Paul announced the reality of a new humanity created by his earthly existence. James Denney in Christian Doctrine of Reconciliation said, “The mere existence of Christ does not constitute the new humanity. It is only constituted as men in faith freely identify themselves with Him.” The faithfulness of Christ to the Father’s mission requires a life of faithfulness from us. I think Jesus provided a framework for that faith response in his teachings. I will suggest a sociological interpretation of that framework.

A new humanity will require two distinct sets of habits, often called institutions. In this blog we will begin to consider the first set social structure which is the collective memory of the group expressed in the oughts and restrictions felt by members as they make choices. In our culture these are often so habitual we never notice the choice. Forming a new humanity is different. We have to learn these preferred choices and intentionally follow them.

Jesus was very direct to instruct those of us who would choose to follow him on the structure of our new life.

The Cross: Luke 14:26-33

The cross loomed over the ministry of Jesus. He could have made choices to avoid the cross. He did not. Yes, He died on the cross for our sins. He is our kinsman redeemer. He paid the ransom for us to set us free from slavery to sin. But the cross is more. It is the symbol that the earthly life of Jesus was not His own, but rather subject to the authority of the Father. The cross is the symbol of the ‘faithfulness of Jesus’ that is so important to Paul’s theology. As Jesus acknowledged in the Garden, only the Father can change the course of the days ahead. If Jesus takes matters into His own hands He usurps the authority of the Father.

In the ‘new humanity’ the cross becomes the symbol of the radical lifestyle expectation placed on each of us, not just a special few. We are expected to demonstrate the same ‘faithfulness’ which characterized Jesus’ obedience to the Father. Every day we structure our decisions in the shadow of the cross and affirm the choice to follow Jesus with forsaking our life for His will. If you haven’t done so, read Luke 14:26-33. This is not hyperbole. Do not de-radicalize these verses.

Our opportunity to be subjects of the Kingdom and children of God was provided at great cost. If we choose it, it is ours, but then we are His. Choosing the way of the cross is placing the Kingdom before any aspect of our lives.

In the new humanity, the cross is foundational to our membership. Taking up our cross is critical to lives that honor the faithfulness of Jesus.

Paul announced the reality of a new humanity created by his earthly existence. James Denney in Christian Doctrine of Reconciliation said, “The mere existence of Christ does not constitute the new humanity. It is only constituted as men in faith freely identify themselves with Him.” The faithfulness of Christ to the Father’s mission requires a life of faithfulness from us. I think Jesus provided a framework for that faith response in his teachings. I will suggest a sociological interpretation of that framework.

A new humanity will require two distinct sets of habits, often called institutions. In this blog we will begin to consider the first set social structure which is the collective memory of the group expressed in the oughts and restrictions felt by members as they make choices. In our culture these are often so habitual we never notice the choice. Forming a new humanity is different. We have to learn these preferred choices and intentionally follow them.

Jesus was very direct to instruct those of us who would choose to follow him on the structure of our new life.

The Cross: Luke 14:26-33

The cross loomed over the ministry of Jesus. He could have made choices to avoid the cross. He did not. Yes, He died on the cross for our sins. He is our kinsman redeemer. He paid the ransom for us to set us free from slavery to sin. But the cross is more. It is the symbol that the earthly life of Jesus was not His own, but rather subject to the authority of the Father. The cross is the symbol of the ‘faithfulness of Jesus’ that is so important to Paul’s theology. As Jesus acknowledged in the Garden, only the Father can change the course of the days ahead. If Jesus takes matters into His own hands He usurps the authority of the Father.

In the ‘new humanity’ the cross becomes the symbol of the radical lifestyle expectation placed on each of us, not just a special few. We are expected to demonstrate the same ‘faithfulness’ which characterized Jesus’ obedience to the Father. Every day we structure our decisions in the shadow of the cross and affirm the choice to follow Jesus with forsaking our life for His will. If you haven’t done so, read Luke 14:26-33. This is not hyperbole. Do not de-radicalize these verses.

