PART 3 - THOMAS CRISP INTERVIEW

In this section Thomas and I get very personal and practical and discuss the differences between sharing and giving.
**
KEITH: In Western culture we think it's about giving more. We think of writing checks but I think it’s really more about what we'd call sharing that Jesus is wants. It's not just giving money apart from relationship with those who are poor. Really, I think it's knowing their names and understanding their struggles and making them your own. Then it may still involve sharing money, but it goes beyond a percentage tithe and becomes more about meeting a specific need for a specific person. It's sharing not just giving. Because you could write a check and not really engage with another human being in a meaningful way. To me, it’s almost like the Widows’ Mite, where writing a check for $100 to an impersonal organization is less impactful than sharing $20 with the person right in front of me.

THOMAS: Maybe you and I disagree on this, I’m not sure. Maybe it’s a both/and that Jesus wants us to divest ourselves of our extra resources, in love. That matters. That’s important in it’s own right. But also, the Shalom thing is, in the Shalom community everyone is included in the relationship. There are no outcasts. People are drawn into relationship. So, if I’m going to seek that for my brother as well as I seek it for myself, I’m not just going to give them food or money, but I’m also going to draw them into relationship if they’re lonely, I’m going to draw them into my church community, and around my personal table for dinner.

It means – to pursue the idea of Shalom – I both give my money away, and that I have people around my dinner table. You can’t separate those things.

KEITH: I think I totally agree with you. I think I’m meaning to say, more in the sense of “this” or “that”. In other words, usually if I’m having a conversation with a Christian to whom these concepts are foreign. They have no concept that to follow Jesus is at minimum a tacit invitation to interact with and engage with and love the poor around them in their community. To those people, their first reaction is that they’ll just start giving to World Vision and then they’re done. They’re off the hook, so to speak. And I would say that according to Jesus they are not done. I would say that Jesus really does want us to know someone who is poor by name, and to open our homes to them, and to welcome them into our lives. To me, following Jesus in this way is not primarily about just writing checks. We can write checks, but it only begins there, it doesn’t end there.

I mean, it’s good to give to World Vision. Our family has been supporting a girl in the Phillipines for years now through Arms of Love and we love that. But I would say that this isn’t enough in itself to fully walk in obedience to Jesus’ command to love our neighbor as ourselves or to care for the poor, the orphan and the widow.

To me what we’re called to is so much deeper. I think Jesus intends to mess up our plans and our lives with this. If it’s convenient for us we’re not where He wants us to be. I think that if you start down this road that God is going to put people in front of you who are poor and He’s going to challenge you to love them in a very real, personal way. I can’t imagine anything different.

THOMAS: I totally agree by the way. When Jesus says, “If you throw a banquet don’t invite your friends but the poor”, He’s calling us into table fellowship. To the extent that we’re trying to follow Jesus and to do the works that He did, Jesus is going around laying hands on lepers. He’s entering into close personal contact and fellowship with folks who are hurting. Drawing people into the joy of table fellowship – who would not otherwise be welcome – to include them, and He calls us to do the same.

So, yeah, it’s about inclusion and relationship AND economic sharing. It’s all of that.

KEITH: Do you feel like in the process of writing this paper that you arrived at some conclusions? Are you still struggling with these concepts now?

THOMAS: No, I’m totally struggling with it. I’ve got all kinds of hypocrisy. (laughs)

KEITH: (laughs) Me, too.

THOMAS: Like, the thing is, I’ve got tons of extra stuff and things and material in my life that I need to let go of.

KEITH: Same here.

I love this quote by Basil that you included in your paper.

What is a miser? One who is not content with what is
needful. What is a thief? One who takes what belongs to
others. Why do you not consider yourself a miser and a
thief when you claim as your own what you received in
trust? If one who takes the clothing off another is called a
thief, why give any other name to one who can clothe the
naked and refused to do so? The bread that you withhold
belongs to the poor; the cape that you hide in your chest
belongs to the naked; the shoes rotting in your house
belong to those who must go unshod.

Wow.

I have all of those things. I have shoes that I’m not wearing. I have probably 15 different jackets I don’t wear and shirts that just hang in my closet all year long.

