Apocalypse — what comes to mind when we hear the word?  The end of the world?  The whole genre of post-apocalyptic movies, literature and games that encompass zombie outbreaks, post nuclear holocausts or the Blade Runner vision of a dystopian future?

Actually, the word apokalypsis literally means ‘un-covering’ or revelation; an exposing of reality that was previously hidden or unknown.  The book of the Bible we know as Revelation is literally called Apokalypsis in Greek – not because it is about the end of the world (why Christians think of it that way instead of as New Creation is beyond me, but that’s a different conversation), but because in it we find a revealing of God’s message and purpose in history to a servant of Jesus named John.

That understanding of apocalypse as being an unveiling or revealing of truth is essential to understanding this chapter from Gorman entitled: “The Apocalyptic New Covenant and the Shape of Life in the Spirit according to Galatians.”

It’s worth noting that Gorman’s main audience is pastoral and academic, engaging conversations that have been going on for quite a while in trying to understand Paul’s theology and how that relates to life, to the Torah, to God’s covenants with Israel and what that has to do with a community in Christ that includes Jew and Gentile together.

One of the key takeaways for me is that when Paul is writing about Jesus, he is not just passing along a revelation he has been given (i.e. information about Jesus or even his personal story of encountering Jesus), but that his life itself has become a revealing of the presence and work of Jesus.

In other words, because as Paul says in Romans 6:8 “if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him,” this transforming work of God in us becomes a way God is revealing God’s self and God’s purpose in the world.

Participation in Christ then, is not just a personal mystic experience or a body of knowledge to be passed along, but a way in which our lives, being caught up in the life of God, makes God’s work visible in the world.  Lest we get ahead of ourselves, it’s essential to remember that for Paul, it is Christ crucified in which the character of God is revealed.  Which again brings us back to confront our temptations of a theology of glory vs. a theology of the cross.

This indwelling becomes the fulfillment of the promises made in Ezekiel and Jeremiah about receiving a new heart that enables us to live in right relationship with God.  In Gorman’s words:

“This apocalyptically [The dramatic way in which God] revealed new covenant is, and must be, revealed for what it is by being made visible in human lives and communities that are being transformed by the Spirit to bear testimony to the paradoxical reality of nature of God’s apocalypse [revelation] and new creation in the crucified Messiah”

In other words – making God visible as we live a life not only patterned after Jesus, but lived in the power and presence of Jesus through the Holy Spirit within and among us.

To some, that’s a pretty obvious conclusion – yet it’s challenging precisely as we engage the scandal of a crucified Messiah as the one who sets the pattern for us.

One of the things I appreciate most about this approach is that it avoids the temptation to reduce faith to spirituality or knowledge or action, instead drawing all three elements together in a relationship lived in the presence and empowering of the God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit and in community with others.

Note: Dr. Scot McKnight at the Blog: Jesus Creed is also moving through this book, and it seems that we’re moving through at about the same pace, as his article on this chapter went up earlier this week.   His comments can be found here, and I’d highly encourage folks to give that a read as well.

If Philippians 2:6-11 is a central description of what God’s cruciform love looks like in the person of Jesus Christ, the introductory verse of Philippians 2:5 is critical for understanding how Paul intends us to understand the implications for our lives and identity.

A complication is that there are different potential translations and interpretations of what the NRSV translates as “Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus”

Gorman highlights two of the main ways the passage has been interpreted.  Is it about imitating Jesus’ mindset or continuing in the identity we already have in Christ?  An example of this would be in the ESV translation: “Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus.”

The bulk of this chapter is a fairly technical proposal that Gorman puts forward for a third way of understanding and translating this passage.  The in-depth rationale he presents for his translation will probably be difficult to follow for most readers, but we can take a look at where he lands and examine its implications.

He prefers to render Philippians 2:5 this way: “Cultivate this mindset – this way of thinking, acting and feeling – in your community, which is in fact a community in the Messiah Jesus.”

My sense of the core distinction between imitation and participation for Gorman is to guard against the idea of Jesus as just a moral example that we are to follow, which could be substituted by any other really good or moral person we should follow.

Gorman doesn’t like the word imitation, but there is a role for active response to who God is revealed to be.  The difference as I see it, is that we cannot imitate from the outside, as if we are apart from Jesus trying to be like Him.  Instead, to be a Christian, we are intrinsically drawn into community that is literally “in Christ”, participating in the continuing life of God in the pattern of Jesus the Messiah whose story reveals the character and nature of God in Philippians 2:6-11.

As he puts it, in Christ Jesus, “those who live in the Messiah are to be conformed to the pattern of his self-humbling and self-emptying, not merely as imitators of a model, but as persons whose fundamental identity is to participate in him and thus in his story.”

My core takeaway is the understanding that to be ‘in Christ’ is more than imitation of an ideal or example, but an entry into a community shaped and indwelt by God; Father, Son, Spirit.

If it all sounds way too esoteric and lofty; perhaps it’s useful to consider some related questions:

• If Jesus is just an example, could we realistically substitute any other sufficiently good or wise person for him?  What would be missing in so doing?
• What difference does it make that participation in Christ involves life in community, not just individual morality?
• How does the mystical or spiritual dimension of this change how we view the Christian life?
• What questions does this stir up for you?