Acts 4:32-36

In Bible study yesterday and Acts 4:32-36 was read and reflected on. The group was reflecting on the wonderful nature of communal living and sharing all things. And it is a wonderful thing to consider this sort of living. It is this ideal living which draws me to the Neo-monastic lifestyle.

However I could not help but wonder if the original hearers would have tuned in on the communal living part of the story. I mean community living was very much a normal part of life in the first century (and in many places today). To hear of a community living and sharing together does not seem to strike me as hard if I lived in community than it does if I lived in an individualistic community. I think this might be why we tend to focus on this part of the story.

However, I was drawn to the second part: "Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, whom the apostles called Barnabas (which means Son of Encouragement), sold a field he owned and brought the money and put it at the apostles' feet." I think what is remarkable here is the fact that a Levite, that is one of the priests of the day, willingly gave up power and position by selling and laying the money at the feet of the representatives of Jesus. This is a guy who had a lot of power (I mean look at his name, they make it sound like he is well known and comes from a well known family) and he just gives it up for the church.

I think there is a greatness to the communal living, but how much greater is the example of this Levite? Am I willing to give up my privilege, position and power and put it at the feet of the community of Jesus? Or will I continue to preserve some of my power and privilege from the community of Jesus (as the next part of the story goes into)?

Fishing for men???

Taken from one of my favorite books, “Binding the Strong Man: A Political Reading of Mark’s Story of Jesus” by Ched Myers

There is perhaps no expression more traditionally misunderstood than Jesus’ invitation to these workers to become ‘fishers of men’ (Mark 1:17). This metaphor, despite the grand old tradition of missionary interpretation, does not refer to the “saving of souls,” as if Jesus were conferring upon these men instant evangelist status. Rather, the image is carefully chosen from Jeremiah 16:16, where it is used as a symbol of Yahweh’s censure of Israel. Elsewhere the “hooking of fish” is a euphemism for judgment upon the rich (Amos 4:2) and powerful (Ezekiel 29:4). Taking this mandate for his own, Jesus is inviting common fold to join him in his struggle to overturn the existing order of power and privilege.

I would add two things to this. Matthew 17:27 Jesus asks his disciples to pull a fish out of the water and remove the riches in its mouth. Secondly, In light of this interpretation it is highly ironic that James Avery would make an gold and silver “fishers of men” bracelet.

Nomadic or static

My good friend Kyle and I had coffee the other day. In our conversation which ranges from books to movies to theology to being fathers, he disclosed to me an interpretation of the Biblical narrative which he experienced (which he reminded me is in part the foundation of the book “Jesus Wants to Save Christians”).

In it he said there is this constant tension of our desire to be stationary and God’s calling us to be nomadic. We build cities in Babel, God disperses us. We build tents on at the transfiguration, God tells us that would be inappropriate. We want to bury our dead, Jesus calls us to follow. Cain (a worker of the land) kills Abel (a nomadic herder) because God liked Abel’s offering more. We want to build a temple, God asks why; I have been with you in the wilderness. Adam and Eve give up foraging for food in Eden for a life bound to working the land for food.

This can go on and on and on and on…

Which all begs the question, is the church setting down roots, build our own empires and walls or are we moving out, being nomadic and living on the move?

Either way, I can guarantee I will be at my church building on Sunday.