Near Emmaus

Category Archives: Discipleship


by 6 Comments

Book Review: Lois Tverberg’s Walking in the Dust of Rabbi Jesus

Tverberg, Lois. Walking in the Dust of Rabbi Jesus: How the Jewish Words of Jesus Can Change Your Life (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012). (Amazon.com)

9780310284208Lois Tverberg is the author of a recent book titled Walking in the Dust of Rabbi Jesus. She sent me a copy to review (for which I’d like to thank her) since this blog discusses topics related to Second Temple Judaism, Jesus, and early Christianity. It is more of a “user friendly” book than is reviewed here usually, but it is one that I think many of this blog’s readers may find valuable. 

Message of the Book

The aim of this book is quite simple: study the culture within which Jesus lived and his words and deeds will be given a new, enlightening nuance. I enjoy reading literature on this topic from a variety of people, whether it be N.T. Wright, E.P. Sanders, Amy-Jill Levine, Craig A. Evans, or a host of other authors who are experts on the historian’s Jesus. I know authors like Rob Bell, Ray Vander Laan, and to a different extent Kenneth E. Bailey have tried to include the discussion of scholars into their more popular literature (or like Wright, writing his own popular versions), but it is not common. Tverberg on the other hand as written one book already titled Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus and this is her second effort to help the “person in the pew” think about Jesus as a first-century Jew (though by no means does she remove the confessional/creedal affirmation about Jesus).

I admit that sometimes I am skeptical of these types of works. In an effort to talk about the historian’s Jesus there is the danger of anachronism, especially when it comes to the use of rabbinic sources, but even scholars can make the mistake of interpreting the historian’s Jesus through later works, so I read this book with a graceful eye knowing that the historian’s Jesus is a difficult character to grasp, especially when you come from a confessional background of one sort or another, and even when you do not come to the study having thought of Jesus in terms like “the second person of the Trinity”.

I should qualify that though this book does aim to revive the Jewishness of Jesus for the reader it is not strictly a work of history. Rather, it does engage in the reception history of rabbinic and Christian traditions, it is devotional, and it does include stories and examples that give contemporary meaning to living as a Christian in our modern world. Personally, I think it is a very useful book for something like a small group study at your local church with people who may never have the opportunity to read much about the historical studies surrounding Jesus of Nazareth.

Summary of the Content

The title of this book is based on a saying from Mishnah, Avot 1:4. Yose ben Yoeser is a second rabbinical figure of the second century BCE who is quoted here as having said that a disciple should “powder yourself with the dust of their feet”, “their” being that of one’s teacher.[1] The idea is that one should sit at the feet of their teacher or follow their teacher so closely that the dust that kick off his feet cover them. If this saying is nearly as old as it is attributed then Jesus’ disciples may have heard something like it and it may have had it in mind as they followed Jesus. This is the picture of discipleship Tverberg aims to present.

The book divides into three sections: I. Hearing Our Rabbi’s Words with New Ears; II. Living Out the Words of Rabbi Jesus; and III. Studying the Word with Rabbi Jesus.

In section I there are four chapters. Chapter 1: Brushing Away the Dust of the Ages is introductory. Tverberg talks a bit about how Gentile Christians have thought of Jesus as a Savior, as have Jewish Christians, but there was a sense among Jewish Christians that Jesus was their “rabbi” or “teacher” as well, something lost on many Gentile Christians.[2] This may be true, in part, when one examines contemporary Christianity, but I don’t know that the Patristic writings would deny the necessity of following the example of Jesus, even if not described in Jewish terminology like halakhah. It is a contemporary evangelical audience to whom Tverberg writes though and what she says about following Jesus’ example is true of many.

Tverberg does Christians a great service by making known to a popular audience some of the ideas circulating since E.P. Sanders’ Jesus and Palestinian Judaism forced scholars to rethink their language about first century Jews as legalistic and superstitious people who Jesus had to enlighten. Rather, Jesus was very much a Jew of his day engaged in the discussions being debated at that time. In many ways Jesus was unique in his teaching, but there is a lot of what Jesus said and did that is far from original with his person. I think this is good for lay audiences to know.

