Pentecostal Discussions

Initial Evidence

by David Parker

Either side of Pentecost similar Spirit activity occurs, for example, Zechariah the priest prophecies (Lk 1:67) as does Agabus (Acts 11:27), and the 12 (new leaders in Israel: Lk 22:30) ^[1] heal and exorcise (Lk 9:1) as does Philip (Acts 8:7). Such duplication raises the question as to what distinction Pentecost introduces. My contention is that prior to Pentecost, periodic and ethnocentric salvation-historically significant individuals (eg. Zechariah the priest) are Spirit inspired for specific tasks, whereas post-Pentecost the Spirit is universalized (eg. Cornelius and Philip’s daughters). This is best expressed in Peter’s polemic citing Joel’s prophecy, “I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh…and they will prophesy” (Acts 2:17-18). “All flesh” is unpacked as, all genders (“sons and daughters” 2:17), all ages (“young men… old men” 2:17), and all status (“my slaves” 2:18). If we add the promise of 2:39 and understand “those who are far away” as a reference to Gentiles (cf. Acts 22:21; Eph 2:13, 17), ^[2] then a further democratization includes all nations or ethnicities.

Cool Churches

I stole the following quote from the Leadership http://blog.christianitytoday.com/outofur/ blog, since i thought it had potential application for contemporary churches.

The church has bought into this idea that if we make Jesus look cool, we win. But we're really trying to make ourselves look cool, not Jesus. We certainly need to repent of that.

-Donald Miller, author of Blue Like Jazz and speaker at the 2006 Catalyst Conference
Taken from “Not Here to Make Jesus Cool” in the Summer 2006 issue of Leadership Journal. To see the quote IN context click on the cover of Leadership on this page.

War & Peace 3: The Just War Theory

by Stephen Wall

First of all, before I begin, I would like to convey my initial thought on the phrase “A Just War”. A question arises when I hear the phrase spoken. Can war actually be just? As humanity, are we capable of making a just judgement completely free of any kind of bias towards our own end? It is my opinion that this simply is not possible – every war that has ever been fought has its own agenda in sight, for it is humanity’s sinful nature that causes war.[1] It is then my proposition that one cannot have a truly “just war”, however I do believe that war may be justified if it meets various principles or scenarios and these need to be met before a nation can engage in it.

Below is a link to a clip I watched that some might be interested in. I found it fascinating as it told a story that was not told in mainline news and it forced me to ask the question. How can we make a correct judgement to what is right in going to war if we are fed lies and political propaganda?

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=10211 

http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=66951

War & Peace 2 - Middle Ground

by Caroline Quek

When it comes to the topic on War, a Christian’s response usually supports the view of either just war or pacifism. The aim of this article is to investigate the possibility of having a ‘middle ground’, thus challenging some of the mindsets on war and peace. However, this task may seem impossible, as the terms ‘just war’ and ‘pacifism’ seem to be on opposing ends. Instead of launching into the exploration of the two opposites (where each define itself against the other), perhaps it is helpful for us to start on a positive note by looking at some commonalities.

“Christians do not all agree about the practical consequences of Christ’s teaching regarding war but no Christian disagrees about Christ’s longing for a world committed to peace and justice.[1]”

In all that we disagree with, we can agree on the ‘principle’ driving our actions and that is striving towards a world of peace and justice (although our definitions of it may vary). It is interesting to note how the longing to fulfill a common purpose can result in such extreme views! The attitudes of the just war and pacifism are not rooted in different views of God, and only to a degree in different views of humanity, because of the recognition of the depravity of humanity[2].

War and Peace 1 - Pacifism

by Nicholas Mogensen

“Total abstention from violence is the only moral option for born-again Christian”. This posting will examine the evidence for the pacifist stance by investigation of Biblical precepts, the example of Jesus and of history. Attention will be given to opposing camps of thought, namely those advocating “necessary war” and “just war” to demonstrate that these positions are untenable for the faithful believer.

Insensitive reading of the OT[1] scriptures has led many to adopt the approach that war and violence are justifiable. Advocates here amplify Israel's history of atrocious warring, which is ostensibly the will of God. Two brief points that undermine this view are worthy consideration[2]. Firstly, Christians would unanimously disagree with the OT approach to war (cf. Josh 10:40, 1 Sam 15:1-3) Secondly, the theological theme underpinning OT warfare is that the battle is God’s, and not by the strength of his people. Note that often Israel received victory without the help of force[3]. In this light, the OT God is seen to despise human warfare, an attitude further exemplified by His Son, Jesus Christ[4]

Even Christian proponents of war would agree that Christ was a pacifist. Jesus exemplified a radical agapeic love that encompassed all humanity, a love that opposed retribution and violence. When Peter sought to use violence to protect the life of his Lord, Christ ordered him to desist and then healed the ear of the high priest’s servant. In response to shameful treatment, he called not on heavenly hosts or loyal followers to fight for him, rather accepting without murmur torture and death at men’s hands for their own sake. He taught that one must love ones neighbour[5], then radically extended neighbourliness beyond ethnic, religious or national boundaries[6]. His pacifism was costly, but it achieved the most revolutionary victory in history. Christians cannot but emulate his example[7].

