The Imago Dei and Ministry

Posted on April 2, 2014 by J Richard Middleton

I regularly teach a course on the Biblical Worldview at Northeastern Seminary, in which one of the student assignments is to reflect on the implications of humanity created as imago Dei (Latin for “image of God”). Students are asked to think out loud about how understanding their own lives in terms of this biblical doctrine (first articulated in Genesis 1:26-28) might impact their vocation and ministry, whether inside or outside the church. Although the course is addressed to seminarians and is focused theologically and ethically, it is grounded in rigorous study of the Bible in its historical context. So when it comes to the imago Dei, students are asked to move beyond speculative ideas in the history of the church and connect what we know about the imago Dei in the Bible (given its ancient Near Eastern context) with their lives in the contemporary world.

The Seminary has recently published reflections on this topic from three current M.Div. students in their March Newsletter (Resound). The three reflections (on pages 1-2) are collectively entitled “Investigating the Imago Dei—Student Reflections.” These reflections (by Kayleigh, Brian, and Steven) are well worth reading and have relevance far beyond pastoral ministry.

Here is the pdf of the newsletter. Here is the link to read it online.

Resurrection Ethics

Posted on March 21, 2014 by J Richard Middleton

Matt Davis is writing an M.A. thesis at Northeastern Seminary on the ethics of resurrection in the New Testament. He kindly agreed for me to post a recent email exchange we had.

Guest Post from Matt Davis—A Student’s Note after Class

I’ve been struggling with how my life should be reflecting my study of resurrection ethics. You write on the last two pages of chapter 7 (“Resurrection and the Restoration of Rule”) in your forthcoming book, A New Heaven and a New Earth: Reclaiming Biblical Eschatology, that the “resurrection turns the world upside down.”

I have been trying to get a better understanding of turning certain habits in my life upside down. I have been thinking more about my income and where my money goes. How much I give, and where I give it, is becoming increasingly important to me.

Also, you say that the cultural mandate and the resurrection “cannot be separated” and I agree. Your understanding of the cultural mandate in association with resurrection (the notion that God will restore the righteous to earth-stewardship) has given voice to my recent interest in ecology and being a responsible person concerning the earth. After discussing the resurrection, Paul says that “in the Lord our labor is not in vain” (1 Cor 15:58). I see people’s everyday ecological choices as laboring in the Lord, knowing they are not in vain.

Using the language of “power” and our “misuse” of that power, I feel an increased responsibility to fulfill the cultural mandate, and, in doing so, “anticipate and embody God’s new world that is coming” (last sentence in chapter 7).

I feel like I’m thinking aloud and most of this is obvious, but thought I would send this off to you since I wasn’t able to speak to you after class Thursday.

Middleton Response to Matt Davis

Thank you so much, Matt, for sharing these profound thoughts with me. I’m glad to see you thinking about (and struggling with) these things.

I certainly don’t have full answers to all your questions. And I can’t say that I fully live out my own ideals. But I think it is important to continue on the journey, and keep on raising questions so we don’t become complacent.

I also don’t believe we should become guilt-ridden and paralyzed over these questions. For two reasons.

First, salvation (including resurrection and the restoration of rule) is God’s gift to us before it is a calling to fulfill in our lives. God is already at work in us by his Spirit before we even begin to work out our salvation with fear and trembling.

Second, we are part of a body/ community tasked with embodying God’s coming kingdom. Therefore, it is unrealistic to think that one individual could fully embody this kingdom. We are in process together with others, and should be encouraging each other and challenging each other to manifest the kingdom in more and more consistent ways.

One of the things I’ve said for a long time is that I need a church community that is aware they are trying to answer the question of what it means to be the church faithfully in the contemporary context. That I haven’t always found such a community has often been a source of disappointment for me.

As you know, the church I’ve been attending (Community of the Savior) was constituted formally as a Free Methodist Church this past Sunday (and I became a charter member). At that ceremony one of our pastors said explicitly that we are beginning to realize that we need to keep asking the question of how we are to be the church today (rather than just continue on our merry way in acquiescence with the status quo).

This awareness of the question helps me know that “in the Lord [my] labor is not in vain” (1 Cor 15:58).

We should talk more about this face-to-face.

My Assumptions for Studying and Teaching the Bible

Posted on March 19, 2014 by J Richard Middleton

Here are five assumptions that undergird my own study of Scripture and all my teaching at Northeastern Seminary. I first came up with this list when I was just beginning my tenure at Northeastern in 2011, and I’ve been sharing it with incoming students ever since.

The Bible tells one complex, coherent true story.

The Bible is a complex collection of literature that nevertheless is framed in terms of a coherent story of redemption that is meant to guide our lives. The coherence of Scripture holds true despite many differing theological emphases, and even the presence of dissonant voices. We ignore both the coherence and the complexity of Scripture at our peril.

The biblical story is holistic.

The biblical God is the creator of all and everything that God made is good. While the fall is radical (both deep, to the heart, and broad, affecting every corner of life), Scripture proclaims God’s intent to redeem all creation (human and non-human) and to bring this world to the destiny for which he created it. The biblical worldview acknowledges no sacred/secular split.

The Bible is temporal and contextual.

While the biblical message is applicable to all times and places, revelation is given in particular times and places, and is definitively marked by its historical contexts. Attending to this temporal and contextual character of Scripture is crucial for responsible interpretation.

Humans are granted a significant role in the Scriptures.

Not only is the Bible pervaded by the perspectives of its multiple human authors (through whom revelation has come), but Scripture recounts the decisive role of human characters within the biblical story at every turn as significant contributors to the movement (whether forward or backward) of the story of redemption. We must attend to the complex divine-human relationship in the pages of Scripture.

Serious study of the Bible should itself be a process of transformation and discipleship.

It is not enough to say that studying the Bible should lead to transformation and discipleship. This often means that study about the Bible (or someone else’s summary of the Bible or sermons on the Bible) is substituted for our actual engaged grappling with Scripture. Nor is this reducible to lectio divina, valuable as that practice is, since this can artificially separate our spirituality from our cognitive attempts to understand the Bible, in its full complexity. Rather, it is the process of grappling with the detailed complexity of particular texts (even texts that we find challenging) that draws us into the biblical story as engaged dialogue partners with God and as committed participants in God’s mission to redeem creation.