Chapter 2: The Biblical Story

Myers, Bryant (1999) Walking with the Poor, New York, NY: Orbis Books, Maryknoll pp. 46-56 Three important theological ideas
There are three theological ideas that seem useful for Christians working for transformational development.

Incarnation
One of the most incredible parts of this biblical account is the idea that the triune God would stoop to becoming flesh and make his dwelling place among us (Jn 1:14). For many inside and outside the faith, this is a stumbling block of major proportions. The Incarnation is a powerful theological metaphor for those who practice transformational development for several reasons. First, the Incarnation is the best evidence we have for how seriously God takes the material world. The Incarnation smashes any argument that God is only concerned for the spiritual realm and that the material is somehow evil or unworthy of the church's attention. God embodied himself. God became concrete and real. It was possible to touch God's wounds and hear God's voice. Real people were healed; a dead man lived again. This suggests that doing transformational development is what God does. We are only following after God. This is the bottom line of the biblical story. This is why "Christians cannot, indeed they must not, simply believe the gospel; they must practice it so that by God's grace they might embody its reality - what the Christian scripture calls the down payment of God's future glory" (Dyrness 1997, 3). To declare that the mission of the church is solely about spiritual things ignores the Incarnation. Second, the Incarnation provides a highly instructive model for how we must be willing to practice transformational development. God emptied himself of his prerogatives. Are we willing to empty ourselves of ours? Jesus did not come as a conquering, problem-solving Christ. Jesus is not the quick-answer god Koyama warned us against (1985, 241). Jesus was the God who was not able to save himself, and so he was able to save others. There are lessons here for development professionals, full of technical skill and confident of their "good news" for the poor. Any practice of transformational development must be framed by the cross and the broken Christ. Finally, we must always remember that Jesus chose freely to empty himself of his prerogatives as God, making himself nothing (Phil 2:7), so that every tongue might confess that "Jesus Christ is Lord" (Phil 2:11). The entire purpose of the exercise was to invite people to redirect their lives and to provide the means by which they could do so. Transformational development must have the same end in mind.

Redemption
The point of the biblical story is to redeem and thus redirect the trajectory of the human story after the fall. This was made possible by the finished work of Jesus Christ. We need to remember, however, that this act took place in the concrete world of Israel, at a particular point in real human history with the real death of a real man. Redemption is material as well as spiritual. Both our bodies and our souls are redeemed. The new heaven comes down to earth. The glory of all nations will enter the city at the end of the day, our cultures, our science, our poetry, our art, even our transformational development - all are redeemed and part of the end of the story.

For this reason we must remind ourselves constantly that the work of transformational development is part of God's redemptive work (Bradshaw 1993, 43). Don't misunderstand me. Transformational development, by itself, will not save. The charitable and transforming acts of Christians will never mediate salvation. But, having said this, it is also wrong to act as if God's redemptive work takes place only inside one's spirit or in heaven in the sweet by-and-by. This disembodied, wholly spiritualized view of redemption is not biblical. God is working to redeem and restore the whole of creation, human beings, all living things, and the creation itself. "For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God" (Rom 8:20-21). It is in this sense that transformational development is part of God's redemptive work in the world. Finally, because God is working out God's redemptive purposes in spiritual, physical, and social realms, this also means that we are God's agents of redemption, however flawed and unsatisfactory we may be in this incredible role. When we work for transformational development, we are working as God's hands and feet.

