So - who is my neighbour?

Henri Nouwen looks at the parable of the good Samaritan in a slightly different way. So who is my neighbour? Have I always misunderstood the main thrust of this story, or does Nouwen have it wrong. Or am I missing the point?

Henri Nouwen wrote some great books, full of depth and character resulting from a lifetime of learning and growing in Christ. He was a gentle, careful, caring person. He was an encourager and a calming influence. He had substance - not in himself but in Christ.

I've been reading the daily meditations from the Henri Nouwen Society (highly recommended, by the way). This is today's extract.

'Love your neighbour as yourself' the Gospel says (Matthew 22:38). But who is my neighbour?

We often respond to that question by saying: 'My neighbours are all the people I am living with on this earth, especially the sick, the hungry, the dying, and all who are in need.' But this is not what Jesus says.

When Jesus tells the story of the good Samaritan (see Luke 10:29-37) to answer the question 'Who is my neighbour?' he ends the by asking: 'Which, ... do you think, proved himself a neighbour to the man who fell into the bandits' hands?'

The neighbour, Jesus makes clear, is not the poor man laying on the side of the street, stripped, beaten, and half dead, but the Samaritan who crossed the road, 'bandaged his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them, ... lifted him onto his own mount and took him to an inn and looked after him.' My neighbour is the one who crosses the road for me!

What do you think of this idea? Is Nouwen right? Has he seen 'beneath the surface' as it were, and recognised a deeper spiritual truth?

To me it seems more fitting that we should love those that need our love rather than those that help us. So is this one of those rare occasions when Nouwen got it wrong? Although the text supports his conclusion if we take it literally, is this what it really means? Is this what Yahshua intended as he spoke to the lawyer? (See the entire passage - Luke 10:25-37)

Please leave a comment and let me know what you think.

The crowds are fed

Part 4 of a series - 'Seven signs in John'
< An invalid is healed | Index | Walking on water >

People are hungry - and there are a lot of people. Jesus asks the disciples about feeding them and then shows that neither money nor large supplies of food are necessary. We finish with the usual four questions.

For the background to the signs in John and links to the other articles in the series, please read the index page.

At Tabgha on the north-west shore of the Sea of Galilee is a church at the traditional site of the feeding of the five thousand.

About 300 years after the crowd ate the bread and fish, a woman called Egeria visited and wrote of this site.

'In the same place (not far from Capernaum) facing the Sea of Galilee is a well watered land in which lush grasses grow, with numerous trees and palms. Nearby are seven springs which provide abundant water. In this fruitful garden Jesus fed five thousand people with five loaves of bread and two fish.'

So let's read the passage from John and then ask the usual four questions.

Some time after this, Jesus crossed to the far shore of the Sea of Galilee (that is, the Sea of Tiberias), and a great crowd of people followed him because they saw the signs he had performed by healing those who were ill. Then Jesus went up on a mountainside and sat down with his disciples. The Jewish Passover Festival was near.

When Jesus looked up and saw a great crowd coming towards him, he said to Philip, ‘Where shall we buy bread for these people to eat?’ He asked this only to test him, for he already had in mind what he was going to do.

Philip answered him, ‘It would take more than half a year’s wages[a] to buy enough bread for each one to have a bite!’

Another of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, spoke up, ‘Here is a boy with five small barley loaves and two small fish, but how far will they go among so many?’

Jesus said, ‘Make the people sit down.’ There was plenty of grass in that place, and they sat down (about five thousand men were there). Jesus then took the loaves, gave thanks, and distributed to those who were seated as much as they wanted. He did the same with the fish.

When they had all had enough to eat, he said to his disciples, ‘Gather the pieces that are left over. Let nothing be wasted.’ So they gathered them and filled twelve baskets with the pieces of the five barley loaves left over by those who had eaten.

After the people saw the sign Jesus performed, they began to say, ‘Surely this is the Prophet who is to come into the world.’ Jesus, knowing that they intended to come and make him king by force, withdrew again to a mountain by himself.’ (John 6:1-15)

As for the earlier signs in John, I'll now ask the four questions suggested by Neil Cole and provide some pointers for finding the answers in the material quoted above.