Barrett Lectures: Frank Macchia

by Shane Clifton

My apologies for those following my poverty posts - for my lack of progression this last week.  We had Professor Frank Macchia as our guest lecturer for our annual Barrett lecture series.  He spoke on Koinonia, with much of his content drawn from his latest book, Baptized in the Spirit:

This is a highly recommended read - one of pentecostalism's leading scholars contemplating theology from a pentecostal perspective - not the narrow perspective of fundamentalist pentecostalism, but the open and ecumenically aware perspective that should constitute the theology of a Spirit oriented movement.

I am going to return to poverty soon - but need to break the series now to do it justice.  In the meantime, i am going to give you a series of student discussions on war and peace - pacifism and the just war theory.  Hope you enjoy!

Why has the church ignored the poor?

by Shane Clifton

We need to answer the question about how to help the poor – but before we do, we need to determine whether ministry to the poor is part of the church’s mission.  At first glance, it might seem to be self-evident that the church has a responsibility to the poor.  It is somewhat disheartening, however, to discover that religion, in general, and Christianity in particular, has been described as part of the problem; as something that needs to be put aside if the challenge of poverty is to be finally addressed.  As Karl Marx famously argued:

The social principles of Christianity justified the slavery of Antiquity, glorified the serfdom of the Middle Ages and equally know, when necessary, how to defend the oppression of the proletariat, although they make a pitiful face over it. The social principles of Christianity preach the necessity of a ruling and an oppressed class, and all they have for the latter is the pious wish the former will be charitable. The social principles of Christianity transfer the consistorial councillor’s adjustment of all infamies to heaven and thus justify the further existence of those infamies on earth. The social principles of Christianity declare all vile acts of the oppressors against the oppressed to be either the just punishment of original sin and other sins or trials that the Lord in his infinite wisdom imposes on those redeemed (1).

Extreme Poverty

by Shane Clifton

In the previous post i commented on the global poverty in terms of income.  The issue is that low incomes translates itself into untold sufffering of various dimensions. Here are some more terrible statistics from the HDR.

More than 10 million children die each year before the age of five, and more than 98% of these live in poor countries.  As the report notes, “they die because of where they are born,” a matter that is especially disturbing given that almost all “of these deaths could be prevented by simple, low-cost interventions.”[1]  In some countries more than 50% of children are considered to be underweight for their age, with more than 850 million people worldwide suffering the deleterious effects of malnutrition, which in turn makes them vulnerable to ill health and disease.  HIV/AIDS has had a particularly brutal impact on some countries, with infection rates in certain African nations exceeding 15% of the population.[2]  The effects of malnutrition and disease are exacerbated by the fact that “more than 1 billion people lack access to safe water and 2.6 billion lack access to improved sanitation.”[3]  Taken altogether, these interrelated dimensions of poverty pursue people throughout their lives, so that citizens of the worlds poorest 32 countries can expect to live an average of less than 46 years.  In Sub-Saharan Africa, people born in nations such as Zambia have a life expectancy of as little as 37 years,[4] a figure that is less than half of the average 80 year lifespan of citizens living in the world’s wealthiest nations. 

Global Poverty

by Shane Clifton

Sorry i have been ofline for a while (blogs are hard things to keep up to date).  I have been doing some writing with Professor Neil Ormerod on globalisation, and currently am addressing the situation of global poverty.  Without making any prescriptions or responses - the statistics themselves are fascinating:

According to the United Nations Development Program Human Development Report, more than 1 billion people survive (or don’t survive) on less that $1US a day.[1]  The figure at least stands as an indication of the almost overwhelming extent of poverty in the world.  Given that a further 1.5 billion people live on a mere $1-$2 per day, the challenge of the present age is the fact that more than 40% off the worlds population are subject to the consequences of extreme poverty.[2]  The moral reprehensibility of this poverty is clarified when it is considered in terms of global inequality.  One of the more oft-cited indicators of the magnitude of global income disparity is the fact that the wealthiest 500 people have a combined income that exceeds that of the poorest 416 million.  But this disparity extends to more than just the super wealthy.  Indeed, the richest 10% of the world’s population, which includes the majority of people in more prosperous nations, earn over 50% of global income.[3]

There is more to come - but this should be enough to get you thinking. 

---

[1] United Nations Development Program, Human Development Report 2005 (New York: United Nations  Development Program, 2005), 3.

[2] United Nations Development Program, Human Development Report 2005, 24.

[3] United Nations Development Program, Human Development Report 2005, 4.

Lets talk about sex

by Shane Clifton

Next week in my ethics class, i am addressing the topic of sexuality.  What you might expect in a lecture on human sexuality is a list of “thou shalt nots”; of restrictions, of sexual sins etc. You expect this because ‘restriction’ has been the almost exclusive focus of the church in its discussion of human sexuality, a discussion which is essentially negative, which limits sexuality to genital activity, and which has resulted in people being manipulated by guilt and repression. Indeed, the history of the church's perception on these issues makes for interesting read

• Origen castrated himself, since he believed that prayer and sex were self-contradictory
•  St Anthony had a vision in which the devil took the shape of a woman and imitated all her acts simply to beguile him. His response was to repress his body and kept it in subjection.