Disqus - Latest Comments for Jonas Lundström

Re: On Dumpster Diving

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 13:04:53 -0000

Wonderful. Could it be possible not to love sentences like these: "The other day, Josh and I were liberating some bread from a dumpster"? There is doubtless a lot of liberating work to do in the name of jesus in this (here I first wrote six letters beginning with f, but hesitated since I don´t know if someone would be (too) offended) system.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 13:04:53 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 13:04:53 -0000

Re: Church and State pt 6: initial explorations of practical implications

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 31 Mar 2007 18:35:52 -0000

I think your series on the topic of christian anarchism is brilliant and I totally (I think) agree.
I would, though, like you to spell out more clearly how you think power should be used in the (local) assembly of christians. Most of your material in this series has focus about the relationship to the state, but I think the use of power in church should be a top-of-the-list-topic. To me , the christian anarchy of the New Testament seams to favour decision-making through consensus (no majority rule), avoidance of priviliged titles (as in Matt 23), an ever-present openess to the free sharing of every member of the messiahs body (1 Kor 14:26-), public discussion of the dominant speakers (1 Kor 14:26- again), abolition of "private property" along the lines of Acts and church-controlled delegation of specific obligations within the church as in the so called pastoral letters.
How do you practise and think about these matters?

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 31 Mar 2007 18:35:52 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 31 Mar 2007 18:35:52 -0000

Re: Power and Authority within the Church: A Brief Excursion

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 04:34:04 -0000

Very interesting. I belong to a very small and new church-like group who are struggling with these questions. And we do need to learn more so I keep a big open ear to you and other christian anarchists and anabaptist.

To me, it seems that we will often or always have to abandon leadership positions within the established church in order to get to servant leadership. I have no trouble with influence or different degrees of influence, but we should not use titles, moneys or decision-making privileges to influence others, only our example, gifts and bible-based conversation. As I think you said yourself somewhere, even if "the leader" has the right attitude, there might be major problem since the others still give the leader the usual privileged position. I think we should not call anybody "leader", since this term is to destroyed by the world (as the early christians did not use "lord" or "archån"). As long as there is only a few regarded as "responsible" for the church, we will limit the spirits prescence (too much). The position of leadership and responsibility belongs only to Jesus and his spirit. For sure we do well to in time acknowledge "old ones" in our midst, people with experience and teaching giftedness, but they should be deprived of decision-making possibilities.

As to decision-making, I think we should be speaking about CHANGES in the life together. We join the church as it is, but if our common practises or way of life will change, everybody has to give their assent (is that the word?). This might be conservative, but it will also create real unity in community and work. So the ones wanting change will have to be the ones practising what they want the others to embrace and convincing the others that this is the best way. If this will not happen I think we should only wait for God´s spirit and stay the way we are. Growth comes only from the Leader anyway.

Regarding common ownership I think this is a "juridical" fact - our things is not our own. And the church should live this out. (I hesitate calling money and things like that "God´s" as I can´t really see it in the Bible.) To me, this doesn´t mean that we have to administer every purchase or expence in common or live under the same roof (as the hutterites and others do), but we cannot accept great economic inequalities in God´s people (2 Kor 8-9). As we do now.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 04:34:04 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 04:34:04 -0000

Re: A New Pneumatology Must Resist De-Personalizing the Spirit

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 05:33:11 -0000

Interesting post. I think we need to use God´s own story when we reflect about this, and not be to preoccupied with "theology" and the creeds. If we believe that the marriage between the church and the Powers was and is a bad thing, we would need to hesitate before we embrace the traditional theology of the trinity, since it was the Powerful church with the help of the Empire which produced this understanding and made it into such a cornerstone.

To me it seems to be an easier and more natural reading of the Bible to understand the spirit as the dynamic and personal presence of God, but not as a "person" separate from the Father.

What would be your scriptural base for your view of the spirit?

(Feel free not to answer. This, of course, is a gigantic subject.)

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 05:33:11 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 05:33:11 -0000

Re: A New Pneumatology Must Resist De-Personalizing the Spirit

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 19 Apr 2007 13:07:04 -0000

The blog-fuzziness appears, who is responding to who?
Anyway, to anyone - my own view is that the spirit is God´s personal presence and energy. It is not "a thing" but an aspect of God - God among God´s people. (I disagree with the use of the thing-word as the Progressive Blogger used it.) Somewhat like the fact that "God´s love" is not a thing. This also to me seems more in continuity with the OT.

If this is the case, it seems to me that your (Mark`s) fear of the "de-personalizing" of the spirit misses the target, although of course, you might be right speaking to some other opinion (Progressive Blogger?). I would not deny that the spirit is a personal being distinct from the Father, but I would not agree with it either. I do not know and I think the question might be the wrong one. In the same way, I am not at all sure that The Word was a distinct personal being prior to the incarnation. I suggest James McClendons (Systematic Theology, "Doctrine") readings on these topics.

Of course, this is part of the bigger issue of the trinity. To me, the traditional formulas seems to have developed in a direction quite alien to the scriptures.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 19 Apr 2007 13:07:04 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 19 Apr 2007 13:07:04 -0000

Re: A New Pneumatology Must Resist De-Personalizing the Spirit

Jonas Lundström — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 02:36:08 -0000

Corey.
Ok, thanx for your the LeRon-suggestion. I agree that John´s gospel is the hardest to reconcile with this reading. Please note that I am not explicitly denying either the personhood of the (distinct) spirit or the personhood of the (distinct) Word prior to the incarnation, but I think we need not, and maybe should not have to acknowledge it either. It seems to me that John can be read in continuity with Proverbs and the apocryphical Jesus Syrac (I don´t know the name in english, sorry). According to these texts, it seems that there was a pre-existant woman close to God from the beginning, something few "orthodox" people would agree with. The Word appears to be personalized in John, but this might be in the same way as with The Wisdom. To me, it also seems that John´s Gospel speaks about the relationship between the human Jesus (Word incarnated) and God, and not some ontological relationship beyond space and time.

Despite this, I agree that John seems to give some credibility to the orthodox view, and therefore, I would not deny it. But I also think that ortodoxy have major problems with loads of NT-text that speaks of Jesus as a real human, or that separates "God" from the Lord Jesus (placing Jesus "outside" of God, so to speak). (1 kor 8, 1 tim 2 for example). God is one, and the trinitarian theology, although not the intention, gives most (?) people the impression that God is a team, consisting of three individuals.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 02:36:08 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 02:36:08 -0000

Re: A New Pneumatology Must Resist De-Personalizing the Spirit

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 09:47:36 -0000

This is very interesting, and I appreciate the possibility to discuss this, since many christians seems to be to scare even to speak clearly about this. I am learning through this dialogue.

Despite the openess, there still seems to be a tendency to an all-or-nothing-argument in this dialogue. If we don´t clearly appreciate that the Spirit is a "he" (she?) distinct from the Parent, then it seems that several of the voices in this dialogue says that "our little experient (the emerging church) will become a big pile of poo" (Mark), or "then our whole relationship with God is called into question and the point of this conversation becomes fuzzy" (Corey) or "Faith is fruitless, and we should all go home and read Chuck Palahniuk" (Cullen). But it is really your view that this is spelled out so clearly in the scriptures that we can make drastic conclusions like this?? Isn´t this still a different way to make the heresy-accusation?

