dwight j. friesen » gospel

“free for all” April 15-16 Durham, NC

Dwight J. Friesen — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 14:46:36 +0000

There is a free conference being held in Durham, NC (April 15&16, 2010) bringing people together in discussion around the themes raised in the outstanding new book by Tim Conder & Dan Rhodes, Free for All: Rediscovering the Bible In Community.

Tim Conder

Dan Rhodes

Check out the schedule . . . it promises to be an amazing opportunity to conversationally connect with thoughtful people around Scripture in community.

I will be participating in the event myself and look forward to seeing you there. Again, here is the link to the Free for All Conference.

Peace, dwight

MLK’s call to be maladjusted

Dwight J. Friesen — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 23:30:07 +0000

This is what, among other things, Dr. King said in Michigan a little over 26 years ago:

‘”There are certain technical words within every academic discipline that soon become stereotypes and cliches. Modern psychology has a word that is probably used more than any other word in modern psychology. It is the word ‘maladjusted.’ This word is the ringing cry to modern child psychology. Certainly, we all want to avoid the maladjusted life. In order to have real adjustment within our personalities, we all want the well-adjusted life in order to avoid neurosis, schizophrenic personalities.

“But I say to you, my friends, as I move to my conclusion, there are certain things in our nation and in the world which I am proud to be maladjusted and which I hope all men of good-will will be maladjusted until the good societies realize. I say very honestly that I never intend to become adjusted to segregation and discrimination.

“I never intend to become adjusted to religious bigotry.

“I never intend to adjust myself to economic conditions that will take necessities from the many to give luxuries to the few.

“I never intend to adjust myself to the madness of militarism, to self-defeating effects of physical violence. But in a day when sputniks and explorers are dashing through outer space and guided ballistic missiles are carving highways of death through the stratosphere, no nation can win a war. It is no longer the choice between violence and nonviolence. It is either nonviolence or nonexistence, and the alternative to disarmament. The alternative to absolute suspension of nuclear tests. The alternative to strengthening the United Nations and thereby disarming the whole world may well be a civilization plunged into the abyss of annihilation. This is why I welcome the recent test-ban treaty.

“In other words, I’m about convinced now that there is need for a new organization in our world. The International Association for the Advancement of Creative Maladjustment–men and women who will be as maladjusted as the prophet Amos. Who in the midst of the injustices of his day could cry out in words that echo across the centuries, ‘Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream.’”

Peace, dwight

Tony Jones – Teaching of the 12

Dwight J. Friesen — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 07:27:22 +0000

Welcome to day nine of the Tony Jones’, The Teaching of the Twelve, blog Tour.

Let me begin expressing my gratitude for the thoughtful engagement with the Didache not only by Tony Jones but also by the other bloggers who have engaged this classic work through Tony’s new work. I am thrilled to see the way Tony has personally explored the Didache and now offers his engagement with this important text to the world.

Given that I am no Didache scholar I want to make couple of important, though straightforward observations in response to the following question.

“Does the Didache teach or advise anything that substantively differs from what was decided at the earliest ecumenical church councils. (such as Nicaea)”

No doubt there are a number of ways a person could respond to this question, as for me I begin simply by making a genre observation. The Didache or “The Teaching” is a different type of writing then a Creed; they are different genres. Granted “genres” are rather loose sets of criteria for a category of literature and/or speech; nonetheless genres tend to have different functions so we would be wise to be careful that we’re not comparing apples with oranges.

Comparing the Didache to a Creed may be a little bit like comparing a sermon with systematic theology. We can see they are related, but the goals, language and function within the life of the faith community are different. Therefore I want to be a little bit cautious about drawing too firm a conclusion about substantive differences between the Didache and the early creeds (and for the sake of simplicity let’s focus on the Creed born of the First Nicaea Council).