Tverberg presents her sources in this chapter: the Mishnah, the Talmud, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the writings of Josephus, and the Gospels. She clarifies that she doesn’t mean to limit Jesus to the status of a mere rabbi. Instead, she wants to highlight that part of his reality as a teacher who called disciples. She wants to remind Christians that our religion was once called “the Way” or “the Path” based on the Hebraic concept of following a derekh and that Jesus talk his disciples how to “walk” in his way, or halakah.[3]

The remainder of section I examines Jesus’ teaching that the most important commandments in the Law are to (1) love the Lord your God with all your heart…. And (2) the one like it, love your neighbor as yourself (see Mt. 12:28-31). Tverberg admits that she was surprised as a younger Christian to find that Jesus’ words came from the heart of the Law, Leviticus and Deuteronomy, “two books I had read the least.”[4]

In Chapter 2: Shema: Living Out What You Hear she begins to delve into the Jewish Shema beginning with this word meaning something like “to hear with the intent to obey”. She ties this into Jesus’ words, “Whoever has ears to hear, let them hear.” Then she discusses the meaning of the word echad, often translated “one” (which has caused much debate between Jews and Christians over doctrines like the incarnation and Trinty), but she advocates the use of “alone” as in this God was Israel’s God “alone”. This frames it as a command to fidelity more than a mere creedal statement for monotheism.

In Chapter 3: Loving God with Everything You’ve Got Tverberg continues to explore the Shema asking how God could command “love”. She argues that “love” is not a mere emotion here, but a covenantal agreement of sorts, like the word hesed, which is discussed in this chapter as well. When this chapter ends the reader will have gone through a fairly extensive word study on the Shema with an aim for understanding how this may have impacted Jesus and his teachings and how it should impact our contemporary discipleship.

In Chapter 4: Meeting Myself Next Door Tverberg moves to the second commandment about loving one’s neighbor. She provides a helpful discussion on how important this teaching was for the early church. Then she moves to studying Leviticus 19:18 and its context which is a reminder that Israel was once slaves in a foreign land, therefore treat foreign guests with kindness. This introduces the debate in Jesus’ day over the meaning of “neighbor”, provides a context for Jesus’ story about the Samaritan, and asks how all of this fits into Jesus’ words in his prayer for God to forgive us and we forgive others.

Section II begins with Chapter 5: Gaining a Good Eye which examines Jesus’ words in Matthew 6:22-23 about the eye being filled with darkness or light. She argues that this saying is idiomatic meaning that having a “good eye” means to look out for others, especially the poor while having a “bad eye” means being selfish.[5] The remainder of the chapter examines Jesus’ teachings on charity and giving.

Chapter 6: The Mystery of the Name attempts to unpack the meaning of a “name” in the ancient world, e.g. when disciples baptized or did exorcisms “in the name of Jesus”. Tverberg introduces readers to the idiomatic expression’s relevance for presenting the authority of another. She discusses the lexical meaning of Jesus’ name, what coming in someone’s name meant, the idiom “in the name of a prophet…”, the “hallowing” of the name of God in the Lord’s Prayer, and what it means to profane a name (e.g., taking the “name” of the Lord in vain).

Chapter 7: How to Have a Kosher Mouth begins with a discussion on the role of the tongue on books like Proverbs and James and then delves into the ethics of speech: avoiding an evil tongue, slander, shaming others, and a variety of topics that include showing other dignity and not abusing them with one’s speech.

Chapter 8: Taking My Thumb Off the Scale includes a very relevant discussion on Jesus’ words about judging, especially when contrasted with Paul’s decision to tell the Corinthians to toss a member from their assembly. What does Jesus mean by “judgment” and how does our modern language around “judging others” skew our reading of the text? Tverberg guides the reader into thinking about this from a Jewish perspective, asking how anger and insults play into Jesus’ words as well as the picture of a scale being used at the local marketplace.

