LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW - Brock University

LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW - Brock University LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW - Brock University

concordiasem.ab.ca
from concordiasem.ab.ca More from this publisher
10.01.2015 Views

26 LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW IX Christ. A reading of Hebrews 6-9 reveals how temple worship was fulfilled and abolished in the incarnation of the Messiah. Jesus inaugurated the new order (Hebrews 9:8-15). The rending of the curtain on Good Friday signified the fulfilment of Old Testament temple worship. The temple was no longer thought of in terms of a building but as a Person—the Messiah (Matthew 12:6; John 2:19). The temple was thought of in terms of His Body—the Church (I Peter 2:4-5; II Cor. 6:16)—and as individual members of that Body (I Corinthians 3:16-17; 6:19). When “the Word became flesh and made his dwelling [‘tabernacled’] among us” (John 1:14) the temple, the ceremonial law, and the Levitical priesthood became obsolete to the Christian disciple. Matthew 18:20 is a plain rejection of the Jewish understanding of worship for, on the one hand, the presence of the incarnate Lord replaced the cultic presence of God in the temple, and on the other hand, the requirement of at least ten persons for Jewish worship was abandoned. 5 After a time the Christian came to the realisation that he did not have a significant reason to worship at the temple or observe the ceremonial law. But the Christian had no holy place which had been particularly chosen by God as His place of visitation. The Christian simply knew Christ had promised He would be present wherever two or three gathered in His name around the Word and the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Thus, an elaborate building, set aside for the worship of God, was of little importance to them. The ordinary house became the setting for the gathering of Christ’s “temples” as they gathered around His holy Table in the presence of the Word to receive the Word. When we study Luke/Acts we see a movement away from the temple to the household. John H. Elliott 6 observes that, whereas the Gospel of Luke opens (Luke 1:5-23) and closes (Luke 24:50-53) with scenes in the temple, the opening chapter of Acts has the disciples in a house (Acts 1:12-14) and concludes with Paul’s house confinement in Rome (Acts 28:30-31). He also observes that within the first eight chapters of Acts the scene shifts with regularity between the household, where the believers gather for worship and hospitality, and the temple, which had become a centre of bankrupt politics and religious control. In his article, “Temple versus Household in Luke-Acts,” John Elliott writes: 5 See Ferdinand Hahn, The Worship of the Early Church, trans. David E. Green (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1973) 46. 6 John Elliott, “Temple versus Household in Luke/Acts”, in Jerome H. Neyrey, ed., The Social World of Luke-Acts (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1991) 225-26. See also John Elliott, A Home for the Homeless (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1981) 193-94.

SCHAEFFER: HOUSE CHURCHES 27 The temple, at first the locale of hoped for salvation and symbol of Israel’s holy union with God, eventually is unmasked as the political concentration of power opposed to God’s people and the truly righteous. The household, on the other hand, once the gathering place of the powerless and the marginalized, eventually emerges as the institution where God’s spirit is truly active and where familial relations, shared resources, and communal values concretize the vision of a salvation available to all the families of the earth. 7 There is another theological reason for the birthing of the house church. New Testament Christians thought of God as their “Father” and of each other as brothers and sisters in the family of God. Elliott observes: In this kingdom/household, God is experienced as a merciful, generous, and forgiving “father” (Luke 2:49; 6:36; 9:36; 10:21-22; 11:1, 13; 12:30, 32; 22:29, 42; 23:34, 46; 24:49; Acts 1:4, 7; 2:33). Jesus is recognized as “Son of God” (Luke 1:35; 3:22; 4:3, 9, 41; 8:28; 9:35; 10:22; 20:13; 22:70; Acts 8:37; 9:20; 13:53). In contrast to the “children of Jerusalem” (13:34), believers who hear and do Jesus’ words form his new family (8:19-21) and become the true “children” of the heavenly Father (11:13; 24:49), “brothers and sisters”, one with another (Luke 6:41-42; 8:19-21; 17:3-4; 22:32; Acts 1:15-16; 2:29, 37; 6:3; 9:17, 30; 10:23; 11:1, 12, 29; 12:17; 14:2; 15:1, 3, 7, 12, 22-23, 32-33, 36, 40; 16:2, 40; 17:6, 10, 14; 18:18, 27; 21:7, 17, 20, 22; 22:13; 28:14, 15). 8 With this familial understanding of God’s relationship with man through Jesus Christ it was only appropriate the family of God should meet with their Father, His Son, and the Paraclete in a Christian household. With this brief explanation, one can see the paternal theological traits stamped on the embryonic development of the house church. But the theological “seed” was not the only thing that brought about the conception and development of the house church. There was also the missiological “seed” that contributed to its conception. A survey of the Book of Acts 9 will demonstrate that one of Paul’s missionary methods was to target the pater familias for conversion. 10 Paul’s 7 Elliott, “Temple versus Household” 217. 8 Elliott, “Temple versus Household” 228. 9 See chapters 10 (Cornelius), 16 (Lydia and the jailer of Philippi), 17 (Jason), 18 (Aquila and Priscilla). 10 See Wayne A. Meeks, The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1983) 28-30; Derek Tidball, The Social Context of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Academie Books, 1984) 84-85; E. A. Judge, The Social Pattern of the Christian Groups in the New Testament (London: The Tyndale Press, 1960) 36; Del Birkey, “The House Church: A Missiological Model,” Missiology: An International Review XIX, 1 (Jan. 1991): 93-94; Dimitris J. Kyrtatas, The Social Structure of the Early Christian Communities (New York: Verso, 1987) 134-35;