It seems to me that several groups and individuals that have hade questions about the traditional teaching on the trinity, also have been good followers of Jesus in the power of the s/Spirit. For examples - swedish pentecostals traditionally have refused giving there allegiance to any creed (though not denying them either), swedish "free-baptists" have questioned the person-hood of the spirit and have at the same time been the closest we have had in Sweden to anabaptism. There also are loads of oneness-pentecostals out there (I have heard, we don´t have them in Sweden), denying the trinity but emphasising the miracles and so on. Polish and Italian anabaptists and others questioned the trinity but were more radical followers of Jesus than the mainstream-christianity. This might also have been the case with the not so known early ebionites. Some of the early adventist-groups emphazised prophesy and the spirit but had a unitarian view of God. And, dare I say, the Jehovas Witnesses (what is it called in english?) have developed an alternative church, taking several of Jesus commands serious, but also questioning the trinity. To me - this gives some indication that questioning the personhood of the spirit does not necessarily lead to all these bad consequenses some seems to fear.

Cullen, God is spirit (John 4). God dwells among us, this is the mystery of the spirit. The one we meet in our midst, when we are eating together in the name of Jesus, admonishing each other, sharing our revelations and teachings, reaching out to poor, confronting the powers, is the very presence of God Godself. It was not some human power that came upon Jesus but the very presence of God, and now Jesus himself, through this spirit of God, reveals himself to us (John 14). Why does this make our faith fruitless??

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 09:47:36 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 09:47:36 -0000

Re: A New Pneumatology Must Resist De-Personalizing the Spirit

Jonas Lundström — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 09:14:47 -0000

That is a good question, but I think it can only be truly answered in a definite setting. For sure, there might be limits to how different our understanding of God can be while we are still serving God together, but we will always, I think, emphazise different aspects of God, not fitting all the pieces together in the same way. So far, my trinitarian questions has not caused some serious troubles in the christian groups I participate in. I would also prefer that we accept different theological views but emphazise the common practises and dare to trust that they will also shape our common theology. To me, the teaching of the scriptures has as aim to equip us for good works and practises (2 Tim 3) - to develop correct thinking is not their primary goal. Because of this, I have more troubles with "worship" that, for example, do not allow every believers participation (1 Kor 14) than differences in understanding of the nature of God.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 09:14:47 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 09:14:47 -0000

Re: A New Pneumatology Must Resist De-Personalizing the Spirit

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 24 Apr 2007 06:50:46 -0000

Mark, I appreciate your thoughts (and openess) and will try to watch and listening to your further thought on this. I would agree with the major part of what you say, but I still have some doubts. For sure, there seems to be a threeness in the way God has been working with the humanity, and it does not seem stupid to make the guess that this somehow also corresponds to Gods inner being. But still, I would not use the "person"-word. I am aware of the fact (?) that the church fathers used this in a different way than the modern use, but we live today and I have a hard time envisioning every believer thoroughly reading the fathers. As long as "person" for most christians does mean "individual", I probably won´t speak of three persons in God. We have to communicate our teaching even to our child, the heathens and non-academic people.

Also, there is a lot of talk about God being a relationship. A theologian friend of mine recently tried to explain to me that this is probably a way to reduce the influence of greek, ontological, "static" thinking about God. Sounds nice, but to my ears, this talk seems to promote the thought of three men hanging around in heaven in an eternal "team". As words are also pictures, doesn´t this give us a picture of God as three individuals (as in the old icon)? It doesn´t help me much if they are dancing around...

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 24 Apr 2007 06:50:46 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 24 Apr 2007 06:50:46 -0000

Re: The Retribution of God

Jonas Lundström — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 04:32:47 -0000

Look forward to your coming posts on the subject. If we want to promote a non-violent lifestyle, how we understand the atonement seems to me a central question. Is God a God who needs or take pleasure in violence and blood-shedding? (For people trained in academic theology, I recommend Denny Weavers "The Non-Violent Atonement")

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 04:32:47 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 04:32:47 -0000

Re: The Atonement and the Embrace of God

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 03 May 2007 04:54:59 -0000

Mark, Anna, Ron. Great words! I feel encouraged.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 03 May 2007 04:54:59 -0000

Mark, Anna, Ron. Great words! I feel encouraged.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 03 May 2007 04:54:59 -0000

Mark, Anna, Ron. Great words! I feel encouraged.

Re: Lack of Content, the Unleashing of IV West Bank, and the Promise of Things to Come

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 17 May 2007 06:32:04 -0000

I don´t know you irl, so who am I to tell you what to do? Still, I think you should, theologically, look over the salary-issue. I think it might be a better way for messianic people to make our income out of ordinary jobs and/or combined with a trust that God will provide for us through spontaneous giving, not trusting in employments or regularly salaries. Shouldn´t we give freely as we have received freely? I don´t want to sound judgemental or to critical, but wouldn´t it be a nice goal to get independent of the christians organisations and their economy?

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 17 May 2007 06:32:04 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 17 May 2007 06:32:04 -0000

Re: Lack of Content, the Unleashing of IV West Bank, and the Promise of Things to Come

Jonas Lundström — Fri, 18 May 2007 01:56:14 -0000

I don´t question your fund-raising. I tend to agree with you on this one. Sometimes, of course, radical christians has avoided even this (for example George Müller), but I cannot see that it always has to be the best way.

As to working within existing ecclesial structures, I respect your point of view and I believe you have good motives for this. As a New Monastic, I suspect that you have a theologically motivated reason to submit to the structures of the established church, but this is one of the points on which I disagree with New Monasticism. I tend to be more separatist, but who knows, I might end up in a more ecumenical stance. Anyway, I understand your point of view, thanx for explaining...

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Fri, 18 May 2007 01:56:14 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Fri, 18 May 2007 01:56:14 -0000

Re: If you meet Christ on the road, kill him!

Jonas Lundström — Fri, 18 May 2007 13:04:14 -0000

Brilliant. Important post. Help us, God.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Fri, 18 May 2007 13:04:14 -0000

Brilliant. Important post. Help us, God.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Fri, 18 May 2007 13:04:14 -0000

Brilliant. Important post. Help us, God.

Re: Beware the Subtle Shade of Oligarchy

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 04:28:18 -0000

You are definitely right, I think. Historically, movements and churches that valued every bodys sharing, making the decisions together, and non-ruling leadership, have tended to be swallowed up by the hierarchichal system. In our time, "effeciency" might be the biggest motivation. I believe that this has historical reasons, the first step towards the corruption of the church was the development of hierarchical leadership along the lines of Ignatius. It is hard to say what to do, but I think one important thing is being comfortable with being small, vulnerable and having low impact (at least in the short perspective). I also think we need to separate as much as possible from the system. I respect your non-separatist stance, but I think it is naive. Of course there might be huge problems even in non-hierarchical groups, but these groups will probably disappear over time. Hierarchical organisations on the other hand, tend to be demons that hang around, oppresing people and quenching the spirit...