Chapter 9: Praying with Chutzpah argues that Jesus depicts God as appreciating someone with chutzpah or “utter nerve, sheer audacity that borders on obnoxiousness.”[6] She examines the story of the Syrophoenician woman (Mt. 15:21-28; Ml 7:25-30); Jesus’ parable about the unrighteous judge in Luke 18:2-5; the parable about the man who has unexpected guest from out of town in Luke 11:5-8; and Jesus’ words about “good gifts” in Matthew 7:9-11. She grounds this Jewish appreciation for chutzpah in Abraham, the father of the Jews (see Gen 18:23-25), and Moses (see Ex. 5:22-23). The chapter ends with some words on prayer, especially prayer for others.

Tverberg ends section II with Chapter 10: Thinking with Both Hands examines the Jewish tradition of shakla v’tarya, or “give and take”, where one person—like Tevye in Fiddler on the Roof examining the tradition of a “match maker”—wrestles with a dilemma arguing internally for both sides. This approach to reality is found everywhere within Scripture—sometimes seen through western eyes as contradictions. One could think of Paul’s words on justification juxtaposed with James’ words on justification. Also, Jesus’ paradoxical words about “first” being “last” and “last” being “first” or losing life gains it and gaining life loses it. What would be contradictions to some are balanced views of the world in Scripture.

Tverberg transitions to a discussion on how some Laws—though all seen as having a divine origin—are seen as weightier than others. In this chapter she does a fine job of snuffing the tradition that Jews were panicky legalist seeking to avoid hell to gain heaven. She writes, “Contrary to our traditional Christian assumption, their discussions about the Law do not arise out of an anxious striving to earn one’s way to heaven. Jewish thought generally assumed that Jews were already saved, because God graciously chose Israel as his people. In their minds, the Law teaches them how to live in a way that pleases a loving God and upholds their covenantal relationship.”[7]

This invitation to “weigh laws” explains Jesus’ debates with the Pharisees over things like Sabbath far better than the old “legalism v. grace” paradigm. I think this may be one of the most valuable chapters for Christians who are used to this sort of approach to the Judaism of Jesus’ day. As much as scholarship has seen a paradigm shift it has taken a while for these ideas to “trickle down” to the church. Tverberg’s book as a more popular work can help bridge the gap.

The final section focuses the last four chapters on reading Scripture. Chapter 11: The Treasure of the Text reminds Christian readers that the Old Testament matters and that it is “floating” right below the surface of the text of the New Testament. Tverberg writes, “As Christians, we long to think the thoughts of Christ. But the stories he knew, the songs he sang, and the prophecies that shaped his earthly mission lie in the Old Testament.”[8]

The familiarity with Scripture reflected in the New Testament is attributed to the importance of reading Torah in the synagogue and the command for Jews to meditate and know the words of Scripture. Tverberg discusses parasha and haftarah readings (almost liturgical) and how this dedication to reading the text changed people.

Chapter 12: The Secret That God Keeps argues that the Jewish tradition has been aware that one can study Scripture their entire life and never know it all, or capture it, or find all the answers. This isn’t the goal of reading. Tverberg discusses God’s secrets in Daniel 12:8-9 and how this shapes the words of Acts 1:6-7 and Mark 13:32. The chapter includes sections on Messiah (Jesus) as interpreter of Torah, the ignorance of Job’s friends, and caution when studying eschatology.

Chapter 13: Our Longing Father challenges Marcionite thinking that denies (whether implicitly or explicitly) that the God of Israel in the Old Testament is the Father of Jesus in the New Testament. Tverberg emphasizes the God shown to us by Jesus as being a God of emotion and feeling, not an unmoved mover, but a real “personal” deity as seen in the Parable of the Prodigal Son. She examines a variety of Old Testament texts that speak of God in the same way, as loving, gracious, patient, caring. She presents the God of Jesus as being one who is not indifferent, or an “unmoved mover”, but a God who loves, actively.