The kingdom of God

Finally, a word about Jesus and the kingdom of God. The kingdom of God is something Jesus talked about a great deal. It has been recovered as an important biblical concept, beginning with the social gospel movement in the United States early in the twentieth century. The kingdom of God was the subject of Christ's first sermon (Mk 1:14), was the only thing he called the gospel (Mt 4:23), and was the topic on which he focused his teaching to the disciples during his last forty days on earth (Acts 1:3). Jesus said that the kingdom is the key to understanding his teaching (Lk 8:10). In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus said that the kingdom of God was the first thing we should seek and that everything else will follow (Mt 6:33). The coming of the kingdom is the first petition in the prayer Jesus taught us to pray (Mt 6:10). Luke closes the book of Acts by telling us that Paul "boldly and without hindrance preached the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ" (Acts 28:31). Jesus even said that "the gospel of the kingdom will be preached to the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come" (Mt 24:14). The idea of the kingdom of God is an important idea for those who work for human transformation. Recalling the importance of the interrelationship of people and the social systems within which they live, E. Stanley Jones, long-time missionary to India, makes an important contribution to kingdom theology when he presents the biblical metaphors of the "unshakable kingdom" and the "unchanging person" (Jones 1972). The kingdom of God is unshakable (Heb 12:28) because it is the true reality, the way things really are. Christ is the unchanging person (Heb 13:8), the reality of the kingdom in human form, the only way to enter God's kingdom. The kingdom of God, Jones says, is both radical and conservative at the same time. It is radical in that no one or anything is beyond the claim of God's kingdom. It is conservative in the sense that it "gathers up everything that is good [God's good creation peeking through the results of the fall] and fulfills the good, cleanses the evil and goes beyond anything ever thought of or dreamed anywhere. This is the desire of the ages - if men only knew it" (1972, 27). Jones continues, the kingdom of God simply "is and you must come to terms with it" (ibid., 46). Jones also rejects the reduction that limits the gospel to the individual alone. People and social systems are interrelated. While people create the political, religious, and economic institutions of their society, at the same time these institutions shape (create) the people who live in them. The impact of sin, and hence the scope of the gospel, includes both the personal and the social.

If we reduce the gospel solely to naming the name of Christ, persons are saved but the social order is ignored. This is a "crippled Christianity with a crippled result" (Jones 1972, 30). If we act as if individuals are saved now and the kingdom is only in heaven when Jesus comes, then we in effect leave the social order to the devil. "Vast areas of human life are left out, unredeemed-the economic, the social and the political" (ibid., 31). Into this vacuum other ideologies and kingdoms move with their seductive and deceptive claims of a new humanity and a better tomorrow - socialism, capitalism, nationalism, ethnic identity, and denominationalism - shakable kingdoms all. Therefore, the scope of the gospel of the unshakable kingdom and the unchanging person is the individual, the social systems in which we live, and the earth on which we depend for life. Jones's argument anticipates Wink's analysis to a remarkable degree. The impact of the fall is on both the individual and the social system, and so the impact of the gospel of the kingdom must be on both. Wink makes this provocative claim, "The gospel is not a message of personal salvation from the world, but a message of a world transfigured, right down to its basic structures" (Wink 1992, 83). Even the creation itself has "been groaning as in the pains of childbirth" waiting "in eager expectations for the sons of God to be revealed" (Rom 8:22, 19). To work for human transformation as a Christian means working for the redemption of people, their social systems, and the environment that sustains their life-a whole gospel for all of life. This is the kingdom of God. We must never separate the person and the kingdom, Jones warns us (1972, 37). Jesus, the unchanging person, is the embodiment of God's kingdom. The best news is that God's kingdom is not a theological phrase, but "is now a name with a human face" (Newbigin 1981, 32-33). Better yet, this person came and dwelt among us, "tempted in every way just as we are" (Heb 4:15). The kingdom of God has indeed drawn near in the form of the unchanging person. "Jesus is the kingdom of God taking sandals and walking" (Jones 1972, 34). Any Christian understanding of transformational development must keep the person of Jesus and the claims and promise of the kingdom central to the defining of what better future we are working for and for choosing the means of getting there. Like the cross, there is something paradoxical about the kingdom that is worth noting. Jayakumar Christian, a development practitioner and colleague in India, has explored the reversal of power in Revelation (1994, 1112). The lamb of God that was slain is the one worthy to open the scroll. The lamb, convicted by Pilate and sentenced to death as a criminal, sits on the only throne that matters at the end of time. The slain lamb, not the British lion, the Indian tiger, or the American eagle, is the symbol of power when history ends. In the kingdom of God, what we believe to be the natural order

of things is reversed (Kraybill 1978). Further, because Jesus promised it, this kingdom is peopled by those we think of today as powerless: the poor (Lk 6:20), the meek and the persecuted (Mt 5:5,10). Finally, all expressions of human power, every tribe and language and people and nation, will stand in front of the lamb and acknowledge who he is and what he has done (Rv 7:9-10). The kingdom of the broken and humiliated Christ is the only kingdom standing at the end of time. This creates some challenging questions for development practitioners. Where do we believe the power is that can help the poor? In whom or in what do we trust? What does the image of the slain lamb say to the development practitioner? Or, even more provocatively, to the development agency?