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 04:28:18 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 04:28:18 -0000

Re: Beware the Subtle Shade of Oligarchy

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 04:51:09 -0000

It almost seems I am the only separatist around, commenting on this one, so I will go for some more. I do not think there is a tension between freedom and unity. The unity Jesus spoke about is based on the commitment to following him and all his instructions (John 17), including the ones about hierarchy and leadership. I believe God´s unity has to grow slowly through relationships between the geniun followers of The Leader. To bow before the established, fallen church is not promoting true unity. One example of this is that big organisations always (?) excludes the marginal voices. I believe God´s people is/should be made up of churches that are free, not acknowledging other leaders than Jesus. So true unity is based on the church´s freedom from worldly structures, and there is not tension between unity and freedom.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 04:51:09 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 04:51:09 -0000

Re: Quick Question from the Road

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 13:13:36 -0000

I am not exactly sure I know what you mean. But to me it seems that one has to believe that God raised Jesus from the dead in order to get onto the path to the kingdom. Doesn´t this imply theism in some form? I think people need to feel that the man Jesus is alive, raised and made The Leader by the creating force of the universe.
Maybe I misunderstand your post?

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 13:13:36 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 13:13:36 -0000

Re: Quick Question from the Road

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 05:45:20 -0000

Marks question was about "becoming christian". For non-jews/non-moslems, they will probably get a grip on Jesus (through the church) at first, and this, of course, is fine for me. (Bens words on this was great, I think.) But to become a follower of the Messiah, I think one needs to be baptized (not a lot of talk about this in the emerging church?), into the name of Jesus and/or into the name of the Parent, the son and the spirit. And should we really baptize someone not confessing God/the Parent? Doesn´t turning to the Messiah implies some basic trust in the whole of God´s story?

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 05:45:20 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 05:45:20 -0000

Re: Quick Question from the Road

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 14:30:17 -0000

Keith, I agree, I think. If I am allowed to keep on bringing in the baptism-question, I think that your atheist still needs baptism and becoming a part of a christian group of followers, a church. But your case might also put a question mark after the baptism of lots of "christians". At this point, I am definitely drawn to anabaptism, I think that "baptism" might not be valid, and might need to be repaired or completed. I am not sure I believe in the total rejection of baptism of children or half-believing adults, but I definitely believe that there is a need to repair or make the baptism of lots of "christians" complete, through some useful ritual. (In our small church, we have handed over one of the keys to our house to a brother or sister in the church, as a way of making visible the meaning of baptism.) Baptism should be administered to people who really want to leave the world and follow Jesus, no matter the cost.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 14:30:17 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 14:30:17 -0000

Re: Goodbye, Ingmar Bergman

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 01:48:12 -0000

Interesting post. I am from Sweden and I also like Bergmans work very much, although many people found most of his work too dark, philosophical and boring (I don´t agree). I think that it is sad that the church has not been able to connect to the genuine, existential and religious issues of god, guilt, relationships etc that are raised within his movies in such a creative way.

Another movie you should watch if you haven´t is the one with the priest and the lord´s supper. I don´t know what it is called in english.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 01:48:12 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 01:48:12 -0000

Re: A Follow-up to "On Feeding the Poor…"

Jonas Lundström — Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:13:34 -0000

I have a question regarding "the least" (Matt 25). This seams to be a central text to emerging churches, discovering Jesus in the poor and all that. And I really think we (including myself) have to move in the direction of crossing social and economic boundaries and hanging out with the poor, and my own experience is that God really likes it when we do this. Jesus did it, for sure. But, I also have some doubt about the common interpretation of Matt 25. Is Jesus really talking about all the hungry etc in the world? To me, it seems that Jesus in Matthew identifies himself with, and give the name of "sister"/"brother" only to Jahve´s people. If that is the case, it seems more natural to read Matt 25 as a text about how we relate to each other within God´s people. Of course, this love have to overflow, but I have a hard time viewing every poor man or woman as a "brother"/"sister". I also think that Jesus talks about God´s (worldwide!!!!) family because it corresponds better with 2 Kor 8-9, James and Gal 6:9-10.

I would love to hear your comment on this one, Mark.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:13:34 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:13:34 -0000

Re: Towards the Open Sourcing of Christianity

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 23:28:56 -0000

Mark, I respect your choice to publish Ellul´s work. Probably you are doing the right thing. As I see it, this is also a question of delivering God´s message in a worthy manner. We have been given for free and we should give for free. Christians should never demand a specific amount of money for using their spirit-given role in the Messiah´s body. God´s message is a message of grace!! If people freely decide to support our basic needs when we use our gifts, this is ok, but we should deliver even if nobody does.

To me, this means not only means that I wouldn´t (with the convictions I have today) write a book or an article and demand that people pay for it. I also wouldn´t receive a fixed salary for preaching or serving in the church. In Sweden, we had a movement that started 140 years ago, later called "the free baptists", that for theological reasons avoided employing pastors etc for almost a hundred years (before they began to be like every bode else). I think they were right.

I still buy books etc since this often is the only way to get the hands on good material (but thanx to the Bruderhof and others who do it differently). And I think I wouldn´t "steal" a "christian" book. Would you?

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 23:28:56 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 23:28:56 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 13:57:46 -0000

I wonder from what base we criticize the world for its hierarchical structures? Is the church really an alternative? Which church? If not, does or anarchism have any credibility?

Re: Anarchism, Christianity, and the Prophetic Imagination 2

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 14:57:46 -0000

I wonder from what base we criticize the world for its hierarchical structures? Is the church really an alternative? Which church? If not, does or anarchism have any credibility?

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 14:57:46 -0000

I wonder from what base we criticize the world for its hierarchical structures? Is the church really an alternative? Which church? If not, does or anarchism have any credibility?

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 16:31:58 -0000

Ok. As I see it, we need to break free from hierarchy within "the church" to be able to provide real alternatives. But I respect your more moderate reformation-stance and look forward to the rest of your posts.

Re: Anarchism, Christianity, and the Prophetic Imagination 2

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 17:31:58 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 17:31:58 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 04:59:02 -0000

Mark/Jason. Sorry Jason, I did not notice that it was the same Jason on both blogs. It was not my intention to push this issue further. I would appreciate if you would respond to my last post there. But I won´t coerce you... ;) Mark, I don´t think that the hierarchies are so different. Even the president don´t really have the power to decide what you do or how you think. I am talking about things like "representation", decision-making etc (see submergent).

Re: Anarchism, Christianity, and the Prophetic Imagination 2

Jonas Lundström — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 05:59:02 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 05:59:02 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:07:16 -0000

I read JM less nowadays, after the change. When one reads blogs, you tend to get a feeling over time for the person writing and hers or his story and context. This makes it easier to understand what is written. These collaborative blogs makes it impossible to separate the writers from each other and for that reason, it feels more like a massive dose of ideas being spread, almost without a body. Personally, I like the anarchist slant, and several of the writers has written great stuff, but I feel more of a distance towards JM now than before. (But I might not be representative at all, of course.)