Chapter 14: God’s Image Stamped in Dust is the final chapter of the book. It is a study of the imago Dei concept from Genesis 1:26-27 and how that fits into Jewish thinking and the teachings of Jesus.

At the end of each chapter there are a series of discussion questions under the titled “Wisdom for the Walk”. The book has a forward by Ray Vander Laan and an afterword from Ann Spangler. The book uses endnotes, at the end of the book, not the chapter. Finally, there is a glossary of terms and recommended resources for further reading that include respected authors such as Kenneth E. Bailey, Craig A. Evans, Abraham Heschel, and Brad Young as well as various online resources.

Concluding Thoughts

This book would be a great resource for small group leaders or the Sunday school class of a local church. I think Lois Tverberg has a lot of helpful points to make that evangelicals ought to hear and she puts it in the type of readable format that allows her to gain an audience. It is an enjoyable read. It is applicable. It is pastoral. It is informative. I learned from it and I imagine others will as well.

[1] 201, n. 24

[2] 21

[3] 27-29

[4] 33

[5] 70

[6] 118

[7] 137

[8] 146

About these ads


by 4 Comments

The NFL and Christian Theology: Day Five: Dazzled or Discipled.

Guest Post: Jeremy Cushman

A Cushman routine!

Ever since the day I first laid eyes on the green & yellow jerseys of the Green Bay Packers, I’ve been a fan of football. In fact, it’s nearly impossible for me to think of fall without thinking of football (especially since a tradition of mine every year on the day fall officially begins is to watch Remember the Titans). What I think I love the most about football is watching a great game with close friends. It allows you to be distracted from the mundane parts of life, even if only for a few hours.

In my ten years of going to church, football has always seemed to be a part of the experience as well. Here in Eugene, it’s mostly about college football – congregants talking about Saturday’s big game, injuries, favorite players, etc. But after a bit the focus shifts to the NFL because the pastors formed a fantasy league through the church’s men’s group(s)… and church is usually on the same day as most NFL games. And on the days where I managed to avoid the football discussions, I somehow have noticed (or have been) that guy wearing a jersey. I’ve sometimes wondered if God secretly wears a Manning jersey.

All throughout these experiences of NFL and church mixed together, I’ve been able to notice a few things that are a little odd. For instance, most NFL fans are relaxed in their attire and demeanor – dressing up in their team’s colors and cheering when they score or make a big stop on defense. Church-goers, on the other hand, tend to be dressed nicely and are emotionally reserved – only raising their hands during worship and only if their neighbors are doing it, too.

The Oregon Ducks have a similar color arrangement to the Green Bay Packers. Cushman roots for these two teams. Coincidence?

Another one is many NFL fans will sit in one chair/position for countless hours despite whatever the conditions may be whereas church-goers start eyeing the clock twenty minutes into a sermon. And when it’s all over, NFL fans tend to remember many of their favorite plays and moments from the game (even if it had nothing to do with the game itself) while many church-goers remember vague topics or maybe a couple of the pastor’s jokes. It seems fans are care-free while church-goers are care-ful.

I have often wondered what this might mean. Should pastors and their leadership teams find new and innovative ways to spice up their Sunday mornings? Maybe start with an upbeat worship song and then have a very interactive sermon? Or what if we simply gave Jesus a jersey number? Would things change then? Or perhaps church-goers – those dedicated to the movement of Christ – should call into question the various areas and ways in which societal influence has had an affect on the church-going experience?

We live in an entertainment-based society. If we aren’t dazzled within the first few seconds of a TV show, movie, or even a book, we tend not to be very engaged throughout the rest. I discovered my own entertainment-seeking tendencies when I first read Faulkner for an English class in college. But think of all the games people tend to have on their cell phones. I just received an iPhone 4 for a birthday gift and already I’ve been hooked to only a couple games. I don’t even want to imagine what’ll happen when I discover newer games. Maybe by then I’ll be better at Words With Friends… Okay, no. Probably not.