The biblical story and transformational development Evangelistic intent

This biblical story, of which the Jesus story is the center, is a transformative story. The story of Jesus can heal our story and can heal the story of any community or society by giving it hope and life, if we will accept God's offer of redemption. Failure to share this story is to withhold the only story that Christians believe brings real hope. No other story leads to life. This is the only story that has good news, transformative news, for human sin and for dominating human systems. There can be no better human future apart from this story. For this reason, transformational development done by Christians must include sharing the biblical story in a way that people can understand and that calls for a response.

Restoring relationships
The point of the biblical story is ultimately about relationships, restored relationships. "Living as persons in communion, in right relationship, is the meaning of salvation and the ideal of Christian faith" (LaCugna 1991, 292). Relationships must be restored in all their dimensions. First and foremost, in an intimate and serving relationship with God, through Jesus Christ. Second, in healthy, righteous, and just relationships with ourselves and our communities. Third, in loving, respectful, "neighboring" relationships with all who are "other" to us. Finally, in an earth-keeping, making-fruitful 10 relationship with the earth. The integrating and focusing importance of relationships in the kingdom is a consistent biblical theme. The creation account, including the fall, is a relational account. The Ten Commandments are about relationships with God and each other, with a bias in favor of the well-being of the community. The covenant with Israel was about a relationship between God and God's people. Melba Maggay, a Filipina theologian and practitioner, reminds us that "Israel was sent into exile because of idolatry and oppression, prophetic themes resulting from the laws of love of God and love of neighbor" (Maggay 1994, 69). Loving God and loving neighbor must be the foundational theme for a Christian understanding of transformational development. Jesus made a radical extension to loving neighbor when he told us to love our enemies (Mt 5:44). This is not like us, but it is like God. God has no enemies who lie beyond the love of God, even the most vicious, grasping, greedy landlord. Therefore, we must love the poor and non-poor alike. This is not, however, a call to a smarmy, uncritical, "I'm OK you're OK" kind of love. God's love is often a very tough love. Egypt suffered greatly so that Pharaoh might know "that I am God" (Ex 7:5, 14:4). God sent his beloved Israel into exile, even to Babylon, and then did not speak to her for almost six hundred years. God's love of us and our neighbor can be a tough, truth-telling, there-areconsequences, your-soul-is-in-danger kind of love. But, there is never hate; the enemy is never demonized or declared hopeless. The offer of grace is always there. We need to spend a moment exploring the nature of these relationships. What do we mean? How should such relationships be assessed? The biblical image of shalom is particularly helpful here. Nicholas Wolterstorff points out that shalom is usually translated by the word "peace," but that it

means more than the absence of strife. First, shalom is a relational concept, "dwelling at peace with God, with self, with fellows, with nature." Then, Wolterstorff suggests, we must add the ideas of justice, harmony, and enjoyment to capture the full biblical meaning of the word. Shalom means just relationship (living justly and experiencing justice), harmonious relationships and enjoyable relationships. Shalom means belonging to an authentic and nurturing community in which one can be one's true self and give one's self away without becoming poor. Justice, harmony, and enjoyment of God, self, others, and nature; this is the shalom that Jesus brings, the peace that passes all understanding (Wolterstorff 1983, 69-72). The idea of shalom is related to one of the interesting ways Jesus described his mission: "I have come that they may have life, and have it in the full" (Jn 10:10). Life in its fullness is the purpose; this is what we are for and what Christ has come to make possible. To live fully in the present in relationships that are just, harmonious, and enjoyable, that allow everyone to contribute. And to live fully for all time. A life of joy in being that goes beyond having. While shalom and abundant life are ideals that we will not see this side of the second coming, the vision of a shalom that leads to life in its fullness is a powerful image that must inform and shape our understanding of any better human future.