THOMAS: I know. Think about the Rich Fool in Luke 12 who says “I’ll build bigger barns to have more room to store extra grain so I can take life easy”

KEITH: And Jesus says, “You fool...”

THOMAS: But that’s exactly what I’m doing. I’ve got a retirement account. I’m doing the same thing.

KEITH: I guess I have you beat on that account because I have no retirement savings whatsoever. I’m the fool in the eyes of the world, I guess. I’m not investing at all in any way so I guess I’ll have to work until the day I die. Or maybe my kids will get rich and support me? Or maybe I’ll end up homeless myself.

I don’t know if that’s really wisdom per se, but that’s how my life has worked out.

THOMAS: Well, this is what I wrestle with. We’ve got the retirement accounts. We’ve got savings accounts for our kid’s college.

KEITH: So, the question is, “Is that wrong?” Aren’t you seeking the Shalom of your children to go to college and get an education like you did. That’s not a bad thing, is it? I know from the experience I’ve had in the workforce that if I didn’t have my Bachelor’s degree I wouldn’t be able to provide for my family the same way I do today. That college degree did open doors for me that might not otherwise be opened.

THOMAS: I don’t have any problem giving my kids a college education, I guess. That’s like teaching them a trade.

KEITH: Yeah, I think if you had the ability to help your kids with an education and you didn’t I think that would actually be wrong.

THOMAS: I’m actually fine with that. I’m even fine with saving for retirement, I guess, but that starts to get trickier. But there are other luxuries like, I’ve got a $65 smartphone plan.

KEITH: But there were people in the first century church who would be considered rich. I agree with you that Jesus’ command was to seek the Shalom of others, and in that context of the Kingdom to consider your wealth as a tool to influence people for the Kingdom and to use it for the good of others as you see the need. It seems that there is an allowance for maintaining some level of wealth but keeping it with an open hand so that as you encounter poverty you are free to share that with others.

THOMAS: Definitely.

KEITH: I don’t see any condemnation for those of us who haven’t just gone straight into voluntary poverty. There’s still a mandate for us to provide for our family and to take care of our children. But, striving to have a posture and a heart that says, “God if you ask me to give or to share what I have it’s yours.”

THOMAS: I think that’s right. But I don’t think you have to read Jesus’ teachings as being about that. I think that if you look really closely at what He says, He says things like, “Don’t store up treasure for yourself here on Earth.” So we think, “Oh, he wants me to give everything away.” But in the very next passage He says “Seek first God’s Kingdom and His righteousness and all these things will be provided for you.” What things? Food, clothing and shelter. So, I don’t think this is an ethic of indigence. This is not about literally giving it all way so that you have nothing because in the very next breath He’s saying that if you do this God’s make sure that you’ve got those things – all that stuff – to provide for your basic needs.

I think it’s actually an ethic of simplicity that Jesus calls us to. He saying we need to get rid of all the stuff that’s extra. Like in the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus, the man dressed in fine linen and purple while the poor were suffering all around him.

KEITH: But, do you think that getting rid of it (the excess stuff) is something we should do this weekend, all at once? Or is it more of the process of getting rid of it as you go through your life and encounter people who need the excess stuff you have. Like, you meet a man who needs shoes and you have an extra pair so you share it.

Is it about pushing the button to eject all your worldly possessions or is it about daily trusting God to show you who you need to share your stuff with in relationship?

Wendy and I have talked a lot about this because it’s easy for me to give myself a guilt trip. Wendy always asks me, “Is there any specific thing that you feel like God asked you to do and you refused?” and if I can’t honestly say that I’ve been disobedient in some way then I have no cause to beat myself up. But if I can look and see that there were specific times when God did call me to go here and do this or let go of something or share something, then I am walking in obedience and I’m not withholding anything from God or from others. What do you think about that?

THOMAS: I guess what I think about that is, the whole thing has to be viewed through the lens of the Prodigal Son. The Father’s attitude towards us is not one of being angry because we haven’t given away enough stuff, it’s that He’s running toward us with loving arms, wanting to embrace us. So, I guess I think that He has a lot of patience with us and with the process, and recognizes that it’s going to be a process. I think He guides us deeper and deeper into this process, slowly rejoicing with us as we go.