Nooooo! Ref!

Is football or the NFL to blame for all these attention-span problems? No, I don’t think so. But there are certain influences that I think tend to mar or blur or dilute one’s Sunday experience with God and His people. On my own blog, I’ve written a recent post about how things like watching NFL games might be a way to draw a fellowship a little closer together. I think every time I’ve watched the Super Bowl I’ve done so with friends from church.

But should such an event be the center of focus when the church is gathering to worship, seek, and learn from God? I think most of us would say not at all. And what about the rest of the week? Should things like the NFL take precedence over our own spiritual formation as individuals or as a church body on days when we don’t meet together? Again, I think we’d all say no. But I think there’s a way in which we’re influenced on a daily basis that causes us to form various habits – habits that seem to result in us finding ways to “pass the time.”

Christ’s call to His disciples is so very different from one’s favorite NFL team’s call to their fans. Christ tells us flat out that we must be sold out: “Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it,” (Matt. 10:39, ESV). What would an NFL team ask of their fans? Buy all the gear, watch all the games, spend some money on their ridiculously-priced tickets, spend more money at the food concessions, etc., etc. It sounds similar in a sense: One’s spending all of one’s money on the team. But what’s given in return? Freedom? Eternal salvation? Peace? Hope? Or just a few hours of distraction every Sunday morning or afternoon?

What I hope not to imply is that we need to be more superficially-enthralled into every gathering of our church or that the NFL is evil. It solves nothing to remove one extreme and replace it with another. It’d be the same problem, but with a different color. And frankly I also hope no one’s expecting me to come up with a three-point solution to the problem. I don’t think such a thing exists. What I do hope for, though, is that as we gather with the church or read our Bibles on our own or meet up with fellow believers to talk about spiritual stuff that we are truly being genuine with ourselves and with each other. Even if one person is wearing a Packers jersey while the other is wearing a Bears jersey, my hope is that we’d be aware of John 13:35, “By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another,” (ESV).

My home church, Emmaus Life (brand new seven weeks ago), was founded with the main objective of bringing Jesus’ abundant life – His real, genuine life – to a hurting world. If on Sundays (or Monday or Thursday nights) we act how the fandom culture of the NFL tells us we’re supposed to act, we can’t really deliver this real life. Would anyone really sense anything different about us if we’re cussing out the refs on a terrible call or shirking responsibility to family and friends because the game is on? I highly doubt it. And I certainly don’t think God wants us taking that risk.

Wear your colors, cheer for your team, but do so in such a way that God is reflected. And maybe, just maybe, we’d find a way to wade through this world with its entertainment-based ways.

God bless.

Jeremy Cushman is a blogger at The Cushman Chronicles, a University of Oregon grad, and a former children’s pastor. He enjoys coffee, books, grammar, ping pong, theology, and pizza. Currently he works for the University of Oregon’s bookstore, but hopes to attend seminary and/or serve as a pastor. Also, he thinks you are cool, even though he probably hasn’t met you.


by 11 Comments

Educating the local church (Pt. III): what do congregations need to know?

Prior posts:

Pt. I: introduction
Pt. II: the concerns of pastors

Would it benefit the local church to offer classes in ancient Hebrew and Koine Greek?

In the first two parts of this series I pondered the future of Christian education as relates to the local church. More specifically, I proposed that congregations may benefit from the doctrine wars taking place in Christian educational institutions. I am quite aware that many of the debates that have caused problems for professors in colleges and seminaries exist in churches too: debates about “inerrancy,” the impact of critical scholarship, the compatibility of evolutionary theory with the Christian narrative, gender roles, and so forth. I think the major difference between finding employment at a college or seminary and finding employment with a church is that there are far more churches. The number of Christian liberal arts colleges or seminary presidents and board members is dwarfed by lead pastors. Theoretically, if education is an important part of discipleship, then there may be more of an opportunity for newly minted graduated of doctoral programs to use their talents and gifting in a local church setting rather than in the traditional classroom.