Re: The State of JM

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 14:07:16 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 14:07:16 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 13:06:35 -0000

Is "the kingdom" something spiritual, like an invisible system, a vision, an ideal or an attitude? Or do you believe in an coming, visible rule of God on earth. The reason I am asking is because of this fuzz about preterism in Emerging Church-circles. It seems that quite a few prominent people believe that the kingdom has already come and maybe Jesus too... You put it in a way that seemed to be in line with how preterist-oriented people would put it...

Re: Part 2: Encountering Empire with a Christ Shaped Imagination for the World

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 14:06:35 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 14:06:35 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:08:42 -0000

Daniel. I am not sure that Jesus "proclaims His Kingdom as here among us" in such a clear way that you suppose. There are actually more sayings of Jesus that puts the kingdom in the future than as something present. And I am not sure anyway that I am in the exact same situation as those who originally heard Jesus say that the kingdom was near. I am all for living out the values of the kingdom right here and now, but I also think that this will be done better in the long run if we "put" God´s kingdom mainly in the future and accept the church "only" as a fore-taste or fore-runner of the kingdom. This would make us more humble, I think. Groups in the history of the church that has thought that they had complete access to the kingdom or that confused the lines between the church and the kingdom, has tended to end up in either trusting force and violence to spread this kingdom or to isolate themselves in order to protect the kingdom.

2.000 years has soon gone, and if I have to believe that the kingdom of God has come, this to me seems to be not a very convincing new world, New Jerusalem etc.

Re: Part 2: Encountering Empire with a Christ Shaped Imagination for the World

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 02:08:42 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 02:08:42 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 13:36:53 -0000

As I see it, we need to leave established churches that are occupied with their church buildings, one-way worship, hierarchy, lack of community and discipline etc. A genuine church has to be a band of Jesus-followers. Most churches are a mix where many and maybe most are not following Jesus. I think that we should not support this way of being the church. Instead we need to form alternatives. Radical reformation, ones again.

Re: They’ll Know We are Christians…How?

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 14:36:53 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 14:36:53 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 13:24:26 -0000

Michael. This is a classical issue in times of reformation. I tend to side with the outbreaking groups like early monastics, waldensians and anabaptists. It is not the question of whether there are genuine disciples within the established churches. Of course there are (as there of course also are disciples within the sects). The question is whether we need to follow all of christ´s commands and invite others to do the same. How can we support structures that are opposed to the teaching of Jesus and the apostles?

Of course there will be new groups over and over again. Thank God. God´s people should be a people of great diversity, not a gigantic institution.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 13:24:26 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 13:24:26 -0000

Re: They’ll Know We are Christians…How?

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 14:24:26 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 14:24:26 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 08:08:54 -0000

I have some questions about the usual ec-interpretation of Matthew 25. I think it is more in line with the context of Matthew to interpret "the little brothers of Jesus" as Jesus disciples/the ones sent out, and not every "needy" person around (the common understanding). The concept of "small-ness" and those called "brothers" of Jesus is always otherwise in Matthew used about Jesus disciples/apostles. And actually, I think this is a more radical interpretation. God´s people, when it is normal, is faced with poverty, hunger, nakedness and imprisonment. It is not enough for us to stay safe and rich and "help the poor", keeping our lives at a safe distant. WE need to become the poor ones...

Re: A New Year’s Revolution!

Jonas Lundström — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 09:08:54 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 09:08:54 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 03:36:13 -0000

May God´s will be done and God´s kingdom come. And "Jonas" is a wonderful name, by the way!

Re: The Year Ahead

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 04:36:13 -0000

May God´s will be done and God´s kingdom come. And "Jonas" is a wonderful name, by the way!

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 04:36:13 -0000

May God´s will be done and God´s kingdom come. And "Jonas" is a wonderful name, by the way!

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:13:33 -0000

I think we should not store things up either in our homes or in bank-accounts etc. We should trust God instead. It is not a question of "attitude" or "priorities" (only). As long as we have our riches, we won´t need to trust God. We have to despise riches (Mt 6:24). We should sell what we have and give to the poor, but not necessarily all at the same time.

Re: The Lost Teachings of Jesus 2

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 13:13:33 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 13:13:33 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 10:36:32 -0000

I love NM and has been affected and inspired by this movement. It is one of the most encouraging things the Spirit is doing in the western world that I know about. At the same time, there are aspects of NM that I am very critical about. It seems to me that this thing is moving in the classical direction of accepting a two-level-view of discipleship. Historically, it has sounded like this: Some peoples are called to live an alternative life, applying the teachings of Jesus in regard to community, wealth, violence etc, but we most accept that most christians will never live this kind of life. The radical life is for the few, the ones called in a special way. This is also the reason why we have to let the institutional church remain intact, with its hierarchy, mammonism and compromises with the state. We still have to be loyal. The life in the communities are not for all, so we need to be faithful to "the church".

In this area, I feel ("against" Mark) that there is a vast and overlooked difference between the anabaptist tradition and New Monasticism. Here, radical discipleship is for all, and that is why we need "real" churches that consists of disciples. We cannot support the prostitution of the established church. We cannot accept a two-level view of discipleship. And because of this, we need at least some amount of separatism, moving out of structures that opposes the teaching of Jesus and the apostles.

I would love to hear promoters of NM to explain these things more. Please help me out. Have I misunderstood?

Re: New Monasticism: Fringe Christianity?

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 11:36:32 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 11:36:32 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 12:13:04 -0000

Mark. I understand that you see it this way. But to me, the important thing is not if different people in this movement has the right attitude. I worry about the structures and practices, and it which direction it leads people. Probably Fransiscus and Mother Teresa thought that more all christians should live more like them (and this is the way Shane has put it up to this point as far as I know). But because of the monastic structure in combination with the institutional church, people just don´t get this message. Even the structures communicate.

I think it is easier to love people if you are separatist, because the structures are oppressing people. You wouldn´t apply your "not-loving" argument in regard to the state, where most christians would feel that you are strongly separatist (you don´t want followers of Jesus to be soldiers, police officers, president and probably they shouldn´t even vote...). This shows that because of love for people, you have to be against some structures. You can separate from unchristlike practices, but still be building relationships to people. Attacking the powers doesn´t mean hating people.

I reckon that you recognize that historical anabaptism is definitely separatist. If the anabaptist hadn´t been opposed to the corruption of the church even to the degree that they refused to support "the church", we wouldn´t have had any anabaptist movement at all. A non-separatist anabaptism simply doesn´t exist within history, as I see it. Despite the fact that many has this idea. That doesn´t mean, of course, that we can be separatist in the same way. I don´t want to get into Amish isolation, for example.

Re: New Monasticism: Fringe Christianity?

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 13:13:04 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 13:13:04 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 14:37:31 -0000

Mark/Graham. I know "separatist" might not be the best word, I am looking for another one. What I mean is that there are central features of the established churches that are (sociologically) opposed to the way of Jesus, and an inherited result of the process culminating in the fourth century. How the community of the Messiah relates to these structures and practices are a central issue, and we need to avoid supporting practices that leads away from Jesus. Therefore true disciples need to separate themselves from these practices. (Which practices do I refer to? Having a "strong separatist vibe" (Mark) I would include both practices (for example church buildings, hierarchical leadership, baptism without conversion, "worship" without free participation, bad or non-existant church discipline), life-style issues (compromises with mammon, violence, individualism, hierarchy and more) and and "theology" (focus on spiritual realities and dogmas instead of our bodily, earthly existence under God) in the "fallen" church-issues I think we need to distance ourselves from.