But I also think that there is this radical call to sell our stuff and care for the poor. So, I guess I think that I wouldn’t be doing wrong if you caught the vision and you suddenly divested yourself of all your excess wealth and shared it with the suffering. It wouldn’t be that you’d done any wrong there. I think God would celebrate that action as well.

For the rest of us who are gradually working our way into this, and slowly easing into a more radical simplicity, I think He rejoices at that too.

But, I do suspect that for most of us it’s this process.

KEITH: For myself I see it more as a process and I feel as if God has a place He’s taking me. He’s teaching me things daily that He wants me to show me, about myself, and about His own heart for others. And He has been. If I look back on my whole life – even before I came to Him – I can see that He was working in my life. So, He’s still doing that today.

I can remember specifically when I was still in High School and praying to God, feeling a call to a more radical lifestyle of holiness and service, and I remember in that moment saying to God that I completely agreed with this vision. I completely wanted to end up in that place. I say “Yes” to that, God. That’s where I want to end up. That’s who I want you to make me into. That’s where I want to go with you. But, you know me and you have mercy for me and grace for me because you know that it will be slow. I can’t do that all by tomorrow. But by your grace that’s where I want to go with Jesus.

I take great comfort from scriptures that reveal that God remembers that we’re made of dust. He knows we’re weak. “I believe. Help my unbelief.”

THOMAS: Or the thief on the cross. Or Zaccheus. Both examples of God’s delight and response to people in process.

KEITH: That’s a comforting truth. It can be so…let’s say someone reads your article or reads this interview. It can be so challenging. I mean, it can just scare the crap out of you. A lot of people could have the reaction, “I can’t do this. This is too much.” In despair they could say, “I guess I’m just not a true follower of Jesus” and walk away from their faith.

What I want to say to encourage people who might be in that place is that all God is looking for is someone who is willing to be willing. He’s looking for someone who will say, “God, I love you and I hear what you’re saying about loving the poor, and in my wildest dreams I would love to have you make me into someone who is like Jesus. I would love to become someone who could let go of everything and anything you asked me to, but I can’t be that guy right now. I can’t make myself into that kind of person by my own strength.”

I think that if we’re willing to take one moment at a time, one day at a time, and take up our crosses daily and learn from Jesus how to die to ourselves and allow Him to show us how to love the way He loves and how to give the way He gives and how to forgive the way He forgives, He will do it. He is faithful when we are not.

I think that for anyone who says that, God will say, “Ok. I’ll take that. I can work with that.” A mustard seed’s worth of faith is enough.

THOMAS: Oh, I agree. I think it would be a mistake to take this batch of teachings from Jesus and come away with guilt and fear. God is a Father of tender compassion. He has lots of room for process, like you say. Secondly, this call to divest ourselves of excess resource is an invitation into the abundant life. This is the easy yoke. This is where our burdens are light.

KEITH: It's a treasure hidden in a field that you can't wait to sell everything to obtain.

THOMAS: It's an invitation into a joyous mode of life.

KEITH: Not an invitation to misery and poverty and disease and sickness and hunger. That's the side of it we fear. Jesus just wants to take me through so much suffering and pain. He just wants to pull my soul through a giant cheese grater and rip me to shreds. But that's not what He wants. He wants to show you that his way is true life. We give up our empty, selfish way of living to find true life in Christ.

THOMAS: I think this has not just spiritual application but material implication. In Mark's Gospel, Jesus says that those who have given up everything in this life to follow me - given up houses, and children, brothers, mothers, sisters, fathers, in this life - won't fail to receive ten times as much in this life and in the life to come.

He includes in that list not just family, but farms, interestingly. Property!

So, I think to sell one's possessions and follow Jesus and give all one's stuff to the poor is for the community, not just one person. I think whenever we do this we never do it alone. It's always in community.

As we step into this with others we're always being taken care of by those who are also following Jesus this way. It's a joyous life where all of us in community have enough.