What does this story tell us about people? - We'll list all the people who are mentioned.

First, there is the crowd. Why were they following Jesus? Travelling around on foot would have been quite an effort, they would have been both tired and hungry. Any who were not young, fit and well might have been really struggling. Right at the end the people are mentioned again. How did they respond to what had happened?

Next is Philip. His solution to feeding the people is to buy food, but he knew this was unaffordable for so many.

Andrew knew they had some food, but only a token amount among so many.

The disciples (including Philip and Andrew) are mentioned later. Jesus tells them to pick up the pieces. This might have seemed an unnecessary chore (the were no littering laws in those days). How did they respond? What were they thinking as the baskets filled up?

What does it tell us about Jesus? - Jesus crossed to the far shore. He was always travelling about the land. Why?

His initial response to the crowd was to go up into the hills. But they followed him. What is his attitude to this crowd?

Notice how he uses questions to teach the disciples, getting people to think and verbalise is more effective than just giving the answer.

Jesus tells the disciples what to do - make them sit down - gather up the pieces. Who is in control here?

Right at the end, is he taken by surprise by the intentions of the crowd? Does he approve of their desire to make him a king? What is going on here?

What does it tell me about myself? - Are you like any of the people in the story? Are you like all of them in some way? Which do you identify with most? Which do you identify with least? Might you have thought and behaved differently?

Who else needs to hear this? - Who do you know who might benefit or be challenged or encouraged by hearing this sign of John?

Additional points - John mentions 5000 men in this crowd. The total size of the crowd would have been more, perhaps substantially more if they had counted women and children too.

< An invalid is healed | Index | Walking on water >

An invalid is healed

Part 3 of a series - 'Seven signs in John'
< Healing at a distance | Index | The crowds are fed >

Jesus heals a lame man and tells him to pick up his mat and walk. As it's the Sabbath, this leads to trouble with the Jewish leaders. Once again we will ask four questions after reading the passage.

Here is the third sign in John, for the background please read the index page.

Parts of the Pool of Bethesda are still visible in Jerusalem. The archaeology is not straightforward to understand because of the presence of later structures. But remains of the pool are definitely present.

The covered colonnades have long since gone, but they would have provided cool shade where the sick would have waited, hoping that the water would be stirred so that one person might be healed each day.

Some time later, Jesus went up to Jerusalem for one of the Jewish festivals. Now there is in Jerusalem near the Sheep Gate a pool, which in Aramaic is called Bethesda and which is surrounded by five covered colonnades. Here a great number of disabled people used to lie – the blind, the lame, the paralysed. One who was there had been an invalid for thirty-eight years. When Jesus saw him lying there and learned that he had been in this condition for a long time, he asked him, ‘Do you want to get well?’

‘Sir,’ the invalid replied, ‘I have no one to help me into the pool when the water is stirred. While I am trying to get in, someone else goes down ahead of me.’

Then Jesus said to him, ‘Get up! Pick up your mat and walk.’ At once the man was cured; he picked up his mat and walked.

The day on which this took place was a Sabbath, and so the Jewish leaders said to the man who had been healed, ‘It is the Sabbath; the law forbids you to carry your mat.’

But he replied, ‘The man who made me well said to me, “Pick up your mat and walk.”’

So they asked him, ‘Who is this fellow who told you to pick it up and walk?’

The man who was healed had no idea who it was, for Jesus had slipped away into the crowd that was there.

Later Jesus found him at the temple and said to him, ‘See, you are well again. Stop sinning or something worse may happen to you.’ The man went away and told the Jewish leaders that it was Jesus who had made him well.

So, because Jesus was doing these things on the Sabbath, the Jewish leaders began to persecute him. In his defence Jesus said to them, ‘My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I too am working.’

As for the earlier signs in John, I'll now ask the four questions suggested by Neil Cole and provide some pointers for finding the answers in the material quoted above.

What does this story tell us about people? - Let's work through them systematically.


