twenty-three

I’m up for speaking again tonight at the last Summer INN of the quarter. We’ve been going through the book of Acts this summer, reading along through a new book called "The Dust Off Their Feet," a retelling of Acts and commentary. It’s been a good read, with some fresh perspectives on what can be a somewhat dry text without some of the context.

I don’t mind speaking. I actually enjoy the "idea" of it. But I feel useless in the day or two leading up to it. I have tons of ideas working around in my head, but I feel unable to put them down into anything but ramblings and repetitive retellings of the same thoughts. I’m very excited about the book of Acts, now that I look at it in the context of the 1st century world, the world of the Roman empire. But I don’t know how to talk about it.

It feels like writer’s block, but I could probably just sit and write and write all I wanted about it. I think the underlying problem is that I don’t feel confident with my ideas on the subject. I’m trying to talk about book in an overview fashion, recapping some of the ideas we’ve walked through this summer with the expansion of the Message into the world following Christ’s departure. I find the tension between missionary Christianity and the Roman Empire fascinating. To think that an idea, an outgrowth of a centuries old nomadic religion like Judaism had the audacity to go up against the Roman Empire at the height of the great "Pax Romana" (Roman peace) is amazing. And not only did Paul and other disciples risk their lives by spreading this new word around the world as they knew it, they did it in a subversive, witty, smart way that undermined the dominant authorities of the popular culture while speaking the language of the masses. Calling Jesus "King of Kings," a phrase reserved for Caesar, as an act of subverting Caesar’s power for the primary power of Christ. It’s wonderful stuff!

Part of my lack of confidence in talking about this though is that I want to have all the facts straight. I’m a new scholar when it comes to understanding the relationship between Christians and emperor worship in the 1st century, so I don’t feel quite capable of making a great case for these ideas. But I know they have some validity, even on the surface, and also have some incredible significance for us today. It’s not often that a concept or topic jumps out to me so clearly as what I hear when I examine this piece of the Bible. I feel like this whole text has been pointing towards a simple question: Who/what is lord of your life? Is it the gods of the culture? Is it legalism that helps you put everything in a nice box? Or is it Christ? For me, Acts doesn’t need to go any further into defining the how’s of faith. It simply needs to make me ask the question of who/what is first in my life. Only later will I begin to ask those deeper questions of "ok, now how shall I live?" That’s important stuff. Who’s Lord of our life? Is Caesar lord? Is the law lord? Is Rome lord? Is America lord? Is our president or governor lord? Is our boss lord? Is our credit card lord? Is our computer lord? Is our spouse lord? Is our family lord? Are WE lord?

Or, is Jesus Lord?

Maybe I’m finding the voice I needed. It’s exhilarating to be so into this topic, this idea, this matter of faith. I know God is at work when I feel stuck on something like this idea of "who is Lord?"

Who is Lord?