We shouldn't feel guilty because God is a God of infinite patience and He's happy to walk us through the process. It's not a thing to fear, it's the way to true life and light burdens, and it's the way to joy where everyone has enough and everyone shares in the Shalom of God.

But this is very different from the American Dream.

KEITH: Yeah, and I think that's the huge collision. Really. I think that's the biggest stumbling block for Western Christians, especially if your idea of being a Christian is connected to the pursuit of happiness, owning a home, starting your own business, amassing wealth for yourself, etc.

They are actually totally opposite messages. One carries the message that you should gain more wealth, more property, more status, more respect in the community...

THOMAS: ...to be more independent.

KEITH: Exactly! I don't need community. I mean, the worst thing that could happen to me is that I might ever need to depend on someone else for anything like food or shelter. The American Dream is all about being self-sufficient.

The Gospel is about moving into relationship with the poor, it's about moving into community with other believers, it's about becoming less self important and less selfish and less independent, but more dependent upon God and others for life.

In the Western mind, Jesus is there to help me get that new car or grow my business or buy a bigger house. That's what Jesus, my co-pilot, will help me do.

THOMAS: If you think about the American Dream it's about increased status, increased wealth, increased independence. Following Jesus is about going in the absolute opposite direction on all three points.

[END OF PART 3]

Interview: Thomas Crisp and the Sin of Affluenza

My good friend Thomas Crisp is a professor of Philosophy at Biola University. We became friends because we share a similar passion for issues of justice and following Christ into community with the poor.

Recently, Thomas wrote an influential philosophy paper entitled "Jesus and Affluence" which I was fortunate enough to read. After considering the arguments in this paper, I asked Thomas if he would agree to an interview where we could discuss the paper in a more conversational manner and allow me to post the results on my blog. He graciously agreed to this and here is the first part of my hour and a half interview with Thomas.

The basic argument in his paper is based on a premise by philosopher Peter Singer which states that "If it is in your power to prevent something bad from happening, without sacrificing anything nearly as important, it is wrong not to do so."

Additionally, Singer goes on to support this concept with the following:

On your way to work, you pass a small pond. One day, you
notice that a small child has fallen in the pond and is
having trouble staying afloat. You look around and see that
you are the only one who can help. You can easily wade in
and save the child, but after a moment’s thought, you
realize that, if you do, you’ll ruin the rather expensive
shoes and slacks you’re wearing and be late for work. You
pass by and the child dies.

Quoting from the paper, Thomas concludes:

"Surely your conduct here is abominable. But why? Because, says Singer, it’s a fundamental principle of morality that, if it is in your
power to prevent something bad from happening without sacrificing anything nearly as important, it is wrong not to do so. Cases like the pond case make this principle plausible. Singer's conclusion is severe: if it's right, our prodigious spending on luxury and frill (fancy houses, boats, cars, clothes, dinners, vacations, etc.) is morally wrong."

"Singer proposes that his argument, though demanding in its
implications, fits nicely with some of our most respected ethical
traditions. For example, it fits nicely, he suggests, with Jesus’
teaching on wealth and poverty. Jesus, he proposes, is an ally of
his argument."

With this basic idea in mind, Thomas and I sat down to discuss these implications further.

KEITH: Briefly, talk a bit about your inspiration for this paper.

THOMAS: I’ve been wrestling with the Peter Singer argument for years now.

KEITH: In what way are you wrestling with it?

THOMAS: The implications are so demanding and so radical. I was kind of hesitant to follow the philosophical argument to where it may lead.

KEITH: Some people would say that your problem is that you’re taking philosophical concepts and actually attempting to put them into practice. They’re just philosophical arguments.

But, you’re like me in that respect. If the principle is true you need to let it guide your actions.

THOMAS: Exactly. That’s kind of how you and I got acquainted. I had this kind of epiphany – a kind of second conversion experience – where the Gospels presented themselves afresh to me as Jesus saying “If you want to follow me you have to love the vulnerable; you have to give yourself in love, and quit being like the rich man in the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus who dressed himself in purple in fine linen every day while poor people lay starving at his doorstep."

