I suppose you could say my internal clock functions on event time as opposed to clock time.  These are sociological distinctions that describe the way time functions in various cultures (think “island time” vs. Day-timer).  Here’s a bit from a sociological abstract about the difference:

Cross-cultural research documented two types of temporal culture governing the way individuals schedule tasks over time: clock-time, where individuals let an external clock dictate when tasks begin/end; and event-time, where tasks are planned relative to other tasks and individuals transition between them when they internally sense that the former task is complete.

Actually, it’s worse than that.  I think time is something we construct to make sense of the perceived world about us.  In other words, because we observe that something did happen (past) and something is happening now (present) and we anticipate something happening later (future) we call this observation by the name “time.”  Then, thanks to the wonders of modern technology, we divide up this thing called time into increments that transpire on a clock.

There’s nothing wrong with that and it functions perfectly well for 82.5% of our lives (I made that number up, just go with it).  The problem is that I don’t think that’s whole story.

Two Understandings of Time

The Bible has 2 different understandings of what Time is, or at least how we experience it.

• “The time has come,”
• “The time promised by God has come at last!”
• “The time is fulfilled,”
• “The time is now!”

All of those are different translations of the same scripture.  Here’s the rest,

“The time has come,” he said. “The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!” Mark 1:15

Then we find this at the beginning of Luke’s story,

“When it was time for Elizabeth to have her baby, she gave birth to a son” Luke 1:57

So are these the same or different understandings of time? They are different kinds of time.

καιρὸς v. χρόνος

kairos v. chronos

Kairos time is about fullness and “now-ness.”  It is an experience of a depth of a moment.  It’s not bound by sequence or efficiency.  Kairos is not contained or containable.  It is an unfolding of the event horizon in a relational universe.  It is, if I may be so bold, orgasmic and culminating.  Kairos is about epochs, eras, and openness.

We’ve all had these moments.  When we become absorbed in an invigorating conversation or story (novel or film) and then say things like, “oh my! I’ve lost track of time”  or  ”how is it already 2:00 am!”  We loose ourselves in these moments and we relish in them.  It is in these Kairos moments when we feel most alive and human.

Kairos, is the kind of time in Mark’s Gospel where the fullness of Kairos has come.  It is in this Kairos-fullness that Jesus proclaims the Kingdom is near.  And I’d suggest that the Kairos is culminated because Jesus is present.  It is his being present that makes the Kingdom near and the time “right.”

“The kairos has come,” he said. “The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!” Mark 1:15

Chronos, is the clock time of Luke’s Gospel.  It is normal time.  It is chronological time where things happen in regular sequence.  It was normal and regular for Elizabeth to give birth because the subsequent number of months had past and it was the next thing to have happened.  That isn’t, of course, downgrading the magnitude of what was happening in the story or the import of John’s birth.  It’s just the noun the writer used to indicate a chronological unfolding of events.

“When it was chronos for Elizabeth to have her baby, she gave birth to a son” Luke 1:57

So, three suggestions:

Time doesn’t exist

You can’t smell it, taste it, touch it, feel it, or hear it.  There is no direct empirical evidence that time exists.  And, if anything, we’ve all had those moments when “time stood still” or “time flies.”  In other words, we regulate our lives by chronos, but that doesn’t mean that that is all there is.  There is a certain degree of ephemeralness about time.  It is not as concrete as we might like to think.  Which is why I’d like to suggest that it does not exist (at least not in the way usually think about something existing).

Time is fluid

So, if it isn’t as concrete as we might think, then, what is it?  It’s fluid.  Time flows like liquid in all directions at once.  It can fold back upon itself and even move ahead of itself.  It works more like a lava lamp than a ruler.  It is dynamic and always changing.  It responds to our interaction and yet it is somehow unaffected by it.

Time has telos

And yet, time is moving …. somewhere.  It has an aim and a goal.  It is not merely meandering about or spinning on an endless loop.  The function of time, theologically, is teleological.  In other words, time’s movement is a dance with a big finish.  God’s desire is to draw all things – all creation – to himself.  God’s aim and goal is for the cosmos to become enmeshed in kairos.  Not unending chronos time, but ever-present becoming of fullness.  The goal of time is God.  Our eschatological move is toward the fullness of time.  In other words, sabbath/jubilee/kingdom-on-earth-as-in-heaven/unity with God and one another.

