Paul vs. the Empire?

Elsewhere I have posted on some of the emerging scholarly debates regarding a counterimperial impulse in Paul’s writing. Of late, I have been reflecting on this theological trend. Why such a preoccupation with counterimperial theology? Is this a product of anti-American sentiment? Perhaps a resurgence in Greco-Roman backgrounds for NT scholarship? Or maybe a political hermeneutic? I suspect all three are at play and that there is no consensus explanation for the spate of literature on counterimperialism in Paul.

However, I am more concerned about hermeneutics than motive. Did Paul intend to convey counterimperial ideas when writing his epistles? Was his word selection based on Greek or Jewish lexicography? Is it an either/or, after all Paul was both missionary and theologian. I engaged some of these issues in my Th.M thesis, Creation in Colossians, and was struck at the time by the hyper-counterimperialism of Walsh and Keesmaat’s Colossians Remixed: Subverting the Empire. At times, they confuse contemporary implication with Pauline meaning. That said, I have room for Pauline contextualization, which is often counter-cultural; however, I have been careful to not confuse his intended theological meaning with his missiological orientation.

Denny Burk has provided some critical reflection on what he dons “The Fresh Perspective,” language taken from Wright’s writings on Paul. In this issue (vol 51) of JETS, Burk published:“Is Paul’s Gospel Counterimperial? Evaluating the Prospects of the ‘Fresh Perspective’ fro Evangelical Theology.” Although Burk states in anti-imperial thesis up front (314), he adduces convincing reasons to be suspect of the FP hermeneutic. Here are a few:

1. Caution of the use of parallels. Just because a biblical word or concept has a Roman parallel use does not mean that Paul intended it to be an anti-Roman polemic, especially when the word or concept has a rich Jewish origin. After all, Paul quotes and theologizes extensively from the Septuagint (Greek version of the OT). Burk identifies the key linguistic issue: “To what extent are the parallels due merely to the fact that Paul and the imperial cult were drawing from the common stock of Koine Greek, the lingua franca of the eastern part of the Roman Empire?” (317)
2. Caution about the distinction between meaning and implication. Citing E.D. Hirsch’s landmark work on literary interpretation, he writes: “An implication, however, differs in that it is not a part of the author conscious intention, even though it is established by a type that derives from the author’s willed meaning.” (320) In other words, get the author’s intended meaning first, then consider implications second. Make the distinction; don’t confuse possible implication with intended meaning.
3. Caution about the hermeneutics of the FP. Burk points out that much of the hermeneutical ethos of the FP has been generated by the Paul and Politics group from SBL. Richard Horsley, a leading scholar among the Paul in Politics group, clearly articulates a political agenda in the fresh perspective of counterimperial studies: “The aims and agenda of the Paul and Politics group are, broadly, to problematize, interrogate, and re-vision Pauline texts and interpretations, to identify oppressive formulations as well as potentially liberative visions and values…” And here is Burk’s concern–Horsley’s elevation of the post-colonial readers of Paul to the level of “the text being read in the work of interpretation” in Paul. In other words, by trying to accomodate the political concerns of readers, Horsley and his colleagues give those popular readers’ concerns a prominent place in the interpretive task.

Good Advice on Church Planting

This article contains more insight about the nature and practice of the church than video venue wisdom. Bob’s comments regarding community, missionaries, and preaching. Here are some of them:

Preaching: “Some churches grow faster than they can find, train, and send church planters who have the same teaching talent as the “main guy.” But what if instead of asking “Can he preach as well as me?” you ask, “Can he or she, with a team of others, lead a Christ-centered community that starts small and grows, reproducing itself before becoming unmanageable and outgrowing the gifting of its leadership?”

Missionaries: “I know, a lot of people love your preaching and want to hear it. Let them get saved and discipled at your community, or spend a season there, and then point them to your pod/vodcast, sending them as missionaries to reach their local communities.” I would add that instead of pointing them to your cast, point them Christ, their community, and their mission. We have made preaching too central in the Ministry of the Word. Tim Chester has made some great points on this subject.

Churchplanting: “One of the main justifications for video venues is that upwards of 70 percent of church plants fail. Giving people a “brand name,” proven communicator makes more sense. But do church plants fail because of the planter? Or is it because of unreasonable expectations, unsustainable “big launch” methods in which thousands of dollars are pumped into new churches in an effort to make them big, fast… because of the consumer mindset…” I would agree and add that plants can flourish when the bar of church is lowered and the bar of discipleship, community, and mission is raised. Convert people to Jesus and in the same breath, to Jesus-centered communities on mission to the city, world, not to your preaching.

HT: Judd Rumley

Chester on Community and Centrality of Christ

Check out Tim Chester’s comments regarding community and the centrality of Christ here.

Total Church - (Extensive Notes from Session 1)

Here are Chris Marlow’s more extensive notes from the Total Church conference.

