Justin Welby at Trent Vineyard

Justin and Caroline Welby are interviewed by John Mumford at Trent Vineyard Nottingham on Sun 27th Jan 2013. Image tweeted by John Wright (@CJohn_Wright).

It was a real pleasure to see the soon-to-be ArchBishop speak again. I first saw him speak at a youth conference on evangelism in Durham, and funnily enough his talk ('sermon' according to John Mumford) was the same; though clearly more developed! Nevertheless, he spoke with wisdom and clarity (as before), and I felt confident that he will make a good ArchBishop, even if he seemed to think the appointing didn't make sense! I would argue that there is great strength in Welby's detachment from the stifling academic environment (not to suggest that he is in any way unlearned, as he is clearly a very intelligent man), and that comes from someone who currently intends to go into academia! The tendency for academics to get lost in their own minds is such an obvious stereotype, and one that I see in myself! Therefore my readers have my permission to let me know if I ever encase myself in an ivory tower.[1] I hope that Welby will forgive my paraphrase of his talk, as I am writing from notes and memory rather than a recording.

Welby opened his talk with the assertion that the idols of this present age have fallen one after another; the financial crisis, the integrity of the media and politicians, the health system, the list goes on. He argued that today’s society is disillusioned with the present state, and that when everything fails only an empty cross and an empty tomb is left standing; thus Christ was the focal point of his talk. Because of this, now is the time for the church to be a light in the darkness, now is the time for social action and integrity, for genuine relationships with the person Jesus.

But how can the church go about this? Welby had five points all beginning with P;

Peace: Christians are to bring peace following Jesus’ example in Lk 24:36 and Jn 20:19. When the disciples are scared and lost because their world has crumbled around them, Jesus’ answer is to bless them with peace.

Presence: Like a certain monastic community in France, Christians are to affect change in the areas where they live. Christians should be present in difficult situations, and the positive change they bring should be evident.

Promise: When idols are falling there is a lot of cynicism and mockery. Christians should remember that God is faithful and true to his promises. In times of doubt we should be seeking the Spirit for affirmation of God’s love and constancy.

Purpose: The church must fill the gap left by state-run social programs that have lost their funding. A sense of purpose is important in times of uncertainty. Furthermore, social action will lead to opportunities to share the gospel, and every Christian should be able to explain the good news if such an opportunity occurs. Education was an example.

Power: The power that God gives us is always equal to the task that he calls us to do. In the Holy Spirit, God’s power takes control of the space left by broken idols.

Welby, like Dallas Willard in his fantastic book The Divine Conspiracy, was incredibly practical, something that is often forgotten for the more favoured spending ones “time in nothing but telling or hearing something new” (Acts 17:21).[2] The spiritual disciplines of prayer, reading the bible, fasting, and studying the bible (reading commentaries) all made an appearance, and there could have been others that I didn’t notice. Furthermore, practical evangelism was stressed, specifically; social action, practicing summarising the gospel, and having spiritual conversations.

I would like to re-iterate that I have paraphrased Welby’s talk and by no means should this be seen as a quotation. Instead I offer a humble interpretation of what was said.

Generally, all this made for a thoroughly enjoyable evening, from Caroline Welby’s intense description of their struggle with God’s will, to John Mumford’s comic interview technique. I appreciated the sense of church unity shown through the hosts Trent Vineyard, and I wish Justin and Caroline all the best as they step into this new role. I pray that God might keep them close to him and equipped in the power of the Holy Spirit.

---

[1] On this note, I found an incredibly useful roundtable discussion about careers in academia. It can be found here.

[2] Dallas Willard, The Divine Conspiracy (New York: Harper Collins, 1998).

The Scandal of Grace

'Scandal of Grace' by Hillsong (2013)

The song on Youtube

When I first heard the title of Hillsong’s new release called “Scandal of Grace” I was extremely exited, as I assumed that this meant that the song itself would be shocking and scandalous in describing God’s extreme affection for humanity. Sadly I was very much disappointed, as there is nothing out of the ordinary about these lyrics! The use of the word “murdered” is about as shocking as it gets, and I think that ‘murder’ is a soft term to describe crucifixion!

The word scandal comes from the Greek word skandalon, which means “scandal, offense, cause of indignation”, and this indeed a great word to use to describe the Gospel![1] Jesus says in Mt 11:6 “blessed is anyone who is not scandalized by me”, thus implying that the gospel is offensive.[2] But how often do we hear an offensive gospel being preached? A gospel that might cause you to lose friends its so shocking? A gospel that could cause society to ridicule and hate you to the point of persecution? A gospel that would cause churches to reject your teaching because its too extreme? Maybe the reason why there is no persecution of Christians in the west is not because the west is so accepting, but because the gospel we preach is not as offensive as it used to be!