Our opportunity to be subjects of the Kingdom and children of God was provided at great cost. If we choose it, it is ours, but then we are His. Choosing the way of the cross is placing the Kingdom before any aspect of our lives.

In the new humanity, the cross is foundational to our membership. Taking up our cross is critical to lives that honor the faithfulness of Jesus.

Jesus began his ministry with acts of mercy which restored physical, mental, and/or social health to people in need. His corrective teaching was designed to redirect people to a living relationship with God not merely the external acts which may demonstrate a weak or nonexistent faith. His popularity was a matter of some concern to the established powers but not panic. When his popularity began to support the possibility that He might assert himself as more, the same powers became concerned enough to track his movements and assess his teaching.

Jesus’ teaching on his kingdom was confusing. At first glance a kingdom, not of this world appears non-threatening to all authorities, until this teaching began to undermine the legitimacy of any earthly authority. His teaching on Torah, his inclusive mercy, his indifference to the power structures others defended, indicate an alternative way to live that would lead to fundamental change.

In other words, Jesus was a social entrepreneur. Entrepreneurs can be uncomfortable people. Those like Jesus who launch entrepreneurial movements are dangerous. When the Sadducees, Pharisees, Zealots, and Romans realized that a community was emerging around Jesus and his teaching, he had to die. “Better that one man dies rather than the nation.”

Jesus never established an organization in any the sense we would understand. He called out followers to abandon personal, social, and cultural traits that were contrary to his vision of a new humanity. This was not a new vision. Moses and the prophets shared this vision. The entrepreneurial task was to restore the varietal faith within the current context.

The people He called were not all cut from the same cloth. Politically they varied between a separatist ideology which looked forward to the Messiah that led to national independence and those advocating accommodating the foreign powers. His followers came from across the spectrum of society, rich and poor, even a number of Pharisees became followers of Jesus.

Learning to become who you are is the task of every human living in modern societies. It is also the task of anyone who commits to following Jesus. This is a life-long process and not at all easy or straightforward. The process is complicated by the person Jesus or at least by the different frameworks used to explain him to us. It is also complicated in the requisite change that must occur in each of us. The follower of Jesus must experience internal transformation while learning to establish external relationships with God and mankind identical to those of Jesus himself. Just let that sink in.

More specifics on his vision for us will follow!

As far as I know, Paul never discussed the concept of ‘wineskins.’ He is, however, a prime example of one who embodied the concept fully. On the Damascus Road Paul received new wine. His encounter with Jesus exposed the gap between him and God despite his religious practices and identity. Following Jesus closed the gap. He learned to rely on the Holy Spirit not his tradition.

For in him [Jesus] every one of God’s promises is a ‘Yes.’ For this reason it is through him that we say the ‘Amen’, to the glory of God. But it is God who establishes us with you in Christ and has anointed us, by putting his seal on us and giving us his Spirit in our hearts as a first installment.

II Cor. 1:20-22

Do you realize the difficulty in transitioning from Saul the Christ-persecuting Pharisee to the Paul who makes this declaration of faith and theology? This occurs only if all that had structured the life of Saul and provided his identity and security was demoted—placed under the Lordship of the Messiah.

In this declaration to the Corinthians Paul gives us a clue. The key is that we have competence, not self-generated, but God given competence to live in a new covenant creating a new society, a new culture. In this covenant the Spirit provides life. And evidently freedom.

I think this transformation became possible only when Paul realized that he was liberated by the Messiah, the Christ. As Saul left Damascus, he met with Peter and James, and he spent time out of sight possibly at Mt. Sinai and returned to Damascus. This covers a period of 14 years. Scholars have debated what he did during these years. Given the insights into his personality contained in the New Testament, I think he felt compelled to re-examine through the filter of Jesus, the risen Lord whom he met on the road, all the tenets of Judaism he had learned.