New Monasticism has chosen to appear with a common "face" (the book and the home page and more), which I think was a bad move that leads to other difficulties. And the central stream within official NM seems to be interpreting the movement in line with the older monastic communities. That is also why you need to keep on saying that you are not opposed to the church (see for example the title of Wilson-whatever his name is on the relationship between the communities and the church). Note that "the church" is constantly appearing as something that is outside of the communities that they need to relate to. The communities wouldn´t normally call themselves a church (Missio Dei being a good exception, due to the anabaptist influence?). The communities also seems to be dependent upon the established churches for the administering of the sacraments, and avoids talking about priesthood, the Lord´s supper and baptism.

I my view, the NM-communites are true churches, but they would to well to understand themselves as "churches" and putting forward there way of life as (roughly) for all. But this would open the doors for even tougher criticism and might close the doors to the platforms of the established church.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 14:47:57 -0000

By the way. I know that there are sectarian tendencies within many christian groups that wants to keep oneselv distanced from other people (even/especially some anabaptists), even from true believers within other churches (often by ignoring their existence). This is IN NO WAY what I am opting for by using the word "separatism". Our separatism should be directed towards structures (the powers), and not towards people. As Jesus seems to have been doing (and is still doing). Marpeck might be the best example in the sixteenth century of this attitude, keeping up the dialogue with people everywhere, but strongly opposed to the corrupt practices of the established church (violence, baptism, bad church discipline). By the way, interestingly, "his" group didn´t survive. Maybe we are not called to build a city (institution) that lasts (Hebr 11), but being God´s voulnerous pilgrim people.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 15:02:20 -0000

Mark. Yeah, but this is not the fault of "the folks". It´s because that people have been trying to marketing NM under a label, publishing a book etc, and there are no voices out there from within the movement distancing themselves from this project, and least none that have reached my ears. It is the same thing with every other denomination-like structure that exists. There are always important differences, but they are downplayed by the hierarchy that seeks a unified movement that they can control.

Can you relate to what I say about a group understanding themselves as a monastic community or as a church? (Shane for example has said that maybe we don´t need more churches.) Is this an issue for you? And how would you personally feel for example for the chapter in 12 Marks about "humble submission". Would you agree? And doesn´t the whole argument presupposes that "the church" is something that are not present within the community and close related to the structures of the institutional church? And why are many new monastics very "alternative" in relationship to mainstream american society, but not that alternative towards the established way of being church.

Re: New Monasticism: Fringe Christianity?

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 15:37:31 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 15:37:31 -0000

Re: New Monasticism: Fringe Christianity?

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 15:47:57 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 15:47:57 -0000

Re: New Monasticism: Fringe Christianity?

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 16:02:20 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 16:02:20 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 01:27:49 -0000

Mark. Thanks! What you say sounds very interesting and hopeful. Even though I still have concerns (I agree with what Graham said in his last post), you hand on a more nuanced picture. And you seem to be genuinely aware of the problem, which I haven´t noticed in Jonathan and Shane. (Actually, I would have written about my concerns to Shane, but because of his vast popularity, which he himself has accepted, he has made himself hard to get in touch with.) Where can I read bout your eight core impulses?

One problem is that when you have created a movement (of course, what God´s spirit is doing cannot be created, but we often try to put it into a box, labeling it etc), it tends to move in one direction and in tends to become more and more controlled by the oligarchy/hierarchy. The only way to opposes the official picture finally becomes to step out from under the umbrella. "NM" is only in its childhood and the future will tell where this is all moving. My feeling would be that "NM" has already moved so strong into the monastic heritage that it will be hard to get groups that relate to the "NM" label to view themselves as churches. This, as always, will cause some conflicts and divisions within the movement.

My dream is that we could see more churches that were formally independent and avoided connecting to these kind of labels that divides God´s people and creates confusion. In this, I might well be too idealistic...

Re: New Monasticism: Fringe Christianity?

Jonas Lundström — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 02:27:49 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 02:27:49 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:38:28 -0000

To me it is a fundamental question what we mean by "the meal". To me, the practice Jesus instituted was a full meal. What would you view be on this topic? What do you refer to using the word "eucharist"?

Re: The Incarnation, Eucharist, and Community

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 12:38:28 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 12:38:28 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 13:08:42 -0000

Ok. I am not sure I follow. I would understand "the Lord´s supper" as a full fellowship meal with the church with the specific intention to honor Jesus. So for me, every meal is not the Lord´s supper, but neither is the thing most churches do when they use only a little piece of bread and some wine, without a fellowship meal.

Re: The Incarnation, Eucharist, and Community

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 14:08:42 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 14:08:42 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 14:26:31 -0000

Mark. I have appreciated these comments very much and the information you have given on NM. Despite the fact that I have had my eyes on this "movement" for a year and a half, much of what you say is news to me, and news that gives me hope and encouragement. Keep up the good work! I get the creeps when christians began to speak about their platform. Seeking to build our platform, wouldn´t that be just about the most un-christ-like thing one could do?

Re: New Monasticism: Fringe Christianity?

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 15:26:31 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 15:26:31 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 14:58:30 -0000

I like your way to bring this question up in this way, it´s a good decision so far as I can tell.
-I think blogging can be legitimate ministry and I think this site is a good example of this. As I see it, blogging can be different things, for example spreading the good news (evangelism) or teaching, this site would mainly fall into the last category. Since I believe that teaching/prophecy should be discussed and not just swallowed or rejected, blogging is a better medium than books or articles.

-I think people within Christ´s body with teaching roles/gifts and the like, should serve (like others with other roles/gifts) without expecting economic pay-off. The gospel should be given for free. If people would freely help us with basic supplies, it´s ok to receive it, but we should not take it for granted. For this to be possible, the normal way to do it is to work with one´s hands, as Paul taught and practised it. Sometimes work hard. This might be scary, especially for people like me that has spent their whole lives within "the ministry" and different bible schools and seminaries, and it might make it impossible to give as much time to "ministry" as the ones can do that receives salary for using their gifts of grace, but it keeps the integrity of the gospel in a better way. (An exception to this rule could be people sent out and moving around in order to spread the message) I think. But few agree, I know.

Re: Mammon, you cruel bastard!