KEITH: I love that in your article you point out something that I don’t think I’ve seen before, which is that in the parable when the Rich Man asks if Abraham can send Lazarus back to warn his brothers – that what he wants his brothers to be warned about is not to live the way he lived, (ignoring the poor). I think usually we assume that what the Rich Man wants his brothers to be warned about is not to reject Christ as Messiah, but that’s not even in the parable at all. The whole point seems to be, if you ignore the poor as the Rich Man did, you’ll end up on the wrong side of the judgment. So, the whole point of the parable is not to live as this man did; not to amass wealth for yourself and ignore those living in poverty around you. Frankly, until you pointed it out to me I didn’t see that this parable is a warning for us not to ignore the poor.

THOMAS: That’s right. That parable, and other teachings of Jesus, presented themselves to me afresh, in a powerful and life-changing way. So, as a result I dropped all of my scholarly projects and work and decided I needed to write and think about issues that matter. I couldn’t afford to waste my time with interesting puzzles anymore.

KEITH: What kind of projects were you working on at that time?

THOMAS: Issues of the philosophy of time and abstract metaphysical arguments about time and the nature of space. All very interesting, but it started to feel like fiddling while Rome was in flames. So, I wrote a letter to Nicholas Wolterstorff who is a really thoughtful Christian philosopher who writes on Justice and asked him, “Where is there need for a philosopher to help out on issues that matter for the vulnerable?” He said, “Well, there’s need all over the place. There’s hardly any Christian philosophers working on these topics so I recommend you find something that’s of interest to you and dig in.”

KEITH: See, that’s shocking to me. There are not a lot of Christian philosophers writing and thinking about Justice? I mean, I would understand if philosopher’s in general didn’t want to explore this area, but Christian philosophers – if they’re not wrestling with these practical issues of love and justice – then what are they wrestling with? These issues of “What does it mean to follow Christ and put His teachings into practice in the world today” seem to be the paramount issue that all Christians (philosophers or otherwise) should be concerned about. Are they also working on issues like time and space and reality?

THOMAS: Yeah. There’s been a flowering of Christian philosophy in the past 30 years or so, but it’s mostly been focused on metaphysics, epistemology and physics, and not so much on social ethics.

KEITH: So, are you thinking of going deeper in this new direction?

THOMAS: Oh yes. I had a book project that I had been working on for 3 years or so and I trashed it and cleared off most of my commitments to pursue the ethics of poverty and peace and violence. So, since I had been wrestling with the Singer argument forever I decided to focus my attention on this. Singer says that you shouldn’t be too scandalized by the radical conclusion of his argument because some of our most respected ethical thinkers have been saying the same thing for thousands of years. Jesus, for instance.

KEITH: He doesn’t develop that assertion?

THOMAS: He gives a couple of verses of Jesus and he quotes Aquinas on the issue, but that’s all. So, I thought I’d start with Singer’s argument and I wanted to see if he was right about Jesus being in agreement with his assertions. So, I decided to start with the Love command that Jesus gives us.

KEITH: One of the things I wanted to ask you to expand more on is the idea of the command to love God and to love others being tied to the Jewish concept of Shalom, which as you point out is more than simply "Peace".

THOMAS: The original context of the command to love your neighbor as yourself is taken from Leviticus 19 and it shows up after a series of specific commands like, 'be sure to leave extra on your fields after the harvest so the poor can glean from it' and 'don't trip a blind man or curse a deaf person', 'be sure to pay your laborers on time', 'rebuke your neighbor so as not to partake in his sin', and all kinds of commandments about how to treat one another well in the context of community. After this long list of such commands you finally get this "so love your neighbor as you love yourself' and Wolterstorff points out in his forthcoming book that the neighbor-love command there is meant to be a summary of all these other commands.

This got me to thinking, "Is there anything that these specific commands (leading up to the summary command) have in common?" What I see is that, to live in accord with these commands would be to engage in the Shalom community.

The Old Testament version of Shalom as you find it in the prophets, in the Law, in the Psalms, is as a community in which there is enough. There's enough food for everyone, there's enough safety from harm, there's enough justice for all, there's enough celebration where everyone is included and people care for each other.