Navigating Time

All that said, how do we navigate the fluidity and lack of concreteness of time while on our way to the fullness of the Kingdom?  Three bits to be unpacked at another time:

• past – we finish what we started
• future – we scheme and dream with God
• present -we live eternally now in the ever-present Presence of the present

“Whatever your political views, let’s not sacrifice care of creation on the altar of ideology.”

This was accompanied by a link to this article:  Santorum Obliquely Suggests Obama Worships Earth, Not God 

29 comments later….

Now, my point in this post isn’t to address the comments made thusly.  Nor do I really want to wade into the point the article was making.  Rather, I wanted to, in a sense, (a) set the record straight about what I meant and (b) why it matters.  In other words, why I’m “Green.”  Likewise, (c) I want to make a comment or two about the heretical nature of taking an alternative view, and why that’s a very good (and Jesus-like) think to do.  Yes, you read that right, Jesus was a heretic and we love him for it.

(a)  What I Meant

I meant that my fervent desire was to see care of creation, environmental stewardship, ecological mindfulness – whatever you want to call it – transcend the “he said, she said”, argumentativeness of partisan politics.  Now, perhaps that is a naive desire and unrealistic.  Creation, and the resources we gain from it, will always be political.  It will always be something that the body politic must wrestle with.  Somehow we have to debate, negotiate, and even argue our way to a common understanding of what resource gets used by what community or individual.  That’s fine and to be expected.  But using creation as a bludgeoning weapon to hit one another over the head with is just wrong.  We can have fervent disagreement over the role of government to regulate (or not), use (or not), manage (or not) a given resource from the earth, but can we agree that we have one planet that we live on and we need to respect that fact.

In other words, one political party shouldn’t be the environmental party and the other the non-environmental party.  One party, or leader, ought not lambaste another for being concerned about the environment.  Again, it’s fine to have a fierce debate about how we engage the environment.  But using the environment as a litmus test for whether you are in or out of our group is pathetic.

(b)  Why I’m Green

I’m Green, because God is Green.  God made and loves and cares for creation.  And by creation I mean the whole kit and kaboodle, the cosmos, you, me, and everything we see.  He called it very good – not just humanity, the whole shootin match, all things made that were made.  Check the tape.

Here’s a couple of examples, key texts if you will:

• Genesis 1-2 – God hovers over waters, makes humanity in His image, calls it all very good, makes a dude out of mud, gives the dude mouth-to-mouth, plants a garden, gives us a job to do, takes a walk, talks with His creation – all in the first 2 chapters.
• John 3:16 – You’ve heard this one, right?  “For God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.” Well, “world” there is κόσμον or κόσμος.  That’s right, the cosmos.  The whole ordered creation.  God loves it all and Jesus came for the whole thing.  Not just us humans.  He incarnated, lived, died, resurrected and redeems you and me and earthworms and dalmatians and ficus trees and orchards and microbes and molecules.  Paul has a bit to say about this too, but that’s for another time.

Which leads us, of coure, to Global Warming.  Er… wait.  It does?  Really?  No, actually it doesn’t.  There is good debate about Global Warming – is it happening? is it real? do humans cause it? can we stop it? does driving a Prius really help? will I get beach front property in Ohio?  I think it is fair to say that the mainstream of the scientific community is persuaded that it is real and we are causing and we may or may not be able to do anything about it.  That, of course, doesn’t make them right.  And frankly, for the purpose of this discussion at the moment, I don’t care.

Being Green for me has very little, maybe nothing, to do with Global Warming, Climate Change, or Saving the World.  It has everything to do with my heart being captured by the Creator who loves and cares and sacrifices for His creation.  I am persuaded to live as gently as possible on the earth because I respect it.  I respect it because the God who made me made it.  And more!  I’m made out of it – dust to dust.  I care about the earth because I’m embedded in it and connected to it – because that’s how it was ordered or designed to be.

(c)  and other heresies

Ok, I’ve gone on long enough for now.  This point briefly.  I recognize that what I’m suggesting is not in keeping with the status quo.  It is an alternative view.  Probably one that wouldn’t play well in a political campaign, dinner party, or even some (maybe most!?) churches.  You might even say that what I’m suggesting is heretical.  That’s fine.

