D is for Dialoguing

Josh here, with another boring no picture, all-text post.  The topic of the emerging church has been of some interest to me lately; it's admittedly a hard "movement" ("conversation"?) to characterize, but that's the point.  I suspect like most movements there are positives and negatives.  It remains to be seen whether the negatives outweigh the positives, or vice-versa.  

I stumbled across an interesting find, though I'm not totally sure what to make of it.  I was reading in the Greek New Testament and a word caught my eye--the word (transliterated) "dielogizonto" which is one of two words derived from the Greek "dialogue," one of the EC buzzwords.  In other words, "dialoguing" is the preferred approach when discussing one's thoughts or beliefs.  "Preaching," "evangelizing" and "witnessing" are to be avoided at all costs, for a more holistic, organic and non-threatening approach--if it can be called an approach at all (since one might argue that a "conversion" is not necessarily the goal).  

The use of "dialogue" I stumbled upon in Mark 8:16 was where the disciples, on the heels of the miraculous feeding of the 4,000, "discussed" (dialogued) "with one another the fact that they had no bread."  An exasperated Jesus asks, "Why are you discussing [dialoguing] that you have no bread?" (8:17).  His point is that he can obviously provide bread, so don't worry about whether or not you forgot to bring some!  Such a misled and counter-intuitive instance of dialoguing made me curious about its broader use in the New Testament, so I did a word-search.  What I found was startling.

Of the 16 times the Greek word "dielogizonto" is used in the Gospels, in all but one of them the use of "dialoguing" is cast in a negative light.  Anyone wanting to piece together a theology of the dialogue needs to account for these 15 instances, instead of skipping to the positive dialogue of Acts--positive, that is, except for 20:9 where Paul's "dialogue" puts a young man to sleep, and he falls from a window to his untimely death!  In fact, the "dialogue" of Acts is a slightly different derivative, and resembles modern "preaching" more than it does two of us middle class white guys chewing the fat at a local coffeehouse.  

Because of the repetition of certain stories in the synoptic gospels, these 15 uses of "dialoguing" fall into just 7 distinct scenes:

1)  The disciples "dialogue" about how they didn't bring bread and they think Jesus is upset with them.  And yet Jesus has just shown himself to be able to miraculously feed thousands.  In this scene, Jesus calls them "O you of little faith," and says, "why are you dialoguing among yourselves" (Mt. 16:7; Mark 8:16, 17).

2)  Jesus is teaching in the temple courts.  The irate priests and elders ask by what authority he is doing these things.  In response, Jesus poses a question for them, about which they "dialogue" (Mt. 21:25 and Mark 1:31).  The brilliant answer from their dialogue is... no answer at all.  And so Jesus says, "Neither will I tell you by what authority I am doing these things" (Mt. 21:27).  There is one dialogue I'm glad I wasn't a part of.

3)  In this third scene (Mark 2:6, 8; Luke 5:21-22), Jesus tells a paralytic that his sins are forgiven.  Some of the scribes and Pharisees "dialogued" and concluded that Jesus was blaspheming (Luke 5:21).  Jesus' response is straightforward; literally:  "Why do you dialogue in your hearts?"  That's the end of the sentence.  Not "why do you dialogue about me" or "why is your dialogue calling me into question," but instead, the very act of dialoguing is indicted!  Yikes.

4)  This fourth scene is by far my favorite.  In Mark 9:33, Jesus levels one simple, devastating question to his disciples:  "What were you dialoguing about on the way?"  Why is this a devastating question?  Because of what they were dialoguing about:  "who was the greatest" (9:34)!  Oops.  

5)  At least the people in this fifth scene, in Luke 3:15, were humble enough to accept reproach.  They were dialoguing about whether John the Baptist might be Jesus.  Another instance of dialogue that leads to a conclusion completely unfounded in truth.  Fortunately John is there to set them straight (Luke 3:16)!

6)  In Luke 1:29, Mary dialogues within herself about "what sort of greeting this might be."  Not exactly a negative thing.  But we're also told in 1:29 about her state of mind:  she was "greatly troubled."  Hey, you would be too if an angel from God appeared in your room tonight!  At the very least, her dialogue was the product of a traumatized state.  

7)  This final instance in the Gospels of "dialogue" is the most troubling.  In Luke 20:14 the men in Jesus' parable "dialogued together" about how to kill the vineyard owner's son.  Jesus' parable is meant to depict the string of circumstances that would ultimately lead to his crucifixion.  In other words, Jesus' crucifixion was accomplished by men who had dialogued their way to a sinister plot to crucify the Messiah.  

I certainly don't think the dialogue of emerging Christians is driven by evil motives.  In fact, most may be honestly grappling  with how to live out their faith in 21st Century culture.  But at the very least, it seems to show that human dialogue doesn't necessarily always lead in the right direction.  Maybe like the disciples and like John the Baptist's followers, we need an authoritative voice to show us the right direction.  I wonder where we could find that?