A holistic story
Holism is an important word for Christian thinking about development. There are a variety of ways in which we must think holistically. First, we need to remember the whole story from beginning to end. Sometimes we are tempted to shorten the biblical story and limit it to the birth death, and resurrection of Jesus. While this is the center of the story, it is not the whole story. To think properly about human transformation, we must see the world of the poor and the non-poor in light of the whole story. We must be clear on what was intended, how things got as they are, what God is offering to do to change them, and what we can and cannot do as participants in the story. We must have a holistic view of time, of biblical time. The whole story is also important because it helps those who have not heard the story to understand the gospel. It is hard to make sense out of any story if the storyteller insists on starting in the middle. For example, telling people that Christ died to forgive their sins can be hard to understand if people do not know which God you are talking about or understand the idea of sin. We need a holistic view of the narrative to create a complete framework of meaning for all the gospels have for us. Second, we need a holistic view of persons. This brings us back to an earlier theme: God's redeeming work does not separate individuals from social systems of which they are a part. People come first, of course. Changed people, transformed by the gospel and reconciled to God, are the beginning of any transformation. Transforming social systems cannot accomplish this: "No arrangement of social cooperation, in which power controls power and anarchy is tamed, will produce human beings free from the lust for power" (Wink 1992, 77). Therefore, transformational development that is Christian cannot avoid giving the invitation to say Yes to the person of Jesus and the invitation to enter the kingdom. At the same time, however, this individual response does not fully express the scope of God's redemptive work. Social systems are made up of persons, but they are also more than the sum of the persons involved in them. Corporations, government ministries, and even church structures have a character or ethos that is greater than the sum of the individuals who work in them. Wink explains this ethos or spirit in terms of the biblical concepts of principalities and powers: "The principalities and powers of the Bible refer to the inner and outer manifestation of the political, economic, religious and cultural institutions" (Wink 1992, 78). As I have said, this social dimension of human life is also fallen and is thus a target of God's redemptive work.

The Great Commission calls for making the nations into disciples, not just people. This commission of the living Christ instructs us to baptize the nations in the name of the triune God, "teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you" (Mt 28:20). What did Jesus command? To love God and your neighbor as yourself. Kwame Bediako, the Ghanaian theologian articulates the full meaning of the Great Commission nicely: The Great Commission, therefore, is about the discipline of the nations, the conversion of the things that make people into nations - the shared and common processes of thinking; attitudes; world views; perspectives; languages; and the cultural, social and economic habits of thought, behavior and practice. These things and the lives of the people in whom such things find expression - all of this is meant to be within the call of discipleship (Bediako 1996b, 184). Recalling Hiebert's three-tiered worldview scheme in Figure 1-2 in Chapter 1, God's redemptive work addresses all three levels. God is the only true God, the God of power and the God who loves and works in the real world of sight, sound, and touch. His redemptive agenda works in truth (upper level), in power (the excluded middle of the West) and in love (the concrete world of science and the earth). A whole gospel for all levels of our worldview. Finally, one other aspect of holism needs mentioning. The gospel of Jesus and his kingdom is a message of life, deed, word, and sign, an inseparable whole, all expressions of a single gospel message. Mark's account of the calling of the disciples says that Christ "appointed twelve designating them apostles - that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach and to have authority to drive out demons" (Mk 3:14-15). When the apostles are sent on their first solo ministry outing, Mark reports that "they went out and preached that people should repent. They drove out many demons and anointed many sick people with oil and healed them" (Mk 6:12-13). Activists are quick to pick up on the preaching, the healing, and the casting out stuff. They too often overlook that Christ's call was first and foremost "to be with" Christ. Being must precede doing. I find it helpful to picture the gospel message in the form of a pyramid. The top of the pyramid is being with Jesus, life in and with the living Lord. This relationship frames all that lies below it. Each of the corners of the pyramid are one aspect or dimension of the gospel: preaching - the gospel-asword; healing - the gospel-as-deed; casting out - the gospel-as-sign. Each of these can be developed in turn. Gospel-as-word includes teaching, preaching, and the doing of theology. Gospel-as-deed means working for the physical, social, and psychological well-being of the world that belongs to God. This is the sole location of transformation for too many Christians. Gospel-as-sign means signs and wonders, those things that only God can do, as well as the things the church does as a living sign of a kingdom that is and has not yet fully come. The metaphor of a pyramid is helpful because one cannot break off a corner and still claim to have a pyramid. This reminds us that for the gospel to be the gospel all four aspects-life, deed, word, and sign-have to be present. They are inseparable, and so is the holism of the Christian gospel.

