Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [XTalk] XTalk on Peter: Originating Proclamation

Expand Messages
  • Gordon Raynal
    Hi Mark, I m cutting down to get to a comments and response to your question: ... Mark I note here you opt for the definite article (***the*** early church
    Message 1 of 9 , May 8 7:12 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Mark,

      I'm cutting down to get to a comments and response to your question:
      On May 7, 2009, at 4:16 PM, Matson, Mark (Academic) wrote:

      > Gordon Raynal argued on the "originating proclamation":
      >
      >>> Question One: What was the original proclamation (messaging) of the
      >>> community? What was it about?
      >>>
      >>> Phase I text? The Q1 Mission Program found in extant Luke 10:3-11.
      >>> Message: "say to them, The Kingdom of God has come near to you."
      >>> And so this program was at core about (per the directives of the
      >>> aforementioned), peace (shalom) declaration, shared table fellowship
      >>> (which, of course is
      >>> inclusive of the conversations), and "healing" in homes. Where "the
      >>> peace" was received and shared, then there would be another home on
      >>> the map to make
      >>> up a network of peace/ reconciliation places/ families & friends.
      >
      > A couple of notes on the exchange above:
      >
      > 1. At root, a basic issue is what was the major impetus for the
      > rise of
      > the early church?
      Mark I note here you opt for the definite article (***the*** early
      church (singular)). This sounds so organized and so, well,
      singular:)! Seriously, when I read such as Paul's Corinthian
      correspondence I'm not very moved to start with such singularity or
      sense of clear organization! When I look to the earliest evidences I
      can find, I find a none too surprising diversity in various locales.
      And for historical purposes I think the term "movement" is a more
      helpful term... so we're talking a movement with a lot of diverse
      voices in it. This makes entire sense to me in a reconciliation
      movement, as opposed to a sharply ideological movement. Rush
      Limbaugh's pushing Republican Purity (his definition) is doing a fine
      job of driving folks away;)!

      >
      > 3. Assuming Q (as most economist jokes start "assume a free
      > market", we
      > can also begin many hypothetical discussions with "assume Q), Jesus
      > appears to focus on the coming kingdom. Of course Mark does too at the
      > beginning of his gospel, the first preaching of Jesus. But that is
      > not
      > the necessarily the preaching of the church in its earliest
      > evangelical
      > form.

      What literature doesn't focus on the Kingdom of God? Even if you
      want to approach the question(s) as you do, the proclamation of the
      cross/ resurrection kerygma is all about the Kingdom of God, right?

      > The sending of the 12 or 70 was not evangelistic so much as
      > exploring the power of God in his kingdom -- though it could be
      > anticipatory (progymnasmata training exercises) for a coming
      > evangelism
      > of the church.

      And here is where we disagree.

      >
      > 4. What I would want to know from Gordon, is whether he sees the
      > death
      > and resurrection of Jesus as the primary formative event for the
      > church.
      > Or does he see a church formed based on Jesus' preaching, and which
      > only
      > later added on the importance of the resurrection of Jesus. In other
      > words, was it Jesus as subject of the preaching content or Jesus as
      > object of preaching content that drove the earliest church to form
      > as an
      > ongoing replicative social unit?

      You give me an either/or question and I'm going to answer,
      "neither:)!" Again you use the definite article, "the" ("the
      primary formative event") of "the church." As noted, I really want
      to frame approaching my suggested questions in a different way. To
      your questions and my "neither" answer, I want to suggest that what
      we see emerge out of late Second Temple Judaism is a reconciliation
      movement (to work off of Paul's summary phrasing). I see this as a
      social development, not as a movement inaugurated by one person or
      response to one person. For the sake of a modern analogy I would
      suggest something like the organization of the Southern Christian
      Leadership Conference. We're talking the coming together among
      friends and associates over some years to form a distinctive
      movement. The dynamism of this comes from response to a real need
      (here... reconciliation work/ with the SCLC the need for civil rights
      for African Americans). That dynamism is spurred by key voices and
      the broader conversations that are evoke. The dynamism of a
      reconciliation movement, as opposed to an core ideological movement,
      is very vital as diverse voices join in and only grows as that
      diversity grows. Hence, they are messy. And these reconciliation
      folks were an arguing lot! The eventual canon (a much later work, of
      course) shows us what were considered to be the tolerable limits of
      that diversity, but then those decisions began to be worked out over
      a hundred years after Jesus. So, I have to answer, "neither."

      Now to Jesus, I think he became "the lead voice" in this circle of
      friends and associates. I actually think "teacher" is the wrong term
      to use to describe him. The authentic language we have from him, in
      my view, is found in the aphorisms and parables... in other words
      "wisdom speech." Wisdom words as wisdom words, don't "teach," they
      alert and orient and stir conversations and stir imaginations. They
      are evocative "wonder" and "wondering words." The word "sage" is
      closer to a descriptive titling, but I think the better way to talk
      of Jesus is that he was "a man of aphorisms and parables." The
      "dynamic juicing" so such language sharing is powerful. I think with
      imaginations stirred, then sharing "the peace" led to the organizing
      of a movement to share this experience. The mission agenda we find
      described in and/ or assumed/ talked about in Q, Thomas, the
      Synoptics, John, Paul's letters, Acts, etc. was a key inaugural
      moment in that it intentionally spread the reconciliation experience
      beyond the confines of the original family, friends and associates.
      Per that mission agenda, this was "a two by two to homes" movement,
      hence it was a social operation. And per all the gospels and the
      fact that we're still talking about it, it "worked." (or it "can"
      work). That the lead "imaginator," who was mercilessly killed by the
      "Pax" they were responding to, became the iconic embodiment of the
      whole thing is no surprise. To be sure, there were fears and
      fallings away in the midst of that horror, but that didn't kill this
      movement, it spurred it on! And that cross could not kill the
      imaginative power of Jesus' potent language. Those words still
      "worked" and still do "for those with ears to hear:)!"

      To end on some shameless self promotion:)! "The 4th R" has just
      published the first of two articles by me on wisdom speech (this
      article) and Jesus as a wisdom communicator (the next edition). I
      hope some might be interested in reading it. Also I want to give a
      shout out to Hal Taussig's new book, "In the Beginning Was the
      Meal." It is fresh off the presses and I just got my copy. I urge
      all to read it.



      Good to chat.

      Gordon Raynal
      Inman, SC
      >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.