Posted by Joshua Woo

Three weeks ago, on 9th December, Gospel@Areopagus held our first meeting. The theme of our discussion was 'Kingdom of God' (KOG). 

We have three presenters on three different topics on this theme:

Benjamin Lee on 'Church Leadership and the Kingdom of God'.

Jason Ting on ' Pentecostalism's Perspective on the Kingdom of God'.

Zhe Hao on 'Twentieth Century Theological Perspectives on the Kingdom of God'.

It was a wonderful session where we get to learn about the many issues concerning this important theme of the Christian faith: KOG. Each are given 20 minutes max to share their findings and then followed by a discussion session. 

Benjamin summarized the necessity of church leadership to emphasize on this theme in the life of the church. Following Ben Witherington III's Imminent Domain: The Story of the Kingdom of God and Its Celebration, Benjamin mentioned that the idea of KOG is the herald of the dominion of God, bringing God's rule in whatever that we are doing. The KOG is an active and passive domain of God.

God's renewal of the world is by recreating humans in the divine image, not through social or political (violent) changes. So it is one-by-one changes. Evangelism should be seen as transforming people into dominion-bearer, dominated by God's rule.

Church's leaders are expected to submit to God's rule and demand the community that they are responsible for to do the same. When more lives are changed into dominion-bearers, the values of the society would change accordingly.

Benjamin profoundly stated that the Church is the counter-balance of secular power-struggle because the KOG is the final power structure. The values of the church can be seen as a comparison between the people of God and those who are not. It is through our deeds of righteousness like evangelism and social works that God's dominion is advanced.

Although the KOG has such a significant place in the world, nonetheless we must not see the Church as reigning in the world. The Church is not into the business of furthering the Church's dominion in the society. Church leaders need to constantly emphasize the Church's mission as expanding God's dominion rather than the Church's.

In this sense, the unity among local churches must  be public and visible. Through unity that the Church able to be more effective in the work of KOG. 

Benjamin ended his presentation by sharing with us why he picked this topic. He told us that the local congregation he belongs to has never preaches on KOG. If KOG is such a central theme in Jesus' own ministry, then the local churches cannot neglect it.

During discussion time, there was an interesting question raised by other participants: If the local secular government has been doing a good job in term of social and community services, what roles are there for the local churches to play? 

None of us have any answer. However the articulation of this question forces upon us the awareness to rethink and to think hard what is the relevance and place of the Church in the local society? This is our first step.

Mui Kiang raised an acute issue prevalent among households with maids. She is convinced that the KOG has implications to the treatment of domestic helpers by Christian families. Day-off and rest-time should be given to the maids as part of Christians' daily measure to exercise the reality of the dominion of God. She remarked that perhaps due to the sensitive implications of KOG that local pulpits do not dare to preach about it.

On the other hand, Edmund mentioned that the job of the church leaders is to preach and teach faithfully and not to discern the sincerity of the members. His remark is a response to Benjamin's earlier point about the vagueness of the congregation's sincerity in living up God's dominion in the world.

After the discussion ended, Jason presented his Pentecostal perspective on the KOG. He started off by talking about the five points that mark the full extend of the gospel: (1) Justification, (2) Sanctification, (3) Healing, (4) Pre-millenium return of Christ, and (5) Baptized by the holy spirit.

The Pentecostal community sees the phenomenon of 'Spirit Baptism' being part of the Christian life serves as the Pentecostalism's contribution to the understanding of the KOG where Christ is the king while the Holy Spirit is the active presence.  

It is the Spirit of the eschaton that causes the fusion between space and time and so framed human responsibility as part of the in-breaking of the KOG into the present. Therefore the KOG should also reflects the possibility of divine healing on the sick as well as other physical benefits such as alleviation of poverty and increase in affluence. 

Nonetheless, Jason was critical that the prosperity gospel that is preached among local churches is a distorted teaching because it is a form of over-realized eschatology. 

Usually these types of teaching creates the ugly culture of elitism within the Church. The rich and healthy ones are deemed as being more faithful, hence they are like the first class Christians. Their wealth and health are seen as God's favor in response to their faith.  Those who are sick and poor are doubted for their faith and so considered as second class Christians. The value of their faith is not as authentic or real as compared to the first class Christians.

Jason also highlighted the lack of the talk about the role and place of the Holy Spirit in the usual discourse about the KOG.  There is a lack of seeing the phenomenon of tongues as kairos event that discloses God's presence in the world. The gift of tongues is a sign that needs to be confirmed by the life of the believers. Therefore tongue by itself is not meant to be used as 'evidence' to demonstrates  anything. Tongues should not be used as a measurement to see if someone as more spiritual or less.

Jason's presentation generated an enthusiastic discussion. Wei Yi shared about his concern over one of his church leaders who emphasizes the place of tongues in corporate worship. He said that the pastor seems to want the congregation to pray and speak in tongues during services. In similar vein, others tried to clarify with Jason whether should glossolalia be allowed during corporate worship. The group discussed over 1 Corinthians 14 to see what apostle Paul said about it.