Grace is truly offensive, and Hillsong are completely correct to describe it as such, but I would suggest that their song is not a true reflection of how scandalous God's grace is.

Grace flies in the face of justice.[3] Grace redeems us while we were and are still sinners (Rom 5:8). Grace is free, and thus cannot be labelled “cheap” (contra Bonheoffer), as there is never a price attached! “It is for freedom that Christ has set us free” (Gal 5:1): Paul goes on to describe in Galatatians 5 that what Christ has set us free from is the Torah. We do not have a law system. We are no longer bound by rules. “Everything is permissible for me” (1 Cor 6:12): Here Paul is quoting the Corinthian church, who have understood grace so well that they continue to sin in their new-found freedom. Paul does not negate this phrase but qualifies it! Because of grace everything is permissible, but “I will not be mastered by anything”, nor is everything “beneficial”.

Thus Paul is able to say that “there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (Rom 8:1), because life in the Spirit of God has set us free from a set of rules by which we live our lives. The new righteousness is not the Torah, nor the fulfilment of the Torah in a new set of rules (for example the 5 sermons in Matthew 5-7, 10, 13, 18, and 23-25, could be a new Pentateuch), but Jesus himself is the fulfilment of the Torah, not his words (Mt 5:17-18)![4] Righteousness is not to 'do' the sermon on the mount, or a new Torah, but it is Jesus himself. Rather, the person who “hears these words and does them” is wise (Mt 7:24-27). Jesus relates himself to what is worth being persecuted for; “righteousness” and “my sake” are synonymous terms (Mt 5:10-11).

Therefore, let us not bind people with rules, because righteousness is never found in not smoking or not drinking, nor not sleeping around, nor not murdering, nor even following the words of Jesus! Instead righteousness can only be found in his actual person. If we do what Jesus says we are wise, but we are not righteous. Church is for sinners only (1 John 1:8).




[1] William D. Mounce, Mounce Conscice Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament (Accordance Bible Software: Version 2.0, 2011).
[2] NRSV reads “…who takes no offense at me”.
[3] A judge who accepts the life of one to pay for the penalty of another seems to be a very poor judge indeed, and I therefore do not agree with Penal Substitution. Instead it seems unjust, and by this great injustice we are set free.
[4] Regarding Mt 5:17-18; the Torah will pass away with heaven and earth, but Jesus words will not, thus implying that the Torah is temporal, but not Jesus' words. In this sense Jesus’ words are not simply a new Torah but infinitely and qualitatively different.

A Theology of Django Unchained

Django Unchained (2012). Directed and written by Quentin Tarantino. 165 mins. Rated 18.

I heard someone comment on Inglorious Basterds (2009) that Tarantino had the entire audience laughing at the violence directed towards the Nazis. The irony is that there is a scene where the Nazis are laughing at the violence directed to the Russians in a cinema; thus Tarantino shows that his audience are no better than the Nazis, let alone the Jewish men who cause such violence themselves. In the same way, Calvin Candie (DiCaprio) is at one point sitting on a sofa watching a “mandingo fight” to his great enjoyment, yet at several points the crowd in the cinema delights in the slaughter and dismemberment of various characters. Tarantino has shown yet again that with a little justification (a great cause) the crowd assumes the role of the villain. Schultz’s (Waltz) desire to get into the fighting business is justified by the phrase “It seems like fun”, which could easily be a phrase used to justify going to see Django Unchained.

          The interesting thing about this film is that the higher cause that Django (Foxx) appeals to is not freedom for slaves but the salvation of his wife from the hands of the dragon (biblical imagery for satan, who initially seems to be Candie but is in fact Stephen (Samuel L. Jackson)). There is indeed Christological imagery here, as Christ defeats satan for his Bride, but the twist is that he does so through extreme violence and force. Shultz does attempt to simply buy Django’s wife back, which ultimately fails, but even before this Django’s answer is one of violence. In line with this, the subsequent freedom from slavery is also reminiscent of biblical imagery (Lk 4:8 = Is 61:1).