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:58:30 -0000

I like your way to bring this question up in this way, it´s a good decision so far as I can tell.
-I think blogging can be legitimate ministry and I think this site is a good example of this. As I see it, blogging can be different things, for example spreading the good news (evangelism) or teaching, this site would mainly fall into the last category. Since I believe that teaching/prophecy should be discussed and not just swallowed or rejected, blogging is a better medium than books or articles.
-I think people within Christ´s body with teaching roles/gifts and the like, should serve (like others with other roles/gifts) without expecting economic pay-off. The gospel should be given for free. If people would freely help us with basic supplies, it´s ok to receive it, but we should not take it for granted. For this to be possible, the normal way to do it is to work with one´s hands, as Paul taught and practised it. Sometimes work hard. This might be scary, especially for people like me that has spent their whole lives within "the ministry" and different bible schools and seminaries, and it might make it impossible to give as much time to "ministry" as the ones can do that receives salary for using their gifts of grace, but it keeps the integrity of the gospel in a better way. (An exception to this rule could be people sent out and moving around in order to spread the message) I think. But few agree, I know.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:58:30 -0000

I like your way to bring this question up in this way, it´s a good decision so far as I can tell.
-I think blogging can be legitimate ministry and I think this site is a good example of this. As I see it, blogging can be different things, for example spreading the good news (evangelism) or teaching, this site would mainly fall into the last category. Since I believe that teaching/prophecy should be discussed and not just swallowed or rejected, blogging is a better medium than books or articles.
-I think people within Christ´s body with teaching roles/gifts and the like, should serve (like others with other roles/gifts) without expecting economic pay-off. The gospel should be given for free. If people would freely help us with basic supplies, it´s ok to receive it, but we should not take it for granted. For this to be possible, the normal way to do it is to work with one´s hands, as Paul taught and practised it. Sometimes work hard. This might be scary, especially for people like me that has spent their whole lives within "the ministry" and different bible schools and seminaries, and it might make it impossible to give as much time to "ministry" as the ones can do that receives salary for using their gifts of grace, but it keeps the integrity of the gospel in a better way. (An exception to this rule could be people sent out and moving around in order to spread the message) I think. But few agree, I know.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 08:06:15 -0000

Cline. I get a little upset with your age-argument. Age is no automatic road to christian maturity. Using the "I am older and you are younger, and therefore I am right"-line of reasoning might be effective and powerful, but I don´t think it´s very Jesus-like (or Pauline). If your 18-years-old-position was not genuine and solid enough, that doesn´t necessarily mean that you were wrong, but now have grown up and become "mature". I am 33 and Jesus was 33 (if we believe the gospels more than Iraeneus..), and both me and Jesus thinks that the gospel should be given for free. ;) Jesus seems to be very "naive" in his view of money (Matthew 6). "Maturity" is actually often a cover-up for sell out. Probably not in your case, though. But the age-argument makes me angry, I have to confess.

Re: Mammon, you cruel bastard!

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 09:06:15 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 09:06:15 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 09:28:12 -0000

Jordan. He used it in a context where the issue was Mark´s question and survey, so the context suggests that his statement was normative, at least within this context. But the author may be willing to clear up what his intention was?

Re: Mammon, you cruel bastard!

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 10:28:12 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 10:28:12 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:53:11 -0000

I am not sure I want to press my case further. I was just, since Mark asked for it in the post, giving my view of this, since every body else seemed to be saying something different. I am perfectly aware that there comes maturity with age, if we keep on following the narrow path. (Some don´t, you know.) I just don´t think it is valid argument to name a position as "naive".

I am not alone in my interpretation of this (though it definitely is a minority perspective), and I deny that this is primitivism. It´s a question of the integrity of the gospel, we should do everything possible to make the gospel appear as something that is free (and costs all). And the same with our spiritual gifts (which I take not to refer to whatever interests, work assignments and talents we happen to have). There are good answers to the texts mentioned here, I recommend for example

http://assembling.blogspot.com/2007/10/summary-...,

and the links connected to this. Or Frank Viola (Pagan Christianity). If someone

wants to discuss this further, I can give my view, but otherwise I will drop it.

Re: Mammon, you cruel bastard!

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:53:11 -0000

I am not sure I want to press my case further. I was just, since Mark asked for it in the post, giving my view of this, since every body else seemed to be saying something different. I am perfectly aware that there comes maturity with age, if we keep on following the narrow path. (Some don´t, you know.) I just don´t think it is valid argument to name a position as "naive".

I am not alone in my interpretation of this (though it definitely is a minority perspective), and I deny that this is primitivism. It´s a question of the integrity of the gospel, we should do everything possible to make the gospel appear as something that is free (and costs all). And the same with our spiritual gifts (which I take not to refer to whatever interests, work assignments and talents we happen to have). There are good answers to the texts mentioned here, I recommend for example
http://assembling.blogspot.com/2007/10/summary-...,
and the links connected to this. Or Frank Viola (Pagan Christianity). If someone
wants to discuss this further, I can give my view, but otherwise I will drop it.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:53:11 -0000

I am not sure I want to press my case further. I was just, since Mark asked for it in the post, giving my view of this, since every body else seemed to be saying something different. I am perfectly aware that there comes maturity with age, if we keep on following the narrow path. (Some don´t, you know.) I just don´t think it is valid argument to name a position as "naive".

I am not alone in my interpretation of this (though it definitely is a minority perspective), and I deny that this is primitivism. It´s a question of the integrity of the gospel, we should do everything possible to make the gospel appear as something that is free (and costs all). And the same with our spiritual gifts (which I take not to refer to whatever interests, work assignments and talents we happen to have). There are good answers to the texts mentioned here, I recommend for example
http://assembling.blogspot.com/2007/10/summary-...,
and the links connected to this. Or Frank Viola (Pagan Christianity). If someone
wants to discuss this further, I can give my view, but otherwise I will drop it.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 12:17:09 -0000

Graham. I think the main principle (being a primitivist and all) is that "elders" (as all believers) should work with their hands (with christ-friendly jobs in which they can seek the kingdom of God...) in order to fill their needs. Of course, there might be some good exceptions, and I think the NT mentions "widows" and travelling sent-out-ones as the main ones, probably since working in the "normal" way for those people is not the option.

Anyway, of course we can receive any freely given gifts from each other (I don´t even believe in private property, for God´s sake!), as long as it is not a question of economic abundance (which it often is, of course, but probably not in Mark´s case). My problem is with certain believers given a fixed, regular amount of money to another believer so that the second believer can fulfill her/his God-given gifts/roles. As I see it, huge problems comes with this;

-it will appear, at least to some, as if serving with our gifts is an employment

-it will keep on (at least with the history we have) dividing believers into laity and clergy

-it will make the "minister" less free to say or do what the Spirit wants her/him to and will tempt her/him to do what is popular

-it will produce "ministers" that will be tempted to leave "ministry" whenever the economical base vanishes (the hired shepherd of John 10)

-it will produce "ministers" that are tempted to speak, not out of burning passion and belief, but because they have in order to make their living

-for this reasons and others it will also tempt the "minister" to not live in simple trust in God in the way that Jesus has taught us

Actually, I am a bit surprised that I even have to explain this when talking to anarchists and anabaptists... ;)

And by the way, if Michael is still listening, would you explain why my argument is "naive". To me it seems to be the opposite way. To make the ministry dependent on adds etc, believing that this won´t affect the message or the "minister", to me this is the naive position. (I am just being honest, I am not trying to hit back. I hope.)

Re: Mammon, you cruel bastard!