Personally I would like to also see Jason extending his Pentecostal reflection on the KOG to include political theology, like what well-known Pentecostal theologian Amos Yang has done in In the Days of Caesar: Pentecostalism and Political Theology.

After the discussion ended, Zhe Hao took his turn to present the slightly more technical discussion on KOG by twentieth century theologians and biblical scholars.  He very briefly introduced various understandings of KOG, the language of eschatology, and apocalyticism.

He mentioned that the so-called little apocalypse in Mark 13 is the contentious ground of which scholars have different opinions on. And it is this passage that led people confused over what actually did Jesus mean by the reality of the KOG: was Jesus mistaken about the timing of the arrival of the KOG in verse 30? If not, what was Jesus trying to say about the KOG?

Again, another issue which we do not have the answer. Zhe Hao mentioned that G. E. Ladd has done a good job at sorting out the multi-layered issues surrounding this topic in The Presence of the Future: The Eschatology of Biblical Realism. There is a basis from the evidence to think that the KOG is an 'already but not yet' reality at the present.

After the discussion ended, the first official G@A meeting ended with the announcement of the second session. We will still be keeping the theme for the next few sessions as it is such an important task for local churches to reoriented ourselves along the idea of the Kingdom of God. As for myself, I had the most wonderful time learning so much in the two short hours from all who have presented, those who have contributed to the discussion, and encouraged by the presence of everyone.

Posted by Joshua Woo

I used 'challenges' because that has a positive tone compared to the word 'problems'. Seeing problems as challenges help to at least convince ourselves that which we are facing are indeed tasksand not headaches.

Over lunch, Zhe Hao and I were talking about a list of challenges to current churches. One that we noticed is the incongruity between the pulpit ministry and the personal conviction of the preacher. We have concrete examples of local famous preachers whose personal beliefs are not as unambiguous as what they preach when they are on the stage, with their Bible on one hand and the microphone on another.

We were not talking about hypocrisy of examples like the preachers who condemn adultery on the pulpit but commit adultery of their own. We were talking about preachers who, for example personally were not sure if God willed him or her to live until 160 years old, but who preach as if they are so certain that God willed them to live that long.

In my own experience, a friend and I attended one of the local megachurch. During the service, one of the pastor went onto the stage and started leading the congregation in prayers. He told us that we will live until 160 years old because that is what God had will (or something to that effect).

After the service, we went to the visitors corner which was located two stories above the 'sanctuary' to learn more about the church. We were greeted by two leaders of the church. We were warmly received and ushered to a cozy room to talk.

After I told them that I am currently attending a Presbyterian church, one of them told me that he was from a Presbyterian church in the "been there, done that" tone. I was open to the possibility that he has found his preferred place, so we did not dwell too much on his transfer. If he thinks that he is growing to be more like Christ in this church, then I share his joy.

During our conversation, we inquired about what the pastor's prayer that we will live to 160 years old because that is God's will for his people. We were curious whether did they really think that that is really God's will?

To our surprise, the two gentlemen were not as unambiguous as their pastor. They defended the pastor's prayer not by saying that it was indeed God's will for us to live until 160 years old. Rather their defense was that that was their hope that it is God's will and not that it really is God's will. This is what I meant that there is an incongruity between the preachers' personal belief and the expressed conviction while they are on the pulpit delivering a sermon.

On a personal level, there are times when I have to said what is considered the standard right belief to someone when I am not sure whether is that belief right or not. These are the times when reliability of tradition comes into the picture; how much do we trust a certain received wisdom? Nonetheless, such experience prompts me to ask, "Does that make me a hypocrite?"

On the other hand, Zhe Hao and I noticed that there is an expectation from the congregants  that a church leader must have ALL the answers with EXACT certainty. And this expectation sometimes overwhelmed our conscience that we rather provide a standard received tradition than disappointing the congregants. Add to that, people generally are drawn to those with high level of certitude. This is a real struggle for those who are seen as leaders. And perhaps this is the factor that pressured preachers to appear very certain of their conviction on certain things, which are not really certain when you ask them personally. 

Mother Theresa is a good example of this incongruity. Most people in the world regard Mother Teresa as a living saint when she was alive (most because not all). However, it was revealed that she doubted God's existence at one point in her life: "In my soul, I feel just the terrible pain of loss, of God not wanting me, of God not being God, of God not really existing." (From Catholic News Service website: Cindy Wooden, Longing for God: Mother Teresa's letters reveal isolation, doubts, dated 1 Mar 2002, [accessed 2 Dec 2010])

However, this congruity not all the time happen due to congregants' expectation. There are times when some teachings need to be presented in a paternalistic manner to prevent harm, like how countries have laws prohibiting the minors from alcohol and cigarette. It is not too stretching to see a similarity of this with the way apostle Paul dealt with the Corinthians: "Brothers and sisters, I could not address you as people who live by the Spirit but as people who are still worldly—mere infants in Christ.  I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready. You are still worldly..." (1 Corinthians 3.1-3) 

How should one deliver a message on the pulpit to a congregation consists of members from various background and level of spirituality?