         Ultimately, however, I believe that this film is another classic case of Tarantino’s justice without mercy (viz. Inglorious Basterds and Kill Bill). Justice is stressed at the cost of everything, including principles. While Schultz refuses to shake the hand of Candie due to principles (commendably paying $12,000 for a slave is not a breach of his principles), Django fulfils his role as turncoat to the point of allowing a man to be torn apart by dogs. This is in contrast to the biblical witness, which instead demands mercy over justice, often to the extreme, as exemplified in the death of Jesus; where those who deserve punishment are forgiven completely. What this means for Django I don’t know, but what is evident in the film is that both white and black men can be slaves to each other (viz. Candie’s lawyer as a slave, Django and Stephen as masters), as well as incredibly evil to each other.

         In Kierkegaardian terms; Django apparently transcends the ethical in a leap of faith, by sacrificing his principles for the higher cause of his wife, when in fact he is simply esthetic in his desire for what is earthly through the following of his love for his wife at the cost of eternity. The real knight of faith would have given up his wife to God in full expectation of her return; a thoroughly unsatisfying answer for a non-Christian.

Book Review of 'The Heavenly Book Motif...' by Leslie Baynes

The Heavenly Book Motif in Judeo-Christian Apocalypses 200 BCE-200 CE (JSJSup 152), by Leslie Baynes. Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2012. Pp. vii + 233. £82.

My lecturer lent me this fantastic book to write a Biblical Theology of Heavenly Books, which would have been beyond my ability if it wasn't for this publication! Baynes provides a comprehensive and stimulating study of the heavenly books (the book of life, book(s) of deeds, book of fate and book of action) in biblical literature. The study itself is set within Jacques Derrida's concept of writing, with reference to Plato's Phaedrus, who argues that writing is always involved in questions of life and death.[1]

This book traces the progression of the motif through early biblical literature (Ex. 32:32-33 and Is 4:3) where there was no Jewish concept of eternal life, into later texts such as Daniel 7-12, which are to do with eternal life (Dn 7:10, 10:21, 12:1). Furthermore, Baynes traces the expansion and development of the motif in terms of authorship; starting with God in the OT, developing to Enoch in apocalyptic literature and finally the Son of Man in Revelation (Rev 3:5).

Baynes provides a convincing argument for the category of a book of action (Zech 5:1-5 and Rev 5:1-8) contra Richard Bauckham, who suggests that the scroll with seven seals in Rev 5:1-8 and the little scroll that John is told to eat in Rev 10:1-11 are the same scroll.[2] Baynes compares Rev 10:1-11 with Ezek 2:9-3:3 and categorises these as ‘heavenly letters’.[3]

The concepts of predestination and determinism frequently appear, but ultimately are left in tension with the significance of deeds, as the book of deeds continues into use in Revelation but the book of fate is left out of the NT. In Revelation, however, the book of life takes on the role of the book of fate (Rev 13:8 and 17:8). This tension is ultimately left unresolved; a tension that I believe is a reflection of the biblical witness.

Baynes’ writing style is accessible with a well structured approach of OT, ‘Inter-Testamental’, NT and early Christian writings. She includes discussions on the origin of the motif, positing Babylonian tablets of fate, as well as citizenship lists and royal records of deeds (Neh 7:5, Esth 2:23 and 6:1-3).[4]

Leo Koep’s Das himmlische Buch…, is an important text for Baynes’ study but is sadly unavailable in English. If I ever have time I might put the monograph on here.[5] Paul Shalom has also written an interesting article on this subject, and happily in English![6]

I strongly recommend this work for all studies on the heavenly book motif and the concepts of writing, fate, determinism and predestination in biblical literature.

Google books preview here.

---

[1] Jacques Derrida, “Platos Pharmacy,” in Dissemination (trans. Barbara Johnson; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981), 65-171.

[2] Richard Bauckham, The Climax of Prophecy (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1993), 238-66. Cf Leslie Baynes, “Rev 5:1 and Rev 10:2a, 8-10 in the Earliest Greek Tradition,” JBL 129 (2010): 801-16.

[3] This seems to demand further study than the brief explanation on pages 52-54.

[4] Baynes, Heavenly, 46-51.

[5] Leo Koep, Das himmlische Buch in Antike und Christentum (Theophaneia: Beiträge zur Religions und Kirchengeschichte des Altertums 8; Bonn: Peter Hanstein Verlag, 1952).

[6] Shalom Paul, “Heavenly Tablets and the Book of Life,” JANES 5, (1973): 347. Kathleen M. O’Connor, “Jeremiah,” in Oxford Bible, 487.