I could be wrong.

I think one thing that scares most pastors when considering the hiring of a recent graduate of the University of Durham, or Duke University, or Wheaton College, or Fuller Theological Seminary is (1) this person might undermine my authority on doctrinal matters and (2) this person might be unable to translate his/her academic speech to the people in the pews.

As far as the first point is concerned, let’s make this simple: There are bound to be prospective employees whose doctrinal views come close to that of the pastors. It may help to hire someone from the same institution where the pastor graduated. For example, if a pastor did his M.DIV or D.MIN at Dallas Theological Seminary he might want to browse the list of students graduating from their doctoral programs. On the other hand, pastors, if you can’t work with someone unless they affirm every single view you hold on everything from how to understand Genesis 1 to various points about eschatology then maybe you need to reevaluate how doctrine functions in your church–I will leave it at that.

When you are discipling people in one of the most unchurched cities in the country you find the grace to agree to disagree on some things.

As I noted in an earlier post, when I was teaching at my church in San Francisco I had the trust of the pastor. He did provide oversight, as it was his responsibility to do so, but we had an open and honest friendship. He knew I wanted what was best for the church. He wanted the same. Likewise, he knew that in San Francisco there are a lot of critical, skeptical thinkers. As someone who is both critical, skeptical, yet a Christian, I was an asset to the church, not a threat. I was helpful when it came to discipling those on the margins or evangelizing those with strong reservations about Christianity. My pastor was humble enough to know that Christian mission demands unity in essentials, liberty in non-essentials, and charity through and through. Now, I know that “the essentials” differs from church to church. I won’t pretend that this isn’t so. I do think that when I browse the “We Believe” sections of many churches that there are far too many boxes to check. If you are part of a denomination, fine, you have to adhere to this or that. BUT some of these independent churches with statements on how to interpret the six days of creation go too far, plain and simple. (Personally, I think local, independent churches should start with the Apostle’s Creed [maybe the Nicene Creed] and then discuss practical matters of ethics [gender roles, homosexual partnerships], liturgy [communion schedule, music styles], and mission. This allows the Spirit to mold an ethos in the church whereas rigid doctrinal statements are prone to ruin potentially fruitful missional partnerships.)

As to the second point–the main point–what can a pastor do to make sure that the teacher s/he hires isn’t so academically minded that s/he is not ecclesial good? Well, churches “preview” pastors by having them come preach. Maybe a church could have a potential pastor come teach and preach? This would allow them to observe the teacher’s social intelligence.

For some people these discussions are relevant, but it is unlikely that most people care or understand.

Listen, I understand, it makes little sense for a teacher to spend an hour on Wednesday evening talking about the JEDP theory of the development of the Pentateuch or the Synoptic Problem. Sure, there are people in the church who think about these things and it would be great to have someone who is informed about these matter who can sit and talk with these inquisitive minds, but teaching church groups is far more complex, i.e. a church is (usually) not a seminary classroom. When I taught at churches in San Francisco and Portland many people in my classes where their latter years, some fighting illness, some were developmentally delayed, some were addicts, some were homeless. For most, it didn’t matter if the 2 Peter borrowed from Jude or Jude from 2 Peter. I’m sympathetic to pastors who care for people who have hard lives, but who want them to grow in their knowledge as Christians without being squished by the weight of theoretical topics like whether the author of the Fourth Gospel knew of the Gospel of Thomas. (Though, as I’ve said, there are people in local churches who do read widely and who do ask these questions and it helps to have someone who is not afraid to address their inquiries.)

I mentioned some of the ideas I had for educating and discipling a church in Pt 1. Potential hires may need to present the senior/lead/executive pastor with their goals and desired outcomes. People applying to teach at colleges have CVs so maybe something similar would help.

Let’s make this a conversation if you are willing. If you are a pastor, or if you foresee yourself pastoring, or if you are invested in your local church and these things matter to you, then maybe you can answer some questions for me:

(1) What would concern you about hiring someone academically inclined to be a director of education or teaching pastor at your church?