There was a crowd at the Pool of Bethesda - a 'great number' of disabled people lying there. Why were they there? And why so many of them? What were their expectations of success?


Among them is this one particular man. We don't know his name, but Jesus spoke to him. How did he respond to Jesus' question? Why didn't he simply answer 'Yes'? Was he healed as Jesus spoke or as he obeyed? How does he reply to the Jewish leaders who quiz him after he is healed? And later, after he meets Jesus again in the Temple, why might he have gone back to the Jewish leaders?


Next we must consider the Jewish leaders themselves. Are they glad to hear about the healing? Whose interests do they have at heart? What motives underlie their question to the healed man? What was their attitude to Jesus?


What does it tell us about Jesus? - Why was Jesus in Jerusalem, what does this tell us about his attitude to Jewish traditions?


He also went to a place where there were many sick people. Is he willing or unwilling to deal with the pain and misery that people sometimes face? Did he heal everyone, if not how many?


What is his view on rules like working on the Sabbath? Are there things that he sees as more important? If so, what? How did he explain his attitude to the Sabbath regulations?


What does it tell me about myself? - Are there any ways in which you are a bit like the characters portrayed here?


Who else needs to hear this? - Do you know anyone who might be encouraged by this story? Do you know anyone who needs healing? Do you know anyone with strong religious attitudes about following rules and regulations? If you know people who need to hear this story, who will tell them? Might you need to tell them?


Additional points - Jewish law was quite strict. Picking something up and carrying it counted as work and was not allowed on the Sabbath.

< Healing at a distance | Index | The crowds are fed >

Throwing stones

The law brings judgement and death. Grace brings forgiveness and life. And what I receive I should also freely give to others. There is no advantage in receiving grace if I do not also share it around liberally. As I judge, so will I be judged.

While I was walking back from town two days ago I was thinking about the woman caught in adultery and brought before Jesus by the scribes and Pharisees. And I was struck powerfully by a sudden thought. I realised what Jesus had meant when he said that the one without sin should throw the first stone. he was talking about himself!

Looking the passage up later I discovered, of course, that others had come to this conclusion ahead of me. But the sudden revelation while walking left its mark nonetheless. It had been a revelation to me. It was an example of how abruptly and quite without warning we can grasp a new aspect of something. We suddenly 'get' it, and usually for no particular reason.

These flashes of inspiration or revelation are valuable, but they don't seem to come from careful and exhaustive study. Rather, they are like small movements caught in the corner of the eye. Our attention is caught, our gaze shifts, and we become suddenly aware of what we had not known and were not looking for.

Here is the passage I was pondering...

Early next morning he returned to the Temple and the entire crowd came to him. So he sat down and began to teach them. But the scribes and Pharisees brought in to him a woman who had been caught in adultery. They made her stand in front, and then said to him, “Now, master, this woman has been caught in adultery, in the very act. According to the Law, Moses commanded us to stone such women to death. Now, what do you say about her?”

They said this to test him, so that they might have some good grounds for an accusation. But Jesus stooped down and began to write with his finger in the dust on the ground. But as they persisted in their questioning, he straightened himself up and said to them, “Let the one among you who has never sinned throw the first stone at her.” Then he stooped down again and continued writing with his finger on the ground. And when they heard what he said, they were convicted by their own consciences and went out, one by one, beginning with the eldest until they had all gone.

Jesus was left alone, with the woman still standing where they had put her. So he stood up and said to her, “Where are they all—did no one condemn you?”

And she said, “No one, sir.” “Neither do I condemn you,” said Jesus to her. “Go home and do not sin again.” (John 8:2-11, JB Phillips New Testament)

Jesus said the one without sin should throw the first stone. But there was one person in the room who had no sin and who therefore had the right to throw that first stone. And that was Jesus. All the others had left, aware of their own sin and, perhaps, not wanting to have it pointed out!

So instead of condemning her, Jesus simply told her 'Neither do I condemn you, go and don't sin any more'.

This is grace at work. The law demanded the death penalty. Jesus alone had the right to pronounce and carry out that penalty. But he forgave her and let her leave in peace. If we are not forgiven by the one who has the right to exact the penalty, we are not forgiven at all!

