Chapter 16 - Into All the World

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, but you were not willing! (Luke 13:34; NKJV)

What in the world do Jesus' words to the city He loved so much have to do with Paul and his extraordinary commitment to bring the Gospel to the world - the Gentiles? Well, as I read through this chapter, I was drawn back to these words and to thoughts of a chosen people. Drane briefly introduces us to the churches that Paul and Barnabas seeded as they travelled through Cyprus, Pisidia, Lycaonia, and back to Syria. The author says that "as a result of Paul's visits to these [areas], many Gentiles came to believe in Jesus Christ. (p. 293) But not long on his heals came "emissaries from the Jerusalem church" (p. 293) who came to tear down the work that Paul and Barnabas had done. For these "judaizers" true Christian faith in God still relied on being a part of the Abrahamic community. For me, this is where Jesus' earlier words come into significance.

The children of Abraham were God's chosen people, His special children. To the patriarch a blessing had been given, and through his line the world would be blessed. (Genesis 12:1-3) And true enough, God had made covenant with the Hebrew people - one that included Law and sacrifice. This people would remain close to their God and to each other through the keeping of the Law, including the holy days and rituals - including circumcision. But Abraham's children didn't honor God as He had desired. The rituals that were intended to bind together, the people used to separate. Religious and social classes, afforable and "more" pleasing sacrifices created castes and God would look upon it no more. (Amos 5:21-26) Their religious, political, and social appetites became far more important to them than proper relationships with their Creator.

Jesus, God, has always had a special heart for the children of Abraham. Jerusalem should have been the real "city on a hill," but it just wasn't that way. Jesus told a parable of a wedding banquet. (Matthew 22:1-14) As you remember the point of Christ's story that day, aren't you so glad that God didn't waste the feast - that He sent for those who were not originally invited to join in the celebration. But Christ's words that day He was entering Jerusalem betray the hurt that God feels for the wounded relationship between Him and His chosen people.

In the banquet parable, the king sends his messengers into the streets to find anyone who wants to come - come freely - as they were. How could these newly invited guests have been prepared in the same way as those who had received an invitation days, weeks, months earlier. They would have no special gift. They could buy no new clothes - only wear the best of what they owned. In short, they were not the same people who the king had originally invited - but now, they were just as welcomed. They weren't asked to change themselves - being in the king's presence would be enough to bring about desired results. And maybe all this (and more) is why I think of the tears of the King, as He ponders the future of His beloved city. Then I think of His wonderful banquet, and I thank Him so much that He sent His servant Paul into the streets of the world to find those of us who were not originally invited.

Chapter 15 - Paul the Persecutor

Maybe it's just me - but the way Drane starts this chapter off feels like an action flick to me. I can hear the husky, male voice of a voice over announcer now:

"In a day when Christians began to spread like a bad itch - one man was willing and able to do whatever it took to stop this vermin! With the weight of the Sanhedrin behind him, and the authority of the proconsul giving him a ticket to do whatever it took - he's the bounty hunter that can't be stopped. Christians have seen what happens when this one's out to get you - run to Damascus, but you can't hide. It's Paul - the Persecutor! In theatres everywhere January 25. Rated PG for some violence."

Alright, I did say that maybe it was just me - but I had to get that out. Seriously though, I think of aul, and his conversion in the same way that I began to articulate about the last chapter. All that Paul had been through, all that he had learned, all that he had done - all that he was made him the perfect person to be the "Apostle Paul." Drane looks at Paul's conversion on the road to Damascus and calls it one of the most important moments "in the entire history of the early church." (p. 282) And how! Paul was known for being the determined, and religiously determined man who would do anything it took to bring down Christians and their faith. We don't have to stretch our minds to hard to think about what that looks like in our own time. I think of young men today, whose own convictions drive then to violently suicidal lengths to destroy those who bring a voice against their beliefs. In some ways, Saul of Tarsus was similar to these type of fellows.

He had stood by, at the very least, the day that Stephen was martyred. I don't recall having heard the perspective that Drane shared before - that Paul may have betrayed his sympathies to the Christian movement, by standing back during Stephen's death. And, it just might be true. Perhaps Paul was one of the most conflicted individuals going at that time. Maybe it was the whirlwind going on within him that drove him to bring such storm into the lives of those he chased. Paul couldn't have been surprised when the Jerusalem church was afraid of him, and suspicious of his motives - he had earned that "respect." But who else, but one who was such an enemy, could after having seen and knwon the truth become such an advocate. As pain drove him to deliver pain in others, freedom would now do the same.