KEITH: The idea is that everyone is included in everything the community enjoys; peace, safety, food, drink, clothing, shelter, etc.

THOMAS: Yes, everyone is included in these "enoughs".

KEITH: And the point of this is that if someone is not included in this then it is not truly Shalom. The community has no Shalom (peace) if certain people are not also being fed, or sheltered, or clothed, or welcome. So, those in the community who might have enough for themselves might say, "We have Shalom" but God would look at them and say, "You have no real Shalom because you're not including everyone and welcoming them into my peace."

THOMAS: Yes. In the true Shalom community, the poorest of the poor must be included in the "enough". The vulnerable, disabled neighbor is included in the "enough". There's only real Shalom (peace) when everyone is included in the community and shares in the "enough".

So, it looks like the list of commands in Leviticus 19 which are summarized by the love your neighbor as yourself command are intended to be a snapshot of what it looks like to live in a Shalom community. If you're living in a community of "enough" or Shalom you'll be leaving extra in your fields for the poor to glean, you'll be paying your workers on time, you'll be doing all of these things.

KEITH: You'll be honoring the lame, taking into consideration those who are blind and deaf in your community...

THOMAS: ...caring for the disabled, being honest in the courts, and ensuring that all in the community have enough food, shelter, safety, justice, and so forth. This is arrived at by obeying all these commands.

So, that made me think that the love that is being enjoyed and shared in this Shalom community is the love that seeks to include your neighbor in all of this, in the same way you are inclined to seek your own inclusion. We're naturally inclined to seek our own inclusion in this community of "enough" and we want our loved ones to be included as well, so we must also seek to include everyone in the community so that there can be true Shalom and everyone can enjoy the same love, peace, safety and justice.

That, then, made the Parable of the Good Samaritan collide in a new way for me. One of the interesting passages in the Old Testament where you see the notion of Shalom offered is in the book of Judges where there's the story of a sojourner who's making his way through the town and no one will take him in for the night. So, he's sitting in the town square and an old man comes to him and is shamed when he realizes that his community has not extended hospitality to this stranger. He quickly says, "Shalom to you!" and he takes him into his home and cares for all of his needs. He includes him in the peace of their community by showing him hospitality.

KEITH: Yes, it's not just saying "Peace to you!" and going on your way. Or as James says, "If you see a brother or sister poorly clothed and lacking in daily food and say only 'Go in peace (shalom) be warmed and filled' without giving them the food or shelter they need, what good is that?" (James 2:16). The actions must match the sentiment. We must bring them in.

THOMAS: Bring them in to the community of care, the community of enough.

So, it looks to me like the Parable of the Good Samaritan is alluding to this same passage in Judges. If you read that and then hear Jesus you immediately see that the Samaritan is including the man on the side of the road into the community of Shalom. Then Jesus says, "Go and do the same." Who are we supposed to love? Who is our neighbor? If the command to love our neighbor as ourself really is about Shalom, then the Parable of the Good Samaritan means that anyone you run across who is in need - or who is outside the community of enough or Shalom - needs to be brought into that community.

KEITH: I love what you pointed out about the Parable of the Good Samaritan, when Jesus says, "Go and do likewise" as the punchline of the story, you say, "We should imitate the behavior of the Samaritan...note though, the Samaritan in the story does not love his benefactor, he does not love only the member of his own community, he loves someone outside of his community." He's a Samaritan who is loving a Jew - someone outside of what would be considered "his community" and Jesus says, "Love like that."

The genius of this parable, to me, is that once you pick out all the nuances of what Jesus is doing in this story it takes on so many layers of meaning. Not only is the Jewish man the bad guy in this story, if you will, but because he's made the hated Samaritan the one showing Shalom, again to someone outside his own community, it's like an unspoken challenge that basically says, "Don't let the pagans, or the Samaritans outdo you in this Shalom." It's like he's saying, "Surely you can love even as much as an unbeliever can. Whatever this Samaritan did, as extravagant as it might seem, we can certainly, at minimum love as least as much as someone like that, can't we?"