Methinks I’m in good company.  Jesus was a heretic too.  Status quo was for him to be a good Jew.  Maybe bitch and moan about the Roman occupation.  Maybe train with the Zealots to beef up on his hand to hand combat.  Maybe retreat to the desert for a holy huddle with the Essenes.  Or maybe just capitulate with the powers that be, keep his head down, obey the Torah, marry a nice girl, have a few kids and, you know, settle down.

Except he didn’t.

He went around talking about the Kingdom coming on earth as in heaven.  He touched untouchables.  And he loved the unlovable.  I mean really!  Crazy heretic!

This morning I dropped Cloey off for school, she’s a big 1st Grader now, and headed to NKU.  Today was the first day of class and the campus was a buzz with new sneakers, backpacks, and “Ihaven’tseenyouallsummerhowareyou!!!!”  It was great to be on campus as life returned from the summer slowness.  Even better was to sit at Starbucks and constantly greet students who I’ve come to know and with who I have nurtured meaningful relationships.  Three years ago my first day on the job was the first day of class and I sat in Starbucks not knowing anyone.  Today was markedly different.

Then tonight the university hosted a movie on the Science Center lawn.  The Baptists provided burgers, a new church plant provided water bottles, we made lattes.  Oh, did we make lattes!  We used 4 gallons of milk, 5 pounds of coffee beans, 2 bottles of syrup, 5 gallons of water.  Guessing we did upwards of 200 drinks.  The students LOVED them (and they are probably still wide awake from them too)!  Extra special thanks to Chris Bean and the Espresso Guild for helping us out with equipment and set-up and La Terza Coffee for wonderful beans.  It was a great way to bless the students with hospitality and presence.  It was also a great way to get to know students and start conversations.  My friends, I’m pretty sure God showed up.  Really.  I think I served him an iced vanilla latte.  And to top it all off I got serve with a whole host of NKU students who make the Wesley Foundation home and a couple Asbury Church folk, all of them worked and played together wonderfully and intently.  It was awesome!

Did I mention, I love my job!

For this class (MC500: The Church in Mission) we are to:

write, on the average, 50 words for each class session attended. These 50 words are due at the start of the next day of class in paper, by e-mail, or on your personal blog. The topic will be, “My thoughts on the last class session.”

This is my personal blog.  And these are my 50 words:

It was good to be back in a classroom after taking so many IDL and online courses.  I particularly appreciated our discussion of the shift from Church to Kingdom in Mission.  I think this may be one of the more significant aspects of the ideological shifts taking place across the Christian spectrum.  It certainly has been a key aspect of much of the emerg(ing)(ent) conversation and in missiological circles (see “The Three Eras of Mission History Robby Butler” in Mission Frontiers).  Kingdom is not a human effort – something that we build (we can’t), we can live a certain way as the people of God that allows for the Kingdom to come – we are a sign, instrument, and foretaste (ala Newbigin).  As we discussed this I couldn’t help but think of gardening/farming.  I don’t grow tomatoes, rather I attempt to provide the right environment (soil, water, light, etc…) whereby tomatoes can grow.  Seems that there was a parable that Jesus told about such things too…

(well I went over the 50 words, but hopefully that’s ok)

The harmony between the modality and the sodality achieved by the Roman Church is perhaps the most significant characteristic of this phase of the world Christian movement …

The first structure in the New Testament scene is thus what is often called the New Testament Church. It was essentially built along Jewish synagogue lines, embracing the community of the faithful in any given place. The defining characteristic of this structure is that it included old and young, male and female. Note, too, that Paul was willing to build such fellowships out of former Jews as well as non-Jewish Greeks. …

Thus, on the one hand, the structure we call the New Testament church is a prototype of all subsequent Christian fellowships where old and young, male and female are gathered together as normal biological families in aggregate. On the other hand, Paul’s missionary band can be considered a prototype of all subsequent missionary endeavors organized out of committed, experienced workers who affiliated themselves as a second decision beyond membership in the first structure.

Note well the additional commitment. Note also that the structure that resulted was something definitely more than the extended outreach of the Antioch church. No matter what we think the structure was, we know that it was not simply the Antioch church operating at a distance from its home base. It
was something else, something different. We will consider the missionary band the second of the two redemptive structures in New Testament times.