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 13:17:09 -0000

Graham. I think the main principle (being a primitivist and all) is that "elders" (as all believers) should work with their hands (with christ-friendly jobs in which they can seek the kingdom of God...) in order to fill their needs. Of course, there might be some good exceptions, and I think the NT mentions "widows" and travelling sent-out-ones as the main ones, probably since working in the "normal" way for those people is not the option.

Anyway, of course we can receive any freely given gifts from each other (I don´t even believe in private property, for God´s sake!), as long as it is not a question of economic abundance (which it often is, of course, but probably not in Mark´s case). My problem is with certain believers given a fixed, regular amount of money to another believer so that the second believer can fulfill her/his God-given gifts/roles. As I see it, huge problems comes with this;
-it will appear, at least to some, as if serving with our gifts is an employment
-it will keep on (at least with the history we have) dividing believers into laity and clergy
-it will make the "minister" less free to say or do what the Spirit wants her/him to and will tempt her/him to do what is popular
-it will produce "ministers" that will be tempted to leave "ministry" whenever the economical base vanishes (the hired shepherd of John 10)
-it will produce "ministers" that are tempted to speak, not out of burning passion and belief, but because they have in order to make their living
-for this reasons and others it will also tempt the "minister" to not live in simple trust in God in the way that Jesus has taught us

Actually, I am a bit surprised that I even have to explain this when talking to anarchists and anabaptists... ;)

And by the way, if Michael is still listening, would you explain why my argument is "naive". To me it seems to be the opposite way. To make the ministry dependent on adds etc, believing that this won´t affect the message or the "minister", to me this is the naive position. (I am just being honest, I am not trying to hit back. I hope.)

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 13:17:09 -0000

Graham. I think the main principle (being a primitivist and all) is that "elders" (as all believers) should work with their hands (with christ-friendly jobs in which they can seek the kingdom of God...) in order to fill their needs. Of course, there might be some good exceptions, and I think the NT mentions "widows" and travelling sent-out-ones as the main ones, probably since working in the "normal" way for those people is not the option.

Anyway, of course we can receive any freely given gifts from each other (I don´t even believe in private property, for God´s sake!), as long as it is not a question of economic abundance (which it often is, of course, but probably not in Mark´s case). My problem is with certain believers given a fixed, regular amount of money to another believer so that the second believer can fulfill her/his God-given gifts/roles. As I see it, huge problems comes with this;
-it will appear, at least to some, as if serving with our gifts is an employment
-it will keep on (at least with the history we have) dividing believers into laity and clergy
-it will make the "minister" less free to say or do what the Spirit wants her/him to and will tempt her/him to do what is popular
-it will produce "ministers" that will be tempted to leave "ministry" whenever the economical base vanishes (the hired shepherd of John 10)
-it will produce "ministers" that are tempted to speak, not out of burning passion and belief, but because they have in order to make their living
-for this reasons and others it will also tempt the "minister" to not live in simple trust in God in the way that Jesus has taught us

Actually, I am a bit surprised that I even have to explain this when talking to anarchists and anabaptists... ;)

And by the way, if Michael is still listening, would you explain why my argument is "naive". To me it seems to be the opposite way. To make the ministry dependent on adds etc, believing that this won´t affect the message or the "minister", to me this is the naive position. (I am just being honest, I am not trying to hit back. I hope.)

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 15:19:27 -0000

brilliant. thanks, Mark.

Re: What is the New Monasticism?

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 16:19:27 -0000

brilliant. thanks, Mark.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 16:19:27 -0000

brilliant. thanks, Mark.

Re: Jesus and the Kids

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 14 May 2008 14:05:37 -0000

Good post, important stuff! The way we do it in our house church is to have a meal ("Jesus-dinner"/the Lord´s meal) in the center of our church. This makes it easier (not easy...) to welcome the children in the middle of the Messiah´s body, instead of sending them away when we do the important stuff (Jesus doesn´t seem to like that kind of behavior...). We have a short time of thanks-giving and someone reminding us of Jesus in the middle of the meal, but only for a few minutes. Besides this, we also meet in the evenings when the children are sleep so that we get to study the Bible, make decisions, share our need etc in a whole-hearted way.

Re: Jesus and the Kids

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 14 May 2008 14:05:37 -0000

Re: Jesus and the Kids

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 15 May 2008 23:56:50 -0000

I have a question for Luke and Jason. You both seems to view the children (the baptized children?) as disciples. Since even baptist baptize children these days, this doesn´t say what tradition you belong to, so I wonder if you think children should be baptized, and if children should be seen as disciples?

I was baptized at the eight, something I "regret" these days. I think our children should be welcomed into the community of the church without being baptized, and I think baptism should be linked to a radical conversion, turning from the world to Jesus, being ready to follow him to the cross etc. In my view, no one should be baptized before being ready and able to give up her/his life for Jesus, and therefor I think a child cannot be a follower of rabbi Jesus. I hold to a radical baptist position in regard to this.

Re: Jesus and the Kids

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 15 May 2008 23:56:50 -0000

Re: Jesus and the Kids

Jonas Lundström — Sun, 18 May 2008 03:51:42 -0000

Luke/Jason. Thanks. I am familiar with both of your positions. In one way, though, despite being a (kind of) baptist, I might regard Lukes position as more coherent. I´m not sure about Jasons interpretation about the anabaptists. I have studied historic anabaptism a lot and read their writings, and what you bring up might be a part of their motivation, but it at least wasn´t what they were emphasizing or arguing from (sounds more yoderian to my ears, which is fine to me, but not the same thing as historic anabaptism).

To follow Jesus is life-changing and might lead to death on a cross or similar means of execution. We should not invite people to this following before we regard them as responsible people that are able to make these kind of life-changing decisions. If one is not encouraged to marry (to mess with Luke´s metaphor), one should definitely not be encouraged to leave everything to follow Jesus. The one baptized should be at least theoretically able to obey the teachings of Jesus (Matt 28:18-20), which includes things as how we treat "our" property, how we can be a mature participator of reconciliation/church discipline (Matt 5, 18), and a builder of the church (1 Kor 14:26-, Ef 4). I cannot see that there is room biblically for separating baptism from full inclusion into the Messiah´s body (1 Kor 12). (Sorry for proof texting... :(

Re: Jesus and the Kids

Jonas Lundström — Sun, 18 May 2008 03:51:42 -0000

Re: Jesus and the Kids

Jonas Lundström — Sun, 18 May 2008 13:35:47 -0000

Luke. I have never said or thought that a "Christian" must be mature from the start. I think the starting point for the journey with the Messiah is to turn from the world, letting go of everything else. We turn around and begin moving in another direction. That is were we begin. This is what it means to become like a child, to be born again. But this is only the beginning of a long process, it has nothing to do with maturity. You spoke above of "learning to be disciples".

Regarding children and others that we would not put the burden of being responsible for life-changing decision upon, I think that they will be included into God´s kingdom without conversion, obedience or faithfulness to Jesus. Therefore I have no reason to expand the concepts of "faith" and "obedience" so that they include children in the way catholics and protestant have to do. To say that my four year old son should take up his cross and follow Jesus and leave his father and mother and everything he owns "at a level and with an ability appropriate to his age" sounds (to put i mildly) a little strange to me.

