In the Fullness of Time

The Scriptures record the statement of Paul in Galatians 4:4-5, “But when the fullness of time came, God sent forth his son, born of a woman, born under the law.” What were some of the conditions to which Paul was referring? There was certainly God’s preparation of a people and a cultural context into which the meaning of His coming could be understood. In addition, there needed to be a broader context which would allow for the Church to expand. Many of those changes took centuries to develop.

1.   Beginning with Abraham, and continuing through Moses, the giving of the Law, the prophets, and the prophecies regarding the Messiah, God was preparing the way for the arrival of Jesus.

2.  There was a common language – koine Greek. This language consisted of around 800-1000 words, and made communication possible across the Empire. Paul’s missionary journeys relied heavily on its existence.

3.   The translation of the Old Testament into Greek, several centuries earlier, gave all literate people access to the Scriptures. The Septuagint made it possible to evangelize Gentiles across the entire Empire.

4.     Substantial Jewish communities in all the major cities of the Empire initially gave Paul an immediate starting point for his ministry.

5.   Roman roads were built so well, some of them still exist today. Their initial purpose was for the transport of troops and military hardware. They also had much the function for that time as Interstates do today. Increased commerce, travel, and communication brought the vast Empire closer together. The expansion of the Church and the speed of communication allowed Paul’s letters to arrive in a timely fashion.

6.     The divinity claims of Roman rulers was grasping at straws to legitimize their power.

7.   One-nation rule –kept inter-cultural squabbles to a minimum. A relatively peaceful Empire enhanced the spread of the gospel.

8.      The Roman occupation was fairly benign as long as there was no opposition. However, if rebellion occurred, the military reaction was brutal.

9.    Approximately one-half of the people populating the Roman Empire were slaves – one half were women – and one quarter freemen. This meant that about 10%-12% of the population were Romans.

10. The Roman Empire also encompassed almost the entire then-known world. In the minds of the Christians at that time, the Great Commission was understood to be inclusive of the world they knew.

11. The size of the Empire brought many people from faraway places like northern Europe, India, Northern Africa, Arabia, Central Asia, and the Horn of Africa. New converts were in the position of being able to travel back to their home countries, and evangelize their own people. With such conditions, the power of the message of a Kingdom of freedom, love, salvation etc. fell on willing ears.

What else would you add to this list?

As we consider our context, 2,000 years later, we are anticipating Christ’s Second Advent. What would constitute “the fullness of time,” as we consider His return?

As we observe our world today, what should we be looking for?

How will this understanding influence your desire to reconnect the Church?

John the Baptist's Mission

John Baptist's Mission

In this Advent season, we are reminded of an important feature of the preparation for Christ’s arrival. Even though Luke’s gospel was written for a predominantly Gentile audience, it is important that Jesus did not arrive in a historical vacuum. The historical writings, the prophets, and the wisdom literature were certainly preparation. In the beginning scenes of his gospel, Luke tied Jesus' coming to the historical past.

John the Baptist was the structural and theological link between the Old and New Testaments. He was a prophet in the best Old Testament tradition, whose message was rooted in Isaiah 40:1-8. His quoting of the metaphor found in v. 3-4, is a powerful statement, likening the coming of Jesus to the rearrangement of the very topography of the earth:

"… Every valley shall be raised up, every mountain and hill made low; the rough ground shall become level, the rugged places a plain.”

John the Baptist came preaching repentance and water Baptism, which was an accepted Old Testament rite for Proselytes to undergo. Jews, as well, would submit to water baptism as a rite signifying ritual cleanness or forgiveness. It was to the latter that John called his audiences.

Huge numbers of people repented and were baptized by John. He challenged them to show proof of their sincerity. When they asked John what they should do, he answered them very specifically.

All of John’s answers spoke to leveling the playing field for the poor. John replied that the traits of this new life were to include: a) a willingness to share wealth, b) just law enforcement, and c) governmental fairness.

• “If you have two overcoats, give one to a person who has none, and do the same with food.”

Conventional wisdom promised that wealth and privilege was proof of God’s blessing. John was telling his converts to live as though that understanding didn’t exist. Instead of seeing a second tunics as God’s blessing, they were to give it away. For a family at last to have two changes of clothing and more than enough food was a big deal. Then to be told to give away any extra to those who had nothing must have been hard to hear.

Imagine the social revolution that would have ensued, had every newly baptized person followed John’s command. Keep in mind that John was not saying to give away everything. The poor would be cared for. How much is enough?

• “Do not collect more taxes than you are required to.”

The tax collection system was shot through with graft, pay-offs and greed. John was calling for each newly baptized tax collector to do the unthinkable; to act against all social convention; to collect only those taxes which Rome required. They were to stop conspiring to get rich on the backs of their mostly poor countrymen. If only a few were to obey, it would expose the rest of their colleagues for what they were. Word would get out how much money really was required. “The rough ground shall become level, the rugged places a plain.”

• "Do not extort money or arrest people on false charges – be content with your pay.”