As I was reading it again it seemed like such an in-your-face challenge.

THOMAS: That seems right. If it is a parable about Shalom and it's showing us who we need to include in this "enough" community, then when you look back at the Leviticus 19 passage it seems to have evolved out of this love command. The command is not just to share the Gospel, but to include people in the Shalom community where everyone has enough shelter, justice, and all the rest. Who am I to do this for? Anyone who is in need.

KEITH: I think it's a good point to make because I've been in conversations with people before who will say that going to this extreme of putting people in motel rooms or buying them food or letting them sleep on your couch, those steps are secondary and of lesser importance. What those people really need is the Gospel. So, if you really want to love them the way Jesus means it when he says, "Love your neighbor as yourself" then you'll tell them that they're going to burn in hell forever if they don't say a prayer. But, if what you're suggesting here is true and if Jesus is really summarizing these Levitcal commands and all of the Law and Prophets with the command to "Love God and Love your neighbor as yourself" then it seems the love command is really about showing actual compassion and demonstrating a love that results in shared food, shelter, and clothing. It's not consistent to share the message of the Gospel without also seeking the Shalom of the whole person.

I think this is why Jesus points out that the second greatest command is "like unto the first" greatest command. Loving God is intertwined with loving others. If we say we love God and hate our brother we're liars, according to the first letter of John, or "If you see a brother in need and do nothing how can the love of God be in you?" (1 John 3:17)

So, these concepts of loving God and showing actual, tangible love to people in our community cannot be separated. We express love for God when we express love for a neighbor, and vice versa. It then seems that it's very much about putting them up in a motel, or buying them groceries, or giving them the shoes off your feet, or whatever their immediate need might be. That IS loving God and that IS loving others.

THOMAS: I think that's right. I think that's why it makes perfect sense for Jesus to say, "Sell your possessions and give to the poor" and why at the Judgment Jesus will say, "You fed me when I was hungry and you clothed me when I was naked". Of course those are the things that you should do if you are seeking to obey the heart of the Law and the Prophets. If we're seeking the Shalom of our community then of course we're going to be feeding people.

KEITH: You and I have talked about this before, and I love how in your paper you point out something controversial. When Jesus commands the Rich Young Ruler to sell all his possessions and give them to the poor we usually hear objections from modern Christians that this command was only made to this specific person and not to every disciple of Jesus.

THOMAS: Not true. Jesus says to the disciples in Luke 12:33, "Sell your possessions and give to the needy" and in Luke 14:33 he says that "anyone who does not give up everything he has cannot be my disciple." In Matthew 6:19 he says to the disciples that they should not "lay up for (themselves) treasure on earth" but to lay up "treasures in heaven."

KEITH: So, Jesus did say to the disciples...

THOMAS: He DID say to them, "the way to lay up treasure in heaven, the way to do it is to sell your possessions and give them to the poor."

KEITH: So, that teaching and Singer's argument, have radical implications don't they? As you point out, if Singer is right, and if Jesus agrees with him, then for someone who says "I'm following Christ," these are pretty frightening and challenging realities. So, the next question is, "Where do I draw the line?" I mean, do I just need to go to eBay and sell everything now? Do I have a massive garage sale and empty out my house and then become homeless myself? Is that what Jesus is requiring of me?

[END OF PART 1]

RADIO INTERVIEW WITH DEREK GILBERT (VTFB RADIO)

In case you missed it, here's a link to listen to my one hour interview with Derek Gilbert of View from the Bunker Radio Show in Illinois about my new book, "This Is My Body:Ekklesia as God Intended".

Listen
HERE

*
*

[SUBVERSIVE INTERVIEWS] - cover art

My next book, [Subversive Interviews] is a collection of conversations with Dallas Willard, Todd Hunter, Neil Cole, Walter Kirn, Frank Viola, Jim Wallis, Matt Redman, John Fischer, Dr.Scott Bartchy and Dr.G.K.Beale, among others.

Hopefully it will be available in the next week or so on my blog.

Next: My book "This Is My Body" (with a forward by Jon Zens) should be published in about another month or so. Keep watching this space for more details.
-kg