Re: Jesus and the Kids

Jonas Lundström — Sun, 18 May 2008 13:35:47 -0000

Re: Jesus and the Kids

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 19 May 2008 01:33:19 -0000

I have said several times that they should be included. I think I am even more inclusive ;). I don´t demand their baptism for them to be able to participate. When we celebrate the Lord´s supper (a full meal, of course), our (un-baptized) children are totally included.

Re: Jesus and the Kids

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 19 May 2008 01:33:19 -0000

Re: Jesus and the Kids

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 20 May 2008 13:36:53 -0000

Thanks Sara, good explanation. I am familiar with your view (I think), and I am myself not fully anabaptist. So far, I don´t view childrens baptism as nothing (as a radical baptist position might), but as something that at least need to be repaired or complemented. For my own part, I think of my baptism at eight as "repaired" or completed when I some years ago decided to join a covenant with a few other disciples. (I have been influenced by James McClendon on this one.) This is pretty close to confirmation, maybe, although I am more critical towards childrens baptism and would never baptize my children. But I am not convinced on my own position, sometimes I lean towards a more thorough anabaptist view.

Luke. I see where you are coming from and we can leave it at that. I appreciated the dialogue. I am not sure, though, that historic anabaptism without anabaptism (and with this, a degree of separatism) is anabaptism at all...

Re: Jesus and the Kids

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 20 May 2008 13:36:53 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 02:28:12 -0000

I´ve also recently read Witherington´s review, and I am not impressed. BW is clearly annoyed and preoccupied with his ecclesiological and theological presuppositions, and he doesn´t seem to even have read the book properly, judging from the way he describes their arguments. Viola´s book is not a thesis within the university, but a book (also) for people outside of the theological world. It appears oversimplified sometimes, I think, but I definitely agree with his overall thesis, provocative as it is. I think everyone should read this book. Why does representatives for the established churhes get so annoyed with this book? Maybe the feel threatened? Why? To just read critical reviews from the establishment and ignore the book won´t do. Especially, I think EC and NW-people should read the book. I am praying for some mixture of EC/NM and the stance that Viola represents.

Re: Pagan Christianity?

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 02:28:12 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 03:41:30 -0000

I also like "Jon´s" comments on Witheringtons review, in the comments-section connected to the review. I think BW i stuck with details, while largely ignoring the big picture. Is the church of today and/or AD 400 something vastly different then the early Jesus movement? As far as I can tell, most would say so. If this is the case, we do well to evaluate whether there are seeds for this development within the early tradition (the Scriptures) (=the orthodox position), or whether there are actually (more) seeds for opposing the "development" (=the radical reformation stance). I think Viola has done a good job presenting indications that the later position is more true. And actually, I think BW himself has done some work in this direction, for example his Making a Meal of It, which argues that originally the Lord´s supper was (or at least was taken together with) a real meal.

Re: Pagan Christianity?

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 03:41:30 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 03:42:46 -0000

I´m sorry, apparently we were speaking bout the same person (Jon Zens), didn´t notice that.

Re: Pagan Christianity?

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 03:42:46 -0000

I´m sorry, apparently we were speaking bout the same person (Jon Zens), didn´t notice that.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 04:10:08 -0000

A really great text! Thankyou for your extremely important words!

Re: The Style of Subversion Part 2: Resisting Pseudo Alterity

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 04:10:08 -0000

A really great text! Thankyou for your extremely important words!

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 04:19:21 -0000

( I´m a little worried about your strong separatist stance, though...) (kidding)

Re: The Style of Subversion Part 2: Resisting Pseudo Alterity

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 04:19:21 -0000

( I´m a little worried about your strong separatist stance, though...) (kidding)

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 13:40:14 -0000

Amen to this, Joe!

Re: When is enough enough?

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 13:40:14 -0000

Amen to this, Joe!

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 10:24:07 -0000

Thanks, Michael. For a similar resource, I highly recommend "The Early Christians in their own words" (Plough) by Eberhard Arnold, the founder of the very inspiring neo-anabaptist Bruderhof movement (churchcommunities.org). He has collected a massive amount of quotes from the early Jesus-movement under different headings.

Re: Early Christian Voices on War and Peace

Jonas Lundström — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 11:24:07 -0000

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 08:11:29 -0000

Hi Micael.
This is the site where information on their books is available: http://www.plough.com/ebooks.html. As you can see, all are available for free as e-books too.

Re: Early Christian Voices on War and Peace

Jonas Lundström — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 09:11:29 -0000

Hi Micael.
This is the site where information on their books is available: http://www.plough.com/ebooks.html. As you can see, all are available for free as e-books too.

Re: Does Jesus need a “movement”? Lessons from the old new monasticism

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 02:29:33 -0000

This is a very interesting and though-provoking discussion. Personally I agree with some of Paul´s points, but not all. I actually believe that Jesus and Paul was trying to change the world and build a movement. I think that there are other ways to use influence and power than through force, violence and deceit. But Paul´s comments gives the feeling that the way of Jesus is only for a few radical, chosen ones, and maybe even that we should avoid having it in any other way.

The challenge, as I see it, is to build a movement but avoid using the ways of the world and building babylon-like power structures.

(I have not yet read all of the comments above, so maybe I´m misinterpreting this conversation. If this is the case, please tell me.)

Re: Does Jesus need a “movement”? Lessons from the old new monasticism

Jonas Lundström — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 08:53:19 -0000

Yeah. For my own part, I go with the universalist postion. I look forward to the day when every one will bow their knees for the Messiah, and all the peoples will worship God. The nations will beat their swords into plowshares and learn to not practise war anymore. Sounds like a movement to me... At the same time, though, I stick with the anabaptist tradition and emphasize that the road is narrow. I think a church should be a disciplined community which only baptize people who has been converted and "conversions" should be tested in light of the radical demands of Jesus.

How to reconcile those convictions, I´m not sure of. Maybe the big shift will come within the next "age" and the resurrection etc. But I still think the church should be a movement, and I definitely think this is the impression one gets from Acts, Matthew 28 and some of the letters. A minority and disestablished (anarchic) movement, but still a movement.

To some extent I think the Amish, the Hutterites and the Bruderhof have accomplished this, but probably you would disagree?

Re: Does Jesus need a “movement”? Lessons from the old new monasticism

Jonas Lundström — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 03:07:12 -0000

There is a lot of truth in what you say. But I still can´t see that Jesus and the apostles wasn´t building a movement. I tend to see the authoritarian structures of the late anabaptists as something that has been received from the established churches, and never have been dealt with thouroughly. Even the early anabaptist Schleitheim-confession speaks about one shepherd in the church. I tend to think that we are missing a reformation here, and that the hierarchy introduced through Ignatius and others in the early church needs to be confronted.

A question: if we shouldn´t have a movement, what then is our hope for the future? That only the few will answer and that the vast majority will perish? To me, this seems to mean that God will not win out on God´s creation in the end and this makes me very discouraged.

Re: @collapse: exploring the future of blogging against empire

Jonas Lundström — Thu, 07 May 2009 06:31:20 -0000

Jim. Good comment. May God help us.