5. Yoder does apologetics
What?!? I thought apologetics were soooo modernist/foundationalist/fill-in-the-blank-of-old-thing-we're-supposed-to-be-past! In his essay "Believing is Resurrection," Yoder takes on those who would deny the resurrection. First, these "quasi-historians" say, "As a general rule, resurrection do not happen." Secondly, they say, "The general rule can never be broken." In response, Yoder says, "This second statement is not a scientific statement. This second statement is a confession of faith in the unbroken regularity of the universe." He continues,"The confession of faith in unbroken regularity makes sense within the limits of the laboratory...It makes sense within the limits of outer space where there are no people moving around to get in the way of the stars. It does not make sense within history because history is a different mode of truth. History is a kind of reality that is by definition always unique." So what can we say? "This doesn't mean we know all about the resurrection. It doesn't mean that we know anything about how it happened or how it could have happened. How could it have happened? It could not have, but it did." (Real Christian Fellowship, 42-43.)
4. You get Yoder's theology of culture in a nutshell
| Yoder's theology of culture centers on the church itself as a new way of life together. The church is a paradigm for the world as a whole. This book brings together a concise and readable introduction to the practices that comprise this new culture, including baptism, the Lord's Supper, binding and loosing, the rule of Christ, economic sharing, the universality of giftedness in the body, and others. Though Yoder addresses these issues all throughout his writings, the essays in this book are concise, clear, and give clear Scriptural grounds for these practices. | 
|
3. An absolute gem on evangelism
The chapter "Evangelizing like Jesus" is short but sweet. With his typical keen insight, Yoder notes that when we hear the phrase "fishers of men" (and I can't say it without hearing the Sunday School song ringing in my ears), we usually think of the typical North American angler, not a middle eastern, Sea-of-Galilee type fisherman. What's the difference? The angler focuses on one fish at a time. He often catches it by deceit, dangling a worm (or something meant to look like it) on a hook. The angler usually fishes for the thrill of combat and sense of victory. The goal is simply to catch a fish. They may not even eat it; it's all about the thrill of the hunt. Those who fished Galilee were different in all respects: they fished for a living not as a luxury. They worked with the sea, and gathered many together at once. Yoder's summary is worth quoting: "Whether the angler is the farm boy going down to the creek or the prosperous suburbanite taking the weekend off to fight with a trout or a tarpon, the entire enterprise is more recreational sport than it is essential for survival and community building. Fishing is an alternative to real life, not a source of sustenance. Our theology and evangelism would be better if we clarify that Jesus called us to be fishers of people and not anglers." (146)
2. Yoder on singing
In the final four essays of the book, Yoder engages Psalm 136, 24, 137, and Revelation 4-5. Despite reading Yoder extensively, these essays were the first time I read Yoder directly engaging the practice of singing. This is significant because, for many Christians, their most memorable and substantial teaching comes from songs.
I found one particular suggestion from Yoder interesting and compelling. While discussing Psalm 136, which tells the history of Israel while echoing the refrain "for his love endures forever, Yoder asks what it would look like to extend this way of talking about church history. What if we didn't stop with Jesus and the early church but continued to includes the saints of church history, including God's working through the saints at our particular local church? So Yoder asks, "What if we named specific names and events and then responded, 'For his mercy endures forever'? Would we not have a different feel for God's power? Would we not have a different feel for our own identity? We would have a feel not only for the past, but for the future. That is the funny thing about the past--if you know from where you have come, you know where you are going." (158)
I found one particular suggestion from Yoder interesting and compelling. While discussing Psalm 136, which tells the history of Israel while echoing the refrain "for his love endures forever, Yoder asks what it would look like to extend this way of talking about church history. What if we didn't stop with Jesus and the early church but continued to includes the saints of church history, including God's working through the saints at our particular local church? So Yoder asks, "What if we named specific names and events and then responded, 'For his mercy endures forever'? Would we not have a different feel for God's power? Would we not have a different feel for our own identity? We would have a feel not only for the past, but for the future. That is the funny thing about the past--if you know from where you have come, you know where you are going." (158)
1. Two for one: how to read the Bible and Christian social strategy
This last reason is a two-for-one, because you get both in one essay. In "Embracing Equality," Yoder engages 1 Corinthians 11 and the question of head coverings for women. When Yoder originally gave this sermon in 1969, the congregation at Prairie Street Mennonite Church (where Yoder was a member) was going through the process of discerning whether women should still be required to wear a head covering at worship services.
I've learned a lot from Yoder. Whether as a historian or biblical interpreter, Yoder is constantly on guard to read and assess texts and people based on their own time. So rather than first lamenting how "oppressive" the Bible is, he seeks to understand the text in its own terms. A lot of contemporary readers get mad that the biblical authors and audiences weren't as enlightened as we are, but Yoder's hermeneutics help us to avoid that kind of cultural imperialism and arrogance that imperils both good biblical interpretation and good historiography.
Second, Yoder articulates a social strategy here that is sure to offend both your liberal and conservative friends alike (I like it already!). Conservatives, says Yoder, often fail to recognize the new creation brought into being in Christ. Quietists, says Yoder, are people who recognize the newness but don't think it is important to witness to this newness in word and deed. Revolutionaries, says Yoder, are people who believe newness has come but that open and often hostile confrontation with the old age is the only way for truth to be known. Yoder takes issues with all three: "The kingdom of God means change in the direction of equal dignity for all people. Some conservatives are not really sure about that. The kingdom of God sparks an urge to witness, make something known, and show it to all people. Contemporary quietists are not very keen on that. The kingdom of God means trusting God's power and exhibiting uncommon patience. Modern-day revolutionaries are still not convinced of that." (108) In contrast, Yoder casts a vision for God's people that witnesses to the new creation not by might, nor by activism, but by the patient movement of God's Spirit. The kingdom is radical in its newness and revolutionary in its patience. If our fellowship exhibits both that newness and patience, we'll be neither liberal nor conservative but, with God's grace, simply the church.
I've learned a lot from Yoder. Whether as a historian or biblical interpreter, Yoder is constantly on guard to read and assess texts and people based on their own time. So rather than first lamenting how "oppressive" the Bible is, he seeks to understand the text in its own terms. A lot of contemporary readers get mad that the biblical authors and audiences weren't as enlightened as we are, but Yoder's hermeneutics help us to avoid that kind of cultural imperialism and arrogance that imperils both good biblical interpretation and good historiography.
Second, Yoder articulates a social strategy here that is sure to offend both your liberal and conservative friends alike (I like it already!). Conservatives, says Yoder, often fail to recognize the new creation brought into being in Christ. Quietists, says Yoder, are people who recognize the newness but don't think it is important to witness to this newness in word and deed. Revolutionaries, says Yoder, are people who believe newness has come but that open and often hostile confrontation with the old age is the only way for truth to be known. Yoder takes issues with all three: "The kingdom of God means change in the direction of equal dignity for all people. Some conservatives are not really sure about that. The kingdom of God sparks an urge to witness, make something known, and show it to all people. Contemporary quietists are not very keen on that. The kingdom of God means trusting God's power and exhibiting uncommon patience. Modern-day revolutionaries are still not convinced of that." (108) In contrast, Yoder casts a vision for God's people that witnesses to the new creation not by might, nor by activism, but by the patient movement of God's Spirit. The kingdom is radical in its newness and revolutionary in its patience. If our fellowship exhibits both that newness and patience, we'll be neither liberal nor conservative but, with God's grace, simply the church.
RSS Feed