Chapter 14 - Introducing Paul

Drane does a nice job of introducing us to a man who's life should serve as an encourgement to any of us - and a man with a great name. Raised in the traditions of his cultural fathers, developed into a religious authority, exposed to great patterns of thinking and understanding, Paul stands out as a man God knew and prepared from before his birth. It is hard to imagine the depths our Christian understanding would take, even today, if Paul had refused Christ's call all those years ago.

From his youth, Paul was "sent away from Taursus to the center of the Jewish world, Jerusalem." (p. 267) It was there that he would begin his religious education, and build his ferver for the Jewish ways. Studying under one of the more respected Rabbis of his time, Gamaliel, Paul grew in his understanding and position within the religious community. Like many people, Paul probably wanted to be successful in his career, and I wonder if maybe this drove him later as he chased Christians about the countryside.

Drane also observes that Paul's hometown of Tarsus was a hub for philosophical discussion, and Paul may have been particularly exposed to Stoicism. Some have argued that Paul actually did not preach or teach true Christianity, but rather a blend of Stoicism and the Faith. Sure he used many of their concepts to explain his understanding of the Gospel message, but this demonstrates his ability to relevantly communicate to his contemporaries, instead of him blending religion and philosophy. In exploring the Apostle's communication style, Drane points out that there can be "no doubt Paul would know and sympathize with many Stoic ideals," (p. 271) but this knowledge gave him an inroad into the community through its language and culture.

In a similar way, Drane explores Paul's relationship with the mystery religions of the time, and concludes that Paul's relationship to them was limited to awareness. Again, he would use their currency to impact the people involved in the cults. I think about the road that is erceived to be rocky that Paul took with the Jerusalem church. Maybe, if there was tension - and it seems there was - it's because of how God prepared and used the man. He had come from the same old thing, but he wasn't that anymore. He was a difference of a different kind - and that maybe his ministry something new. Even today, we flinch at the thought of change - and sometimes the women and men who sense God calling them in new directions meet the stiffest opposition from within the very church they come. Paul's life and ministry can serve each of as an example of what God is capable of doing with those who will give themselves to Him.

Chapter 10 - Understanding the Gospels

Just a quick blurb / comment on this 10th chapter!

I think Drane's most astute comment of the whole chapter came about a third the way through. He says, "So to understand the gospels fully is a rather complex business." (p. 173) Drane's writing focuses primarily on technicalities:

• What type of writing are they? Are they biography, collections of various works, kerygma (or preaching), narratives, or something else?
• The answer is "yes." Perhaps it is "D" if that means "All of the above."

Drane goes on to show how the anonymous evangelists would have sourced each other and a yet unfound, yet much postulated document called "Q," to construct their individual Gospel accounts. Drawing on the Old Testament, a record of Jesus' own teachings and earliest remembrances of His life (Q - Quelle), Matthew and Luke would each have had Mark's record of Peter's memories on which to draw.

Analysis of the historical documents available to scholars leads to contention - and for some in the world of Biblical study, the issues surrounding authenticity and authorship remain unanswerable. Blind acceptance of anything does not necessarily lead to fact, but those who want to find fault with the Gospels and the understanding and traditions of the historical Church always will. For me, I agree with Drane that understanding the Gospels can be complex - I'd just rather focus on their lessons than their composition.

Chapter 13 - Engaging the Wider World

"After the resurrection of Jesus, his followers were faced with some hard choices." (p. 237) Yes they were; yes we are. As I read this chapter, I couldn't help but think that I was actually reading about the Church today. But I guess in a lot of ways, I was. The story of the first Church is our story too.

"[What] was so different about Jesus - and what was to set his followers radically apart from Judasim [/the world] - was the framework in which he set his teaching." (p. 238) Jesus, although He seemingly spoke in ways that may have opposed the Law or Torah, actually was talking about living in a way that pleases God rather than obeys the black and white of the written word. Today, Christians have the same struggle - to break free of codification and live as a people who have the "law in their minds and [written] on their hearts." (Jer. 31:33, NIV) God still judges our character by our inner nature, and not from our adherence to religious rules.

Yet, there are still many in the Church today, just as there were in those first days who judge others (inside the Church and out) on the merits of accomplishment. For many in the first century, the task to be completed was the loss of a little (yet surely painful) flesh. Today, in some circle we contest on the form of baptism, or the volume of water used. Is the "Torah" we have created in some areas today, and our obedience to it, any more pleasing to God than it was in those first days. It should be no wonder to us, that we see new congregations emerge from those who maintain the Law at all costs - this is what happened in Palestine those many years ago.