Now I will examine four areas where Paul’s process of re-examination is most apparent.

He revisited the history of Abraham. The call of Abram launched God’s specific history with the Hebrews. He became the Father of the Jews. If you pay attention to Paul’s letters, particularly Romans, you will see that Abraham is identified as the father of the Jews, but as the father of those who respond to God as he did, in faith. So, birth no longer matters, it is through adoption, Jews and Gentiles become equally the children of Abraham.

David became the central figure of Jewish history after the transition to life in Canaan was complete. David was a seriously flawed man. As king his sins and failures were public knowledge. Equally public was his faith and continual struggle to live as God wished. In this he became a figure of faith which struggled in a life clearly unworthy of grace yet elevated solely on account of faith. His reign became the symbol of future hope for the people.

There is evidence that Paul now read the prophets differently. Two are particularly noteworthy. First, Ezekiel’s concept of a new heart in Paul’s writings will also be described as a ‘renewing of the mind.’ Because of our cultural corruption, the heart/mind transformation is critical to the health of the varietal faith. Second, Isaiah’s multi-nation vision of salvation is no longer described as the nations coming to Jerusalem. The resolution to the division created by the conflict between Jewish and Gentile Christians is the new people, one nation in Christ Jesus. In Christ they become one people, the new children of Abraham, and the children of faith.

In those fourteen years he became Paul the Jewish follower of Jesus who was preparing to take the Gospel to the Gentiles. Paul would always be a Jew, but now he had a higher commitment—following Jesus. He learned to rely on the Holy Spirit not his tradition to provide concepts that more fully explained God’s provision.

In Paul we see a demonstration of Jesus’ analogy, new wine—new wineskins, new tools to interpret his life.

Sociologist Anthon Giddens first introduced me to the idea that human social life is possible because we are reflexive and purposeful creatures. In other words, we monitor what we do as we live together and we ask ourselves why and if we achieved our purpose in so acting. His writings suggest that monitoring occurs at both conscious and unconscious levels. He is bold enough to encourage doing as much of our monitoring as possible at the conscious level enabling more reflexivity.

Jesus’ use of the imagery of wineskins was not so academic. He was being pragmatic. By calling attention to wineskins, Jesus is making the same point as Giddens, we can and must become more intentional. The central question, “Are the ways we live, the concepts with which we organize what we believe capable of communicating the life with God to which we have been invited?” The critical question, “If that was once true, is it still true today?”

As we read in the Gospels, the ministry of Jesus is the new wineskin for the love and mercy of God in the world. In Luke 7:20-22:

When the men came to Jesus, they said, “John the Baptist sent us to you to ask, ‘Are you the one who is to come, or should we expect someone else?’” At that very time Jesus cured many who had diseases, sicknesses and evil spirits, and gave sight to many who were blind. So he replied to the messengers, “Go back and report to John what you have seen and heard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is proclaimed to the poor.

The utility of the wineskin analogy comes in verse 23.

Blessed is anyone who does not stumble on account of me

New wineskins challenge those comfortable with use of the old. The problem is we all are nurtured to faith in wineskins that are in danger of becoming ‘old.’ John, the messenger tasked with preparing the way for Jesus began to question because his frame of reference was populated by ‘old wineskins.’

We who only know a world of ‘old’ wineskins need an external monitoring measure to guide our reflexive response to the challenges and changes of our day. That external measure is provided in God revealing himself to the slaves in Egypt and to us today. The Bible repeatedly describes it. I have come to label it as the varietal faith. To know if the wineskins of our vintage measure up, we need to apply these values revealed in the character of God:

1. Righteousness—life lived with God and neighbors that eliminates alienation and brokenness
2. Compassion—the quality of living that extends mercy and grace when alienation and brokenness enter the community
3. Fellowship—love and worship towards God, love and forgiveness towards neighbors

I have some ideas on wineskins structured by these values. I am sure you do too. I will be share mine in future blogs.