Having said this I think it is not insignificant that the Didache – which predates our first council considerably – is a teaching which stresses communal life lived in the Way of Jesus. The four movements of the Didache are very practical teachings on how to live and surprising little about what to believe. The four movements as Tony outlines them are (see pages 7-8):

Training in the Way of Life (1:1-6:2)
The Rhythms of Community Life (6:3-11:2)
Visitors Welcome (11:3-15:4)
The End is Nigh (16:1-8)

While the Didache is a one of our earliest glimpses into the practical life of primitive Christians; a glimpse into how the people gathering together in Christ and seeking to live in the way of Jesus actually engaged culture, economics, community, and ritual etc. it is striking at how little doctrine it presents. While just the opposite could be said of the Creed born of our First Church Council at Nicæa (325) . . . in the document out of Nicæa we have a fairly clear confession of beliefs with no practices or rituals.

This to me is the primary difference between the two documents. One is concerned with how we should live, the other what we confess. Part of me would like to jump to the conclusion that how we live should trump what we confess. Personally I’m not convinced I can make that jump based on these two documents. Confessions of belief tend to follow transformed lives.

Again the question posed to me asked, “Does the Didache teach or advise anything that substantively differs from what was decided at the earliest ecumenical church councils?”

I would propose that any substantive difference lies not in the claims per se, but in the types of discourse which the two documents engender. Creeds tend to engender debate, binary agreement or disagreement, the choosing of sides, “I believe/I don’t believe.” Such discourse is often abstracted from the “real world.” By contrast the Didache seems to invite a discourse about exploring questions of embodiment, the nature and function of community, it raises questions about how we show live and follow Jesus now where we are.

BTW – I highly recommend you The Teaching of the Twelve to you.

Peace, dwight

Envision 2008

Dwight J. Friesen — Tue, 06 May 2008 17:47:38 +0000

A very interesting, and I think very important conversation is about to take place around “the Gospel, politics & the future.”

Here is an excerpt from an email my friend Keelan Downton sent this morning. “This June 8-10, scholars, artists, activists, and pastors will converge on Princeton to envision a course for Christian political engagement over the next decade. We hope you’ll be one of them. Over 60 leaders will guide a strategic conversation and deep meditation to discern what it means to be a prophetic Christian in America today.”

For more details visit: www.ev08.org

Peace, dwight

lausanne . . . what’s next?

Dwight J. Friesen — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 23:00:57 +0000

I recently returned from the Lausanne’s 2006 Younger Leaders Gathering which was held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. To be in one place with followers of Christ from 110 nations, was a privilege. Rarely have I had the opportunity to meet, hear stories and learn from such a racially and ethically diverse group.

Paul Steinke, Chris Keller (The Other Journal) and I traveled together both to the conference and back again; and our times of processing what we were hearing and experiencing was more than worth the price of admission.

There are a number of descriptions of the event; lyg06blog, Christianity Today, The Christian Post, and Sivin Kit 1, 2, 3.

Having studied with both TV Thomas and Robert Coleman I’d heard many Lausanne stories and was familiar with both the Lausanne Covenant and the Manila Manifesto prior to the last week’s gathering.

One of the phrases used throughout the conference was, “The whole church, bringing the whole gospel, to the whole world.” Ramez Atallah, who was one of the plenary speakers and the person chairing the programming portion of the congress in the works for 2010 was the first person from the front to challenge Lausanne’s use of the phrase. Ramez suggested that to be more accurate the Lausanne network represents “the whole evangelical church” at best, as Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox voices not well represented. Later, during a meeting of delegates interested in further theological engagement, the concern around the assumed meaning of “whole church,” “whole gospel” and “whole world” was brought up. Concern over the term “evangelical” was also highlighted as the term has morphed significantly since this network was formed.

From my perspective, a number of important issues current in missional work were scarcely given time: America’s abuse of power, postmodern critiques of power, contextual theology, mission in a post-Christendom era, the gift post-colonialism, let alone issues of globalization, and the exportation of capitalism.

Now the question I’m wrestling with is, “what, if any, role do I play with the Lausanne network of the future?”

I don’t have a solid response yet; it’s a significant network and the possibilities for it to serve, connect, and resource is unique.

