catapult magazine
discussion
Building the kingdom is for Imperialists
mwooten
Dec 08 2002
09:01 am
Keith, for Gods sake…what do you mean by being divinized
kstarkenburg
Dec 11 2002
06:39 am
We (as subjects) receiving from God (the ultra-subject) as full a participation in God’s life as we can bear. Thus, we become Godlike. Like the way an iron fired in conflagration becomes something else than what it was before it was in the fire. In order to be fully holy and fun and playful and creative and truthful, we have to fired by God’s presence. Jesus is the prime example of this change beginning in the Incarnation and looking astounding after the Resurrection.
Something like that.
laurencer
Dec 11 2002
07:38 am
keith, for the answer to your jerry falwell question, see this other thread:
mwooten
Dec 11 2002
07:44 am
Explain what you mean by Jerry F. and explain your link to another discussion….
Norbert
Dec 11 2002
07:51 am
Jerry Falwell and see the “Does Jesus like the SUV” thread under the environment board.
mwooten
Dec 11 2002
10:32 am
I have seen those posts but don’t see much of a connection…
laurencer
Dec 11 2002
01:12 pm
several posts ago in this thread, BBC said:
“On this topic, did anybody else catch Jerry Fallwell’s take on the What Would Jesus Drive debate? Fallwell argues an SUV.”
to which keith responded:
“Where does Falwell say that?”
so i was answering keith’s question. it’s not really related to this topic at all, which is why i thought i’d point that discussion elsewhere. i guess it didn’t work that well. sorry for the interruption — please continue the discussion as you were.
mwooten
Dec 12 2002
10:40 am
Thanks for explaining all that…I thought I may be going crazy. Anyway, it appears the discussions have moved to naughty dreams anyway….oh well.
bstarks
Dec 13 2002
05:46 am
Do you think that the “building the kingdom” argument has a layer of gender attached? It would strike me that men are more traditionally builders and women “bearers”…so, I wonder if we are responding to a tradition. Our reformed forefathers, etc.
You knew that I would join the discussion at some point.
mwooten
Dec 14 2002
08:10 am
Good question becky aka bstarks…Perhaps we are responding to our forefathers and their language. And further….it seems that if we are to borrow from the story of the garden we would rather use language which smelled more like nurture, cultivation, and support. The eden doctrine speaks little about creating something new, instead it points to nurturing what is already there.
explore catapult discussions
grant
Mar 11 2002
11:17 am
What if we think of kingdom building in terms of cultivation? Cultivating is not just stewardship, but a working in the fields with that which God has given, a sowing of seeds that will make for a great harvest.
Without wanting to sound too Aristotelian, we could say that the kingdom, then, is both the fully grown tree (the kingdom that is to come) and the seed (the kingdom here and now). I think I may be pushing the mustard seed parable in the wrong direction with this, though. All I’m really trying to say is that the term “kingdom building” might be acceptable if we understood it not as a result of our labor, but as the task of the kingdom to which we are called, a building of the kingdom toward the kingdom. Though I don’t object to the “building of the kingdom” terminology, it might be less confusing (and more Biblical?), however, to speak the language of cultivation.