(2) What do academic types need to know about local congregational life?

(3) What do congregations need to know and what type of information do you think would distract them? 

(4) What are some doctrinal essentials that are not negotiable (or what does an incoming teacher have to affirm that you affirm for the partnership to work)? 


by 5 Comments

The complexity of becoming and rebecoming a Christian.

“We need to push away the notion that church is something to which some people sign up in one go and one way.”

- Rowan Williams

There are many doomsday nay-sayers who either bemoan or rejoice whenever they hear of a “study” that indicates a massive decline among Christians of the younger generation. Often some think tank like The Barna Group or The Pew Forum will announce that the percentage of Christian ages X-Y has declined “this much” over a period of so many years. Christians in their forties and older fret that their children will not share their religious values forgetting that they had to go through the same rejection-to-rediscovery process when they were younger. It is common for young Christians to reject their religion as they reach the college age only to rediscover it has resurrected when they become parents themselves, at least this is what a recent study out of Baylor University suggests (see the WSJ article, “Religion and the Bad News Bearers”).

Now I am not a parent so I cannot imagine the sense of panic that is felt by parents who hear their children tell them, “I don’t believe in God.” My mother went through such an experience with me when as a thirteen or fourteen year old I discovered the word “Deist” and owned it. If atheist know there is no deity, and agnostics aren’t sure, deist presume that a deity or two likely exist, but that they are busy doing their own thing as the world spins. I did not find the God of Christianity plausible since he refused to answer most every prayer I prayed. I assumed that our existence demanded something other than mere chance (to this day I cannot fathom such a suggestion), but I was quite sure that whoever may exist he didn’t know or care that I did.

By the time I graduated high school I had become a Christian. In part this had to do with the emotions related to what C.S. Lewis called “Heaven’s Hound” in that it felt like the Spirit chased me biting at my heels until I admitted that Jesus is Lord. While my mother was a Christian who pressed me to reconsider my faith my father was an atheist, so either path was available to me. I don’t deny my mother’s influence in my “conversion”, but I don’t think it is as simple as some sort of cultural conditioning. All that said, I feel like I am still becoming a Christian. Some become Christians, accept the teachings of their local church, and move on with it. I reconvert every other week it seems.

Above I mentioned a quote from Rowan Williams. It is taken from a talk I embedded as a video below. He speaks of the long road to becoming a Christian and how it isn’t the same journey for everyone. This is true. In the Gospel of John we have disciples like Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea. If it weren’t for the insight provided by 19.38-39 we’d have no idea that Nicodemus converted. When we left him in the third chapter he was baffled by Jesus’ statements about being “born again”. In the next chapter his failure to understand Jesus is directly juxtaposed with a Samaritan woman who understands Jesus. He seems like a lost soul, yet he emerges as a disciple. Joseph’s story isn’t as detailed, but apparently his friends didn’t know he was a disciple.

Sometimes I wonder if disciples know they are disciples?

I have friends who forsook the Christian religion either in their late teens or early twenties. Some have returned, some are considering returning, some don’t seem interested. One thing that I’ve come to understand is that I don’t have to know where they are in relation to Christ. I pray for them. I ask the questions when appropriate. I try to answer theirs. Yet it isn’t my task to force reconversion, nor do I have the right to judge whether or not in some mysterious way they are walking with Christ as I am, though they are less public about it, or even self-aware.

The disciples in the Gospel of John who are “secret disciples” are another reason why I refuse to predetermine how God works and how God saves. While we examine people in the moment God can see the whole life, beginning to end. God is not limited by whether someone accepts his Son as Lord right now at 7:30 AM PST on the 29th of February in the year 2012 (when this line was written). God knows the beginning from the end and he is patient. God wants all to come to him, but he doesn’t often intervene like he did in the life of Saul of Tarsus.