There is so much more I could say, but for now . . .

peace, dwight

lausanne movement

Dwight J. Friesen — Thu, 13 Apr 2006 22:35:39 +0000

I just received word that I’ll have the privilege and responsibility being one of the North American representatives at the Younger Leaders Gathering ’06 (mid 30’s and younger) sponsored by the Lausanne Movement. This gathering of 550 emerging leaderes from roughly 100 countries will be held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia at the end of September 2006.

As a former student of TV Thomas, Robert Coleman, and Ajith Fernando I have heard many stories from this historic movement, and its importance for the evangelical church. I can’t believe that I get to participate, wow!

Historically the Lausanne Conference has focused on world evangelization. What is ‘world evangelization’ today? So much within Western Christian thought and practice is being reimagined – if not entirely revisioned – that I wonder what this global conversation will be like. How will the effects of the spread of consumerism, globalism, urbanism, post-modernism, the threat pandemics or more generally what does the ‘spread of the Good News of Jesus Christ’ sound like to those whose lives are so radically different from mine. For those discipled into a form of colonial Christianity what is world evangelism? With all the conversation in recent years regarding atonement theories, universalism, the afterlife, etc. how might such a conversation proceed? How big is ‘our’ gospel? Can I understand ‘their’ gospel? And what happens when our gospels tangle?

If you could bring a question, a concern, or a hope to such a gathering what might you bring? I’m open to suggestions and thoughts.

Peace, dwight

social-evangelicals

Dwight J. Friesen — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 20:18:58 +0000

A comment in a student’s paper this Spring has been lingering in the back of my mind. Dale Helt re-framed the classic Evangelical litmus-test question by exchanging the word “personal” for “communal.” The question, as he voiced it was, “Do you have a communal relationship with God?”

I very much appreciate the direction Dale is taking this question.

I (like many Evangelicals – I suppose) lived much of my life with a truncated vision and articulation of the Good News.

How good is the good news? Is the good news only good for some – is it good for all – what about creation?

peace, dwight

inverting the bridge illustration

Dwight J. Friesen — Sat, 02 Jul 2005 12:42:24 +0000

Recently, I wrote a very brief article for Off-the-Map.org, titled, “Rethinking the Bridge Illustration.”

You can find it here.

Peace, dwight

morphing message

Dwight J. Friesen — Sat, 16 Aug 2003 07:32:46 +0000

Talking with a “solid” evangelical” leader the other day I heard him say something to the effect of, “our message never changes, our methods may but not our message.” I would suggest that our message does in fact need to evolve.

Consider Salvation: The centrality of the cross. Our sinfulness. Our need for be made holy by the work of Christ and we speak of Salvation history etc.

In the spirit of evolving message, I would throw out there that forgiveness was never a primary goal of God’s, and that our Western emphasis on “salvation” place our sin at the center of the God story. It may be time for us to evolve.

God is relationship, he has created us in his image for relationship. Therefore it may stand to reason that in may be wise to place our emphasis on reconciliation and adoption into the family of God. This places relationship at the center of the God story. Relating becomes primary not my sin.

Remember that evolving does not obliterate what came before, rather it morphs it.

Peace, dwight

incarnation: the gospel’s center

Dwight J. Friesen — Thu, 14 Aug 2003 07:30:31 +0000

The Eastern Orthodox concept of the center point of the gospel as the incarnation of Christ makes more and more sense to me. If we are relationally created by a relational God (One/Three), than it make sense that the Emmanuel (God with Us) is core.

In order for any relationship to endure, death is essential. Call it kenosis, emptying, self-negation, the way of the cross, etc.; offering oneself for the “other” and for the “Us” is a relational necessity. To pursue self is anti-relational, is anit-Christ.

The cross of Christ is vital. Because life, love and relationship is only possible if one is dies to self.

The relational beauty of the incarnation of Christ is not the Cross but is his Ascension.

Incarnation = God with Human
Cross = death to self for life together
Ascension = Human with God

When Jesus Christ ascends to our Father we see the Divine/Human relationship move to a relationship of reciprocity, (which is now and not yet). Jesus – fully God and fully human present with God in perfect oneness. And his high priestly prayer suggesting that can be our experience too.

Peace, dwight