Total Church - III (Church Practices)

Throughout the Total Church conference we learned of various ways the Crowded House pushes gospel-centered community and community-centered gospel through their church practices. Here are a few:

• Baptism: They view baptistm as a visible sign of entrance/way into the community. “It is attractional because it says to others that anyone can come in. It is a declaration of leaving the community of judgment and entering into the community of grace.” Not clean up first, make sure they are a “believer” for a while and then baptize. Baptize upon conversion.
• Communion: If baptism is the way into the community, communion way to stay in the community. Consider Isaiah 55 as a communion text. It is always a opportunity to proclaim the gospel. Communion as meals, not plastic cups and wafers, creates a community context in which the gospel is celebrated and witnessed.
• Preaching: The West has unduly given the sermon primacy in the ministry of the Word. In fact, it has reduced the ministry of the Word to the sermon. All the energy, time, and money spent on preparing for a one and a half hour event on Sundays betrays American ecclesiology: the Sunday service is teh church! What we need is a complete ministry of the Word, which includes mutual counseling—”gospeling”—to promote a Word-centered life, not just a sermon-centered service. Crowded House asks the question: “How are we going to live together in submission to the Word.”

Total Church - II (Vanderstelt on MCs)

Jeff Vanderstelt (Soma Community Church) presented a robust view of gospel-centered missional communities. If you haven’t read or listened to Jeff and Caesar’s thorough thinking in this area, I highly recommend it. Audio should be up soon.

What I want to share are some of the insightful comments Jeff made that are the fruit of years of leading and cultivating MCs. I found these comments most helpful for the present form of Austin City Life and have, in many cases, taken those comments and reworded them (mainly because I don’t have the direct quotes).

• As leaders of missional communities we must abide in the timing of the gospel. If we abide in the timing of the gospel, which is a lifetime, we will not become disgruntled or despair over the slowness of growth in missional communities, among our disciples. There is a tendency for all MCs to drift to Bible Study, to Community Group, to something other than a group of disciples that live in the gospel together on mission.

• Any group can do “Acts 2″ as a moral act without mission. There is a tendency for MCs to devolve into a mere meeting, to not be a true community. Many of our people mistake the MC meeting for missional community. Two hours a week of sharing life and truth is not sharing life and truth. It is easy to slide into a meeting-focused approach to MC if we are not consistently challenged by mission. It is in being forced to give up our time to serve others that our heart issues are exposed. It is in painting a house, picking up a foster kid, serving a meal that our selfishness, grumbling, complaining, and relative indifference to the needs of others are exposed. In this exposure we are meant to turn to our community where we can receive gospel reminders, encouragement in the truth, prayer for increased love for others and for God.

Clarifying my Previous Post

After talking with Jeff Vanderstelt at the Total Church conference, I want to clarify something from my previous post. Tim Chester is most definitely Jesus-centered and nothing close to Emergent (community centered). He advocates both gospel-centered community AND community-centered gospel. The previous post simply pointed out that there can be a difference in expression and practice, depending on which way one leans. This is beginning to sound awfully esoteric, perhaps even confusing, so I’ll let it rest there.

Total Church - I (Biblical Theology of Attractional Church)

Today Tim Chester did a biblical theology of the attractional church. Although it was pretty good biblical theology (i’d disagree with some of this interpretations of given texts, such as “kingdom of priests” as a missionary mandate), it was a bit long-winded. I came to Total Church with the hope of working through practical theology, missional ecclesiology, missional leadership development, etc. However, there have been some great take-aways peeping out at the end of the plenaries, Tim’s talk not excluded. I’ll blog on those later.

After disputing the false dichotomy between attractional and incarnational, Tim embarked on a biblical theology of mission. His contention was that a gospel-centered community is a community of people that attract the lost. While this is certainly sometimes the case, a gospel-centered community is also a community, no matter how kind, loving, and mercy-motivated, will receive rejection. Christ and his church are ultimately only effectually attractive to the elect. And what attracts unbelievers in a gospel-centered church is very different from what attracts unbelievers to an attractional church. And this raises an important distinction raised by Mike Gunn during the Q&A.:

Are we attracting people to a community that is gospel-centered (Tim Chester’s central point) or are we attracting them to the proclaimed Christ? This, is an important distinction, one that Tim was not willing to fully concede. Tim insisted that by attracting people to a community that is gospel-centered, people get to know and see the world of redemption, love, grace in a broken community. A rather optomistic read. Mike contended that the church is so broken that we should not try to attract people to a community first, but to Christ first, who is sufficient for our brokenness. Perhaps it’s two sides of the same coin, but which side do you want up? Heads or tails?

Total Church Conference

I landed in San Diego yesterday with fellow planter Jacob Vanhorn. Last night we stayed with a sweet family that is on staff at Kaleo church, the Petersons.

The Total Church conference with Tim Chester starts in a couple of hours. For those that dont know, Total Church is a book that was written by Tim Chester and Steve Timmis of the Crowded House in the UK. The book is a rethinking of church around gospel-centered missional community. It’s so balanced that it probably won’t become immensely popular, which is unfortunate.

Other speakers include: Drew Goodmanson, David Fairchild, Mike Gunn, Caesar Kalinowski, and Mark Moore. All these guys really get missional ecclesiology really well. I look forward to learning from them and working on some longer range plans for Austin City Life while I am here.

Austin #1 Hardest Drinking City

In a recent article released by Forbes, Austin ranked #1 among the hardest drinking cities in the U.S. Here are some interesting stats from the article:

• The CDC’s Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey last year found that 61.5 percent of residents said they had had at least one drink in the past 30 days
• Nearly 9 percent of people surveyed said they drank daily. For men, two drinks a day was considered daily alcohol consumption in the survey. For women, it was one.
• In the CDC survey, about 20 percent of adults in Austin admitted to binge drinking, or having at least five drinks in one sitting.