” at that moment, Barnabas knew no one was better prepared to lead
the believers in Antioch “to keep its balance” than his friend Saul. Having
grown up in the sophisticated university town of Tarsus in a Pharisee family,
then sent to study under the greatest Jewish teacher of the day Gamaliel, Saul
of Tarsus knew the scriptures of Israel in ways beyond the average person’s
greatest dreams and the experience on the Damascus Road had brought to reality
that the Jewish Messiah had been crucified and raised from the dead. He could
interact with the world around him – Jewish and Roman – with that information.
Everything has changed. Wright sees this moment as a kind of
birth of Christian theology, and his phrase “clashing cultures” to describe the
world into which Christian theology was born sounds like it came from the front
page of today’s AJC.
All of this has me thinking. How do we do Christian theology
in a world of clashing cultures? If I listen to the news – be it CNN, MSNBC,
FOX, or one of the broadcast groups – I almost always think “that’s not my
world.” I watched some of the Oscars Sunday evening, and I think, “that is not
my world.” Every day when I read what is going on in the Georgia legislature, I’m
thinking “that’s not my world.” Social media is no more convincing either. The
stuff people post on social media, “Lord, have mercy. That is not my world.” When I look at much of what passes for justice in our culture, I think, "that's not my world."
Unfortunately some of the most offensive signs of “clashing
cultures” are the things some Christians say about each other and what other
Christians say about the world. What could be more of a “clashing culture”
moment than Christians ignoring “the common good” around us and instead of “making
disciples as we go,” we pronounce judgment on one and all – except those like
us?
The emerging church in Antioch, like would be true for
hundreds of other similar kingdom outposts planted all over the Greco-Roman
world in the last half of the first century, flourished not because the Roman
Senate passed a law to protect them or made certain immoral behaviors illegal.
They flourished not because they retreated from the world around them and built
isolated fiefdoms of people already like them.
They flourished because they dove head first in to the world
of Scripture and discovered a promise God made to Abraham and Sarah that all
the world would be blessed through their descendants and realized that Israel’s
Messiah, crucified, buried, and raised was God’s absolute assurance that the
promise had been kept. With that message, they were willing to take whatever
risks necessary to engage culture for the sake of the Kingdom of God.
Christian theology might very well have been born in
Antioch. The marvelous mind that God gave Saul of Tarsus, along with his
training, his study of Scripture, and the presence of God’s Spirit in his life
made it possible, to borrow Wright’s words, for the church “to keep its balance
as a group of Jesus-followers in that world of clashing cultures.”
Because of that kind of faith, issues of gender, geography,
and group identity melted away in the glorious good news that “for in Christ
Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were
baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there
is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in
Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs
according to promise.” (Galatians 3:26ff. ESV)
It is that kind of Christian theology that creates community,
not individualism. It is that kind of Christian theology that is rooted in
Scripture, not systems. It is that kind of Christian theology that reflects the
politics of Jesus (think John Howard Yoder’s great book) not party politics.
No comments:
Post a Comment