Technology and science have a place in the story

One of the increasingly clear features of the modern era is that science has lost its story (Postman 1997, 29-32). Science and technology do not, indeed cannot, provide the answers we need. Science helps us figure out how things work, but not why they work or what they are for. Science cannot create. Because science is assumed to be value free, it did not operate within a vision of what ought to be. It could relentlessly and efficiently disassemble; it could not construct an alternative whole (Shenk 1993, 67). It was not always this way; science was once part of a larger story. Postman reminds us that the "first science storytellers, Descartes, Bacon, Galileo, Kepler and Newton for example - did not think of their story as a replacement for the great Judeo-Christian narrative, but as an extension of it" (1997, 31). Yet in the intervening centuries science and technology increasingly seemed to be able to explain themselves without need to include God as part of the explanation. God became increasingly marginal to their story and was ultimately dismissed as no longer needed. Today science and technology explain themselves: "We work, don't we? Nothing else matters." Relationships, ethics, and justice are pushed to the sidelines. Yet technology and science are an inseparable part of working for human transformation. Immunizations, water drilling, improved agricultural practices, indigenous or folk science make positive impact in the lives of the poor. Any Christian understanding of transformational development must have space for the good that science and technology offer. Yet, to be Christian, this science and technology cannot be its own story, cannot stand apart from the biblical story that is the real story. We need a modern account of divine action in the natural order (Murphy 1995, 325). If we fail to recover a fully Christian narrative for science and technology, one that recognizes God at work through science in the natural order, and one that places science at the service of life and enhancing relationships, we will bring the poor the same story-less science that is impoverishing the West. This would not be good news. I will develop this more fully in the chapter on Christian witness.

The biblical story is for everyone

In our eagerness to be with and for the poor, we must not forget the biblical story is everyone's story, poor and non-poor alike. Both are made in the image of God, both experienced the consequences of the fall, and both are the focus of God's redemptive work. The hope of the gospel and the transformative promise of the kingdom are for both. The only difference is social location. The poor are on the periphery of the social system while the non-poor, even when living in poor communities, occupy places of preference, prestige, and power. While God's story is for everyone, there are two ways in which human response to the story creates a bias that favors the poor. First, it is apparently very hard for the non-poor to accept the biblical story as their story (Lk 18:18-30). Wealth and power seem to make people hard of hearing and poor at understanding (Lk 8:14). Even Christians who are not poor have a problem living out the story. There is a strong temptation to domesticate the story in a way that uses it to validate their wealth or position. For the Christian non-poor, there is a need to appropriate the whole biblical story as stewards, not owners. The church has lost its way in this regard from time to time. Second, it is the poor who most consistently seem to recognize God's story as their story. The church has a long history of growing on its margins and declining at its center (Walls 1987). Furthermore, God has always insisted that caring for the widow, orphan, and alien is a measure of the fidelity with which we live out our faith. No story in which the poor are forgotten, ignored, or left to their own devices is consistent with the biblical story. If the poor are forgotten, God will be forgotten too. Loving God and loving neighbor are twin injunctions of a single command. If the biblical story is for both poor and non-poor, then we must work to understand the poverties of both as seen from God's perspective. Furthermore, we must see how the poverty of both interact, reinforcing each other. Any theory or practice of transformational development must be predicated on an understanding of the whole of the social systems and those - both poor and non-poor - who inhabit them. This leads us to explore the meaning and expression of poverty. We need to understand who the poor are and why they are poor, as well as who the non-poor are and how their poverty contributes to the poverty of the poor. Viv Grigg & Urban Leadership Foundationand other materials by various contributors & Urban Leadership Foundation, for The Encarnacao Training Commission. Last modified: July 2010