And yet, perhaps this must happen - perhaps it is a part of God's plan. If the local church (its buildings, programs, and liturgies) is a place of comfort and warmth, a womb if you please, then there must be a period of gestation, and an inevitable time of birth. Just as Peter was propped up and given the necessary strength to stand before the masses and preach by the Holy Spirit, should we surprised when such things happen today? Perhaps the local church is continuously "in the process of being born." (p. 243)

As our congregations grow, and diversify in character, should we expect that everyone found within them will always agree on every issue - sometimes even matters of serious importance. Just as conflicts arose in those early days which caused the Church to spread, perhaps today the same is happening. As painful as congregational separations are, dispersion of Christocentric, Bible preaching, evangelical local church groups may actually provide the world with more opportunities to hear the Gospel than would otherwise be possible.

Now I'm not saying that I'm certain of any of this, but maybe it's worth a little thought. Maybe we each need moments in our lives, like Peter, when God reaches through what we think we know, to teach us what we need to know.

Chapter 12 - Can We Trust the Gospels?

Sorry I'm so late gang - some times there are balances to be made between church and school - and this week has been a tough one to do right!

One of Drane's opening remarks to this chapter is that there are serious students of the Gospels who will say that they "reveal nothing of importance about Jesus, [and] we need to take serious account of their arguments." (p. 218) It's not that I want to be disagreeable with everything that comes my way in life, but I really don't take the author's side on this one.

Sure there are challenges to be found in the messages: at best they are each Greek written translations of Aramaic oral moments in time, and plenty of their stories overlap - yet somehow diverge at times. But, that's all minor stuff isn't it? Drane is right to point out that even today we have news media and legal systems that generate and procure differently sourced, and told stories of same incidents in life.

Maybe Drane is right when he says that "Western thinkers have often imagined that only people like them are capable of making rational assessments of" (pp. 222-3) historical information. Perhaps many of us are intellectually imperial in our ways of thinking, but that doesn't really get the heart of Drane's point that many think the Gospels have nothing significant to offer about Jesus' life. Using the language and context of His day, Jesus claimed to be no one shy of God-with-us. Either the Gospels did shout out the good news, or Jesus was a lying lunatic. Any way you look at it - that's significant.

Chapter 11 - Four Portraits of Jesus

How amazing is it that God has graced us today with the preserved message of His Son - kept through the distinctive writers of the four gospels. Imagine if our churches only had one frame of mind - if no one thought differently than the others. Imagine a Christian community that contained no differing vision. Imagine a body of believers who just saw every issue in life through the exact same lens. As easy on the brains as that might seem at first blush - how useful would it truly be to the world around it? This will seem trite, but it is the many facets of a diamond that make it shine.

It's with that sort of view that I see the four Gospels. We are truly blessed to have such a wonderful and lovingly told set of stories about the moments in Jesus' life the evangelists thought important to our salvation. Now, again, imagine if they all agreed down the line - or if only one had been recorded. Just the thought is somehow saddening. I think it was Lee Strobel who pointed out the significance of the different views - stating that their differences in telling the same stories is the part that is so significant to their credibility. I'm not sure Strobel and Drane would necessarily agree on the "who came first, and who looked at whose Gospel" discussion, but even still there is truth in what Strobel points out.

All the Gospels are written anonymously, sure enough, but that shouldn't stop us from accepting the traditions of the Church Fathers, and our own understanding of human circumstance. Drane points out that Mark from Acts et. al. was remembered to be Peter's interpreter. Drane continues on to point out that "a number of the stories [Marcan] are told with such vivid details that it is natural to regard them as first-hand." (p. 196) I think of my own times of reflection and in telling the stories that have shaped my life to date. Sometimes, when I recount these days of my past, I find myself in a "thousand mile stare." I guess my point is about the weight these moments (and now their stories) have played in my life. The stories found in Mark's Gospel may have been very personal to Peter - I would have loved to watch him tell them.

Luke and Matthew, says Drane (and the rest of the world of Biblical academia - I guess ;-p) borrowed from Mark, a yet revealed Q document, and perhaps Matthew peeked at Luke's work. You know, I don't think that's all that big a deal - it challenges my previous thinking that the Gospels must be independent to be credible (or more to the point, I probably have never really given it any thought, and react that they MUST be independent). But what that thought doesn't do is take down anything I have built on the strong foundation of Jesus Christ - the same One whose story is told in these fantastic ways. On an other note, I don't have any problem accepting Matthew, Mark, Luke and John as the authors either.

In his discussion about the Gospel According to St. John, Drane made a rather interesting remark about the different opinions within the church surrounding it. He says that the differences in John's work to that of the synoptic writers "led to heated debates about the relative value of their respective accounts of the life and teaching of Jesus." (p. 210) We just don't get sometimes. The Church is a place of diversity, yet with complete focus on Christ. If we would even just look at the Gospels, we might begin to see how beautifully a diamond can shine.