A Fresh Perspective

It is vital to our spiritual health to understand the difference between dominant power and spiritual power . Dominant power is the power to externally influence behavior by the use of force, coercion, threat or promise, reward or punishment. Spiritual power, on the other hand, is the capacity to influence and persuade based on the quality, integrity, authenticity, and authority of one’s own being, apart from any position or any external authority. Dominant power is often bad, but not always. It is sometimes necessary. I think most of us would agree that some form of dominant power is necessary to stop a terrorist group like ISIS, with whom peaceful negotiations are impossible. Dominant power can force a child to comply, which is sometimes necessary, but dominant power cannot make that child love you. Love cannot be controlled or coerced or demanded. Holy week begins with Jesus’ nonviolent, peaceful procession into Jerusalem on a donkey (Mark 11:1-10; par. Matt. 21:1-9; Luke 1...

I am currently teaching the Gospel of Luke on Wednesday evenings and this week’s text raises issues that those of us who preach and teach an inclusive gospel must deal with. The text is Luke 17:20–37 where the kingdom of God is presented as both a present and future reality. My focus here is on the part that deals with the kingdom as future. In response to a question raised by some Pharisees as to when the kingdom will come, Jesus tells them that the kingdom of God is in their midst (could be translated “within” them). Either way, the emphasis is on its present reality. But does this mean that there will be no future realization/fulfillment of the kingdom? Jesus seems to be responding to this implied question in his teaching to his disciples in Luke 17:22–37. The kingdom formula seems to be: Already here, but not yet in any complete sense; in our midst, but still to come; has come and will come; now and in the future. Many of us have a hard time keeping this balance. Paul seems...

Bell begins Chapter 4 by demonstrating the inconsistency of believing in a God of love and in a judgment of eternal torment. He contends that God wants all people to be saved and come to the truth, and then he asks the question, “Does God get what God wants?” He argues that the writers of Scripture consistently affirm that we’re all part of the same family and that what we have in common outweighs our differences. He compares God’s love to that of a parent for a child, “the kind of love that pursues, searches, creates, connects, and bonds. The kind of love that moves toward, embraces, and always works to be reconciled with, regardless of the cost” (p. 99). Bell then references several texts that reflect an inclusive, universal perspective. Bell writes, “This insistence that God will be united and reconciled with all people is a theme the writers and prophets return to again and again” (p. 100). This, of course, is true; there are a number of biblical passages that reflect a universal...