26 <strong>LUTHERAN</strong> <strong>THEOLOGICAL</strong> <strong>REVIEW</strong> IX<br />

Christ. A reading of Hebrews 6-9 reveals how temple worship was fulfilled<br />

and abolished in the incarnation of the Messiah. Jesus inaugurated the new<br />

order (Hebrews 9:8-15). The rending of the curtain on Good Friday signified<br />

the fulfilment of Old Testament temple worship. The temple was no longer<br />

thought of in terms of a building but as a Person—the Messiah (Matthew<br />

12:6; John 2:19). The temple was thought of in terms of His Body—the<br />

Church (I Peter 2:4-5; II Cor. 6:16)—and as individual members of that<br />

Body (I Corinthians 3:16-17; 6:19). When “the Word became flesh and<br />

made his dwelling [‘tabernacled’] among us” (John 1:14) the temple, the<br />

ceremonial law, and the Levitical priesthood became obsolete to the<br />

Christian disciple. Matthew 18:20 is a plain rejection of the Jewish<br />

understanding of worship for, on the one hand, the presence of the incarnate<br />

Lord replaced the cultic presence of God in the temple, and on the other<br />

hand, the requirement of at least ten persons for Jewish worship was<br />

abandoned. 5 After a time the Christian came to the realisation that he<br />

did not have a significant reason to worship at the temple or observe<br />

the ceremonial law. But the Christian had no holy place which had<br />

been particularly chosen by God as His place of visitation. The<br />

Christian simply knew Christ had promised He would be present<br />

wherever two or three gathered in His name around the Word and the<br />

Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Thus, an elaborate<br />

building, set aside for the worship of God, was of little importance to<br />

them. The ordinary house became the setting for the gathering of<br />

Christ’s “temples” as they gathered around His holy Table in the<br />

presence of the Word to receive the Word.<br />

When we study Luke/Acts we see a movement away from the temple to<br />

the household. John H. Elliott 6 observes that, whereas the Gospel of Luke<br />

opens (Luke 1:5-23) and closes (Luke 24:50-53) with scenes in the temple,<br />

the opening chapter of Acts has the disciples in a house (Acts 1:12-14) and<br />

concludes with Paul’s house confinement in Rome (Acts 28:30-31). He also<br />

observes that within the first eight chapters of Acts the scene shifts with<br />

regularity between the household, where the believers gather for worship<br />

and hospitality, and the temple, which had become a centre of bankrupt<br />

politics and religious control. In his article, “Temple versus Household in<br />

Luke-Acts,” John Elliott writes:<br />

5 See Ferdinand Hahn, The Worship of the Early Church, trans. David E. Green<br />

(Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1973) 46.<br />

6 John Elliott, “Temple versus Household in Luke/Acts”, in Jerome H. Neyrey, ed., The<br />

Social World of Luke-Acts (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1991) 225-26. See also John Elliott,<br />

A Home for the Homeless (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1981) 193-94.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!