Skip to main content

The First Church

We often talk about the birth of the church at Pentecost as a completely new beginning. But was it? The event happened in Jerusalem, and the early believers often went to prayers at the temple or met in the temple portico. They were Jews, albeit from a variety of places.  Most of them only left Jerusalem as a result of persecution and a prophecy (Act 1:8). The fact that the early believers,   including leaders were Jews, means that as well as a new start we need to talk about continuity:
  • The same people
  • The same customs
  • The same location
  • Mostly the same beliefs
When new churches are planted today there will be some continuity with the past. We shouldn't be afraid of that. Much of it is good, as it keeps people where they should be, in their communities. The new thing we want to introduce is 'the word of the Lord' i.e. the good news that Jesus the Messiah is Lord (and God). The rest is not unimportant, in fact it might be very useful background to this message, but it is only foundational, at best.

Some working in mission like to see religions other than Judaism as a useful foundation, but they are less so. There isn't actually a continuity between Islam, for instance, and Christianity. On a timeline one (Christianity) began in the first century, the other (Islam) in the sixth or seventh. We cannot, therefore, draw a line backwards from Christianity to Islam! In fact Islam is probably best seen as a religion that came out of both Christianity and Judaism, the 'people of the book'. Nevertheless there is much to build on in Islam: God is Creator and Judge, the prophets were messengers who brought God's message to the people, Jesus the Messiah worked many miracles, and he will return on judgement day. Therefore many believers from a Muslim background are happy to acknowledge their Islamic roots, just as a Messianic Jew might acknowledge his or her Jewish roots. It's not all about change, guys, it's also about continuity!
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Flow Chart for Bible Translation (a Relevance Theory Approach)

One of the current theories behind modern translation work is Relevance Theory. [1] Here is a flow chart that explains the process often used to produce a draft when using such an approach: *Make sure your translation committee makes the decision as to what kind of translation they want. A domesticated translation is one that submits to dominant values in the target language [2] whereas a foreignized translation is one that is happy to import foreign terms and ideas from Hebrew, Greek, or the language of wider communication such as the Greek term baptizo . The chart looks something like this: Text                                   Communicated Ideas                  Context A sower went out to sow  A farmer went out to sow grain   People scattered/threw seed etc. The text has very little information, but behind i...
Post a Comment
Read more

Asset Based Bible Translation (ABBT)

Many of you will have heard of asset-based community development (ABCD). How can Bible translation programmes be asset based, rather than deficit based? The best way to look at this is a comparison table: Deficit based Asset based Driven by outsiders Driven by the community Outside funding Community funded Done to meet a need Done to help the community grow Quality control done by a consultant Community checked and approved Control from outside-in Lead by stepping back Products not accepted? Products are accepted Little engagement Engagement with products Scientific Organic Not sustainable Sustainable Of course many translation programmes these days are neither one nor t'other, they are somewhere between these two extremes. Nevertheless, this illustrates a point, and shows that the current ...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Problems and Pitfalls of Proof-Texting

Why is it wrong to proof-text when making an argument?  Proof-texting is when someone simply quotes a verse from the Bible, out of context, to make a point. This can be in a book, a conversation, an essay, or a sermon, to give some examples. I just did a quick read of some other blogs on this topic, and none of them wowed me, so I thought I'd write my own. Then I had an even better idea: why not get you to tell me why proof-texting is problematic? In other words, I want to crowd-source the problem, and get lots of input. Since it is my suggestion, and I already did some research, let me get the ball rolling. Proof-texting is problematic because: It ignores the original context of the verse. There are actually two types of context: The literary context of the verse, that is, the verse is situated in a passage (that might be making an entirely different point) of Scripture that has a certain genre. For instance, the book of Acts is narrative, which means it is descriptive of what hap...
3 comments
Read more