Throughout the centuries, police officers and other government officials have supplemented their incomes by shaking down the populace. It even happens today in some countries. They would require payment for protection from people and businessmen. Often, the non-payers would be arrested on trumped up charges to scare them into paying. The extortionists themselves would cause them trouble, if they did not pay.

The fruits of salvation, according to John, are two-pronged: a) allowing God to cleanse us through repentance, and b) showing the outward evidence of that salvation in the loving way we treat other people. Love God with our heart, soul, mind and strength, and your neighbor as yourselves. Changed people, were to exhibit changed behavior wherever they found themselves.

This scene, at the very beginning of Luke, provides us with a glimpse of the message of the “Good News” according to Luke. It also seems to set the parameters for the ministry of Jesus: His declaration in Nazareth, His challenge to every one with power and wealth to use their privilege to help the poor, and finally, commending Zacchaeus for doing it.

What would be the contemporary equivalent of showing this kind of evidence of repentance today?

Are Christians actively pursuing the kind of justice John is talking about?

Robert Bellah and Habits of the Heart

We are in the midst of another titanic struggle in our country. In the book, “Habits of the Heart,” Robert Bellah helps to shed some light on what is happening. He suggests that there are four voices in America’s cultural conversation competing for the soul of America.[1] They all have historical roots in our nation’s story, most of them from the very beginning. Bellah framed each of them in terms of individualisms or freedoms. They are constantly waxing and waning in reference to each other, as they struggle against each other for prominence in the culture.

Religious Individualism

The first of the freedoms was religious freedom. Bellah offered John Winthrop, a governor of Massachusetts, as the major proponent of this freedom. The government and the rule of law were heavily influenced by their Puritan Calvinist roots. In an article, A Modell of Christian Charity, Winthrop saw nature as a unified whole.

In the article, Winthrop saw God’s purpose continuing in the world. Even after “The Fall,” it was God’s grace that first called Israel, and now calls all who trust in Christ, into a covenant of reconciliation. Winthrop defined this covenant as a call to build a “City upon a Hill.” It was to be a model community whose hallmark would be its members’ willingness to be “knitt together in this worke as one man.” Another of Winthrop’s principles was a willingness to give of something we have to help supply the necessities of others.

Republican Individualism

In contrast to Winthrop, Jefferson was used by Bellah as the prime proponent of Republican Individualism. Jefferson’s strong desire was to make certain that the Massachusetts experiment would not spread to the rest of the country, where it was the Scriptures, as interpreted by the Church, which determined the rule of law.

Jefferson considered his authorship of the Virginia Statute of Religious Liberty to be among his proudest accomplishments. He was the first to coin the phrase, “Separation of Church and State.” The expression was first found in the Virginia Statute, and was incorporated into his First Inaugural Address.

Jefferson did not want the integration of Church and state in Massachusetts to ever again occur in America. He believed that the individual’s sense of self receives its identity from its relationships within the larger social order. The town meeting was a significant and practical example of Jefferson’s vision. Participation in the town meeting and having input in governmental decision making will help the individual to discover a satisfying sense of self.

Utilitarian Individualism

Ben Franklin’s concept of being virtuous, and achieving individuality, expressed a third philosophy. He did not abandon the disciplines of Calvinist Christianity or the exercise of citizenship. Rather, he embraced the means to achieve individuality by being entirely self-oriented.

According to Franklin, one realizes virtue or identity in much the same way one goes about learning or investing money. This kind of individualism is acquired by ceaselessly practicing self-discipline and productivity.

All of Franklin’s moral attitudes are colored by his brand of utilitarianism. Franklin’s virtues, as he wrote in Poor Richard’s Almanac, include punctuality, industry, and frugality, which are central to Weber’s Protestant Ethic. According to Franklin, those virtues, like all others, are only virtues in so far as they are useful. It is the desired conclusion which is inevitable for strict utilitarianism.[2]

Expressive Individualism

In the middle of the nineteenth century, Walt Whitman surprised the American literary world when he published his book of poetry, “Leaves of Grass.” In it, he defined a new moral language. In many ways, his philosophy of achievement differed fundamentally from that of Franklin. He wrote about taking time to be at ease and to “loafe.” The very word would have brought shivers to the Puritans. He also wrote, “I need no assurances; I am a man who is preoccupied of his own soul.” In other words, Whitman took individualism into the heretofore unexplored arena of feelings, introspection, and expression.

Whitman defined the self as being inner feelings and empathetic experiences. Persons are good because they are sensitive to themselves and to the situation of the moment.

Toward Understanding

Added to the growing cultural complexity, there seem to be these four ideological streams of individualism as well. Each of these paradigms is in competition with the other three for domination of what might be called American culture. This struggle underlies and helps to inform the current political and social backdrop of our society. It is possible to see in our history how, at various times, different combinations of these philosophies have been dominant. Virtually every national controversy, past or present, can be traced back to the struggle between these four ideologies.

What do you think?

Which of the four ideologies seem to be dominant at this point in our society?

Does this understanding tell us anything about where the Church stands in our society? 

---

[1] Bellah, Robert N., et al. Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life. NY: Harper and Row, 1985.

[2] Weber, Max. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Trans. Talcott Parsons. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1958, p.52.