I love, love, love the language you string together, David. "But the present cannot bring about the age to come by its own powers. It would only reproduce itself over again in the act of force. It relies on the grace of this other; this age to come, which longs backward, in love, to redeem, emerging on the horizon by its own agency."
I am completely with you on this take on the Messiah, David. But I'm wrestling with phrases in letters such as Ephesians and Corinthians in which the people being addressed are told "you are the body of Christ [Messiah]" This is probably due to my lack of knowledge about the original language / words used - but can you offer anything to help understand this apparent paradox?
Rightly noted and a good question, Jez. My thoughts are that these two texts are not about the messianic community's presence toward the other, to whom they might reach out; they are about how messianic communities related among themselves. ie you're a hand and I'm a foot (and the messiah is the head, so remains distinct and other). Platos republic uses the same image. So these texts aren't assigning an executive messianic authority to the I --- the first person; they are, in fact, relativising the I, making them partial, creaturely, limited. To take these as a missional image of 'being Jesus to the world' is to make the text do something it isn't doing. Not saying you can't, just saying its a choice to extend it thus. A text that does speak of presence to the other is the parable of the sheep and the goats, where the messiah is located absolutely (hands, feet, head and all) with the impoverished, imprisoned and colonised other.
Having said all the above, I do think there is such a thing as messianic practice, or participation, or "weak messianic power" as Benjamin put it. That next weeks piece.
I love, love, love the language you string together, David. "But the present cannot bring about the age to come by its own powers. It would only reproduce itself over again in the act of force. It relies on the grace of this other; this age to come, which longs backward, in love, to redeem, emerging on the horizon by its own agency."
I am completely with you on this take on the Messiah, David. But I'm wrestling with phrases in letters such as Ephesians and Corinthians in which the people being addressed are told "you are the body of Christ [Messiah]" This is probably due to my lack of knowledge about the original language / words used - but can you offer anything to help understand this apparent paradox?
Rightly noted and a good question, Jez. My thoughts are that these two texts are not about the messianic community's presence toward the other, to whom they might reach out; they are about how messianic communities related among themselves. ie you're a hand and I'm a foot (and the messiah is the head, so remains distinct and other). Platos republic uses the same image. So these texts aren't assigning an executive messianic authority to the I --- the first person; they are, in fact, relativising the I, making them partial, creaturely, limited. To take these as a missional image of 'being Jesus to the world' is to make the text do something it isn't doing. Not saying you can't, just saying its a choice to extend it thus. A text that does speak of presence to the other is the parable of the sheep and the goats, where the messiah is located absolutely (hands, feet, head and all) with the impoverished, imprisoned and colonised other.
Having said all the above, I do think there is such a thing as messianic practice, or participation, or "weak messianic power" as Benjamin put it. That next weeks piece.
Many thanks David - this makes good sense to me.
Looking forward to next week's piece, and hopefully another Messianic Moot sometime soon!
Jesus is the only Messiah we are ever going to have.