To my friends who want to be Christians, but who struggle with the church (something I struggle with several times a week), or who have been hurt my other Christians, or who have found the Christianity they received to be incompetent in addressing the world around them, I ask that you keep walking. You may find one day that you’ve been a disciple of Christ for quite some time and you didn’t even realize it.


by 25 Comments

Christian discipleship and affiliation with a political party.

Republican for Jesus? Democrat? Other?

OK, so today’s question is this: Do you see your affiliation with a particular political party as having something to do with your discipleship? In other words, are you a Republican because you think abortion is the most serious matter facing Christians or a Democrat because social services for the poor is the greatest concern for Christians? Even if you are not in the United States it would be interesting to hear from people in other countries as well. Please tell me what party you support and why you support it.

Also, I’d like to hear from those who are intentional about not aligning with any one party because of your Christian convictions. 


by Leave a comment

Craig Evans on Jesus’ pedagogy.

Tomorrow we will have another post from Dr. Craig A. Evans available on this blog (read last week’s “The future of historical Jesus studies”). Today I thought I’d share a small excerpt from a paper that he presented at New Orleans Baptist Seminary in February titled “Can We Trust the NT?” In context, Evans is challenging the view of the gospels that they either must be word for word accounts of what Jesus said without any adaption by the evangelist and the equal and opposite error that if there are any adaptions the historical Jesus is forever lost. This is a paragraph of note that I think is worth pondering:

“The stories and teachings of Jesus have been edited and contextualized in ways that lead to clarity. The teaching of Jesus has been applied in new ways and new insights have been discovered as his followers encounter fresh challenges. All of this reflects the way Jesus taught his disciples. It reflects the pedagogy of the time. The disciples were not tape-recorders, mere reciters of the Jesus tradition. They were disciples, trained to understand the teaching of Jesus, not simply to repeat it word for word. They were trained to apply it as they gave leadership to the following of Jesus, a following that in time became known as the church.” (p. 26)

In other words, Evans is giving permission to more conservative readers to be OK with the fact that the four evangelist were not modern journalist. They did not write down the words of Jesus in order to have a good story for the sake of a long career with their local newspaper. Rather, they were disciples teaching other disciples what had been taught either to them by Jesus or to them by Jesus’ more direct disciples.


by 2 Comments

Intentionality in discipleship

When I was back home in San Francisco last weekend I caught the end of an event hosted by Lighthouse called Disciple! There were thirty or so people from around the country huddled together discussing what it means to live as disciples of Christ. San Francisco is a great place to have this discussion for various reasons including (1) it is not a Christian-friendly culture so “church growth” cannot be first and foremost; (2) it is a city that will challenge your convictions as you face world view with differing morality or as you try to proclaim Jesus in the heart of pluralism; (3) it is a place where you must live the faith as much as you proclaim it because hypocrisy can be seen from miles away.

Many Christians I know are afraid to be intentional about discipleship. There is a fear that repetitive practices can result in “legalism” or “Pelagianism”. Yet it has been my experience that while the Holy Spirit is the one who does the work of bringing change there is a reason for the imperatives of Scripture. We must “decrease so that he can increase” as Christ is formed in our lives.

This event was influenced by other communities who emphasize intentionality in discipleship like the Tacoma based Soma group. Yet this is not the only place where these things are being discussed. Another acquaintance of mine whom I met when I lived in San Francisco is Mark Scandrette. He has been lumped in with the emerging church though I don’t know that he is so easily labeled. He has a new book coming out titled Practicing the Way of Jesus wherein he explains how his community, ReImagine!, has lived a “Jesus Dojo” in the City. As with the Lighthouse community ReImagine! has also sought to think through the necessity of being intentional disciples of Christ.

In this video Scandrette explains some of the practices/experiments they have done:

As someone with a heart for San Francisco I am excited to see these various expressions in San Francisco. I am interested to hear the thoughts of others. How intentional do you think we need to be about being discipled and discipling others? Where is the intersection between this sort of living and passionate evangelism of non-Christians? Is there ever a danger that this sort of approach will turn us to “inward” in our spirituality? Thoughts?