God's Timing and Twitter
"When the time had fully come, God sent His Son, born of a woman, born under law, to redeem those under law, that we might receive the full rights of sons" (Gal. 4:4).
"You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly" (Rom. 5:6).
God impeccably timed the coming of Jesus. He wasn't a moment too soon in coming, nor a moment too late. It was "at just the right time." Things were at their full. All that had happened before was, in one sense, completed for our instruction, "on whom the fulfillment of the ages has come" (1 Cor. 10:11).
We should marvel at the precise timing of God in bringing to pass our redemption in Christ. It was not haphazzard. It was not coincidental, nor scheduled according to convenience. Christ's coming was not random or laid back. Jesus came in the era and moment maximally effective at redeeming His people--"at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly." The time had fully come.
One of the things impeccably timed with Christ's coming is the setting down of God's word. Jesus could have come a century or so earlier, before Greek becomes the lingua franca of the empire. Or, he could have come when the printed word was at its peak and publishing at full tilt. But had He come earlier, the recording and distribution of holy writ might have met with limited circulation. Had he come centuries later, when the pubishing was easier and more widespread, perhaps the din of voices would have been too loud to hear the distinctiveness of His own. Had he come in our video age, how might the pixelated depiction of our Lord and His message have squashed the living dynamism of the word and made static forever all the wrong things? These are speculations, of course, because He came at just the right time for the inspiration and distribution of His word as well.
A couple implications:
1. Arguments about the culturally bounded and limited nature of revelation fall short, imo. He came at just the right time to say just what He wanted to say in the way He wanted to say it to reach all of His people.
2. Certain things, then, should not be done to His revelation, like twittering the Easter message. The God-breathed message, fully inspired, wasn't timed for the mediums of our day. That doesn't mean the message can't work in the medium; it means not every medium is appropriate for the message. Seems to me a twittered account of the Passion lacks a lot of reverence and awe appropriate to our Lord's sacrifice.
I'm really glad God sent His Son when He did, accomplishing our salvation, and recorded His word when He did, leaving us an ancient and infallible self-disclosure for the ages.
“But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice.” (Phil 1:18)
I often struggle with my desire for recreation time. I feel that if I had more faith and more confidence in the brevity of life, God’s glory and his coming kingdom that I would give every spare minute to ‘ministry.’ No matter my gifting, I often think that at the very least—given God’s promises about the power of his word—that I could at least stand at a metro stop and simply read the Bible aloud. It may not be the best use of my time but it has to be more faithful than watching my favorite show or playing my favorite computer game, right? [And as a disclaimer, in my life so far going to the metro has lost that mental ‘struggle’ every time…]
But to the point: Sure, there is probably something better that could be done with one’s time than twittering a Bible story/scripture. As we know, a Christian should consider his talents carefully and invest them for the greatest return (Matt 25).
But I wonder that saying this ‘should not’ be done is not too strong?
Maybe they could do something more fruitful than read a bible story in this digital Speaker’s Corner, but might it still not be something more than burying one’s ‘talent’ in the ground even if I it is something less than a five-fold return?
I just don't know, though...
Posted by: Josh W. | Apr 14, 2009 9:42:10 AM
the twitter criticism is a little harsh. is telling the easter message via twitter sparse? yes. does it do harm to the gospel? there is no indication that it does. yes, the easter message is weighty, but i'm not convinced that it necessarily is robbed of its weight by twittering it. twittering certainly should not replace regular preaching of the word, but that is not what was done here, and i could see tweets like these as a good supplement. this was done on good friday, when many people would be at work, so having these tweets sent to their phone, etc, would be a reminder throughout their day that Christ went through a long ordeal, with tortures throughout the day, in order to give himself up for us. i see no harm, disrespect, or lack of reverence in that.
but of course, i welcome greater exposition of your point, thabiti.
Posted by: Meredith M. | Apr 14, 2009 10:07:35 PM
Paul writes, "To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings." (1 Cor 9)
And to the twitterers, Paul would likely have become a twitterer. And he would do it for the sake of the gospel, that he may share with them in its blessings.
Posted by: Aaron R. | Apr 17, 2009 8:41:50 PM