From The Two Structures by Ralph D. Winter

The Good News of the Kingdom is an anthology of ecumenical missiological thought in tribute to the life and work of missiologist Arthur Glasser.  Like Glasser’s own writing, the Kingdom of God as a theological theme ties this work together.  We are introduced to Arthur Glasser as a Citizen of the Kingdom and overview of his work.  Appropriately for this course, and exemplary of Glasser’s theology, Part I deals with the Biblical foundations of mission.  Building from here the text addresses issues of Kingdom theology, Ecumenical Relationships, Evangelical Concerns, Missiological Issues, and Contextual Considerations.  In sum, these serve as an excellent overview of the field of Missiology and Arthur Glasser’s breadth of contribution to the same.

As this course deals with the biblical foundations of mission, the first part of the book is most applicable.  Building a strong missiological hermeneutic and understanding of how the scriptures form and inform our mission is paramount.  However, the rest of the text is helpful in appropriating a fuller panorama of missiological concerns.  As a missionary on the campus of Northern Kentucky University, the investigation and interplay of ecumenical, evangelical, and modernity are daily issues.  The thoughtful and careful attention to all of these concerns is helpful to me as a minister.  What is more, in this election year David J. Bosch’s chapter on church-state relationships was invaluable and enlightening.

Specifically, Bosch’s treatment of the Anabaptist approach to church-state relations was eye-opening.

The church simply exists in society in such a way that people should become aware of the transitoriness, relativity and fundamental inadequacy of all political programs and solutions.  The believing community is a kind of antibody in society, in that it lives a life of radical discipleship as an “alternative community” (92).

The inadequacy of the “Constantinian” and “pietist” approaches had been apparent to me and, admittedly, a cause of much frustration as I survey the church in America today.  However, I was unsure how to distinguish pietist separation from Anabaptist “antibody-ness”, Bosch’s elucidation has been imminently helpful to that end.  Further, the fact that Bosch sets this all in the context of mission is helpful.  This missiological context of church-state relations moves the conversation from abstract possibilities to a lived engagement with God’s Kingdom mission.  I find myself increasingly drawn to an Anabaptist approach, but appreciative of “reformist” and “liberationist” movements as well.

The scope and drive of Arthur Glasser’s Announcing the Kingdom is the primacy and unity of “God’s purpose and action in mission in human history” (17).  Both the Old and New Testaments are pointed in the same direction of God’s rule and reign.  Glasser tells the narrative of scripture through the lens of the Kingdom of God.  We see that from the creation of the world, God’s covenant with Israel, Jesus’ incarnation, and the church’s continuing mission; God is at work revealing and drawing all nations to himself.  Even in the dynamic story of Revelation we are aware of God’s redemptive Kingdom mission coming to its full conclusion.  In this sweeping narrative of God’s reign throughout scripture we understand the God’s activity in the history of the world.

This understanding of God’s Kingdom story is essential for our study of mission.  It is of utmost importance that we form our mission and ministry in the context of how God has engaged humanity throughout history.  By hearing the story of God’s Kingdom through the whole sweep of scripture we begin to understand the pervasiveness and completeness of God’s mission.  This is not an isolated story of merely how Middle Eastern deity dealt with an obscure group of people 2,000 years ago.  God’s mission extends from the beginning of creation to the end of all things.  With this appreciation for the scope of God’s Kingdom our mission is shaped and formed.  This is of particular import as I work with college students in 21st century America.

I have often found in working with students living in a post-Christendom world that how the story of scripture hangs together is almost entirely lost.  There may even be an appreciation for God, Jesus, or the Bible; but understanding the scope and mission is far from prevalent.  Furthermore, for students who do claim a Christian walk the Old Testament seems irrelevant at best, offensive at worst.  Setting the context for how both testaments hang together in the Kingdom mission is very helpful.  My current ministry context is as a campus minister re-starting a ministry on at Northern Kentucky University.  I many ways I feel an apostolic call as one sent from the churches in our conference to the students on campus.  As such, I highly value Glasser’s quote of Kung that:

As an individual Christian, I must become a true successor of the apostles.  I must bear their witness, believe their message, imitate their mission and ministry (302).

I very much see myself as a missionary sent to the people group called NKU.  Understanding that mission through the lens of scripture and, specifically, the Kingdom of God is deeply formative.