Thank you, Lord, for your grace - freely given but never deserved. Thank you for your love towards us. Thank you for your peace resting upon us. Thank you for your presence amongst us and your fellowship with us. Where two or three are gathered... Thank you, Lord.

Pink blackberry - IMAGE

(Click the photo for a larger view)

Pink flowered wild blackberry - Photo taken 13th July 2012
Plants vary considerably within a species. Seedlings are all slightly different from one another and this wild, hedgerow blackberry near my home is no exception. Its flowers are easily the most deeply coloured I've seen. The normal colour is from white to a very pale pink.

What does this image say to you? There are no wrong answers. Add a comment.

Click the 'image' label below to see other image posts.

David Black's convictions

David Black's list of convictions expresses the essence of a spiritual priesthood. The convictions are listed here for you to consider and comment on. Perhaps it's time for a list of this kind, similar to the theses nailed to the church door by Martin Luther.

I came across the following list of convictions on Alan Knox's blog, 'The assembling of the church'. He in turn had found them on the blog of David Black (9th July 2012).

David suggests that the list expresses the essence of a spiritual priesthood. I agree. (See 1 Peter 2:4-10)

For me this list is quite delightful and very insightful. It deserves to be widely seen and discussed so please add a comment.

Are you convinced of each of these points? If not, which ones do you disagree with and why? Would you add any further convictions of your own? If so, what?

1. I am convinced that the house church rather than the sanctuary church was the New Testament norm.
2. I am convinced of the normalcy of tent making leadership.
3. I am convinced that the church exists in part to equip all of its members for ministry.
4. I am convinced that the leadership of the church should be shared for the health of the congregation.
5. I am convinced that top-down structures of leadership are unquestionably more efficient -- efficient in doing almost everything than equipping, which is the primary task of leadership.
6. I am convinced that the process of appointing new elders is best done on the basis of recognizing who is already serving as an elder in the church.
7. I am convinced that any local church that takes seriously Jesus as the Senior Pastor will not permit one man to become the titular head of the church.
8. I am convinced that the essential qualifications for ministry in the church have little or nothing to do with formal education and everything to do with spiritual maturity.
9. I am convinced that the church is a multigenerational family, and hence one of the things that makes the church the church is the presence of children, parents, and other adults.
10. I am convinced that because every local church has all the spiritual gifts it needs to be complete in Christ, believers should be exposed to the full expression of the charisms (grace-gifts) when they gather, in contrast to specialized ministries that center around singularly gifted people.
11. I am convinced that the local church is the scriptural locus for growing to maturity in Christ, and that no other training agency is absolutely needed.
12. I am convinced that the local church ought to be the best Bible school going.
13. I am convinced that Paul's letters were not intended to be studied by ordinands in a theological college but were intended to be read and studied in the midst of the noisy life of the church.
14. I am convinced that the church is a theocracy directly under its Head (Jesus Christ), and that the will of the Head is not mediated through various levels of church government but comes directly to all His subjects.
15. I am convinced that the goal of leadership is not to make people dependent upon its leaders but dependent upon the Head.
16. I am convinced that since all believers are "joints" in the body, ministry is every believer's task.
17. I am convinced that pastor-teachers, as precious gifts of Christ to His church, are to tend the flock of God by both personal care and biblical instruction, equipping God's people for works of service both in the church and in the world.
18. I am convinced that the role of pastor-teacher is a settled ministry in a local congregation.
19. I am convinced that leaders should communicate that every part of the body is interrelated to the other parts and indispensable; every member will be appreciated, every charism will be treasured.
20. I am convinced that the whole church, the community of all the saints together, is the clergy appointed by God for ministry. The fundamental premise upon which I operate is that each believer in the church needs to be equipped for his or her own ministry both in the church and in the world. If the church is to become what God intended it to be, it must become a ministerium of all who have placed their faith in Christ. The whole people of God must be transformed into a ministering people. Nothing short of this will restore the church to its proper role in the kingdom of God.