SUFFERING FOR MISSION: THE ROLE OF SUFFERING IN THE FULFILLMENT OF GENESIS 1:28

MITCHELL KIM WHEATON COLLEGE

AUGUST 14, 2009

1

Suffering for Mission: The Role of Suffering in the Fulfillment of Gen 1:281

On July 19, 2007, 23 short-term missionaries from Saemmul Church in South

Korea were taken hostage in Afghanistan. Four days later, a sharply critical editorial in

the Chosun Ilbo read:

It is simply futile for Koreans to engage in missionary or other religious activities in a country like Afghanistan, which has a history of deep hatred toward Christianity and is wracked by gunfights, kidnappings and suicide bombings. … Religious groups should realize once and for all that dangerous missionary and volunteer activities in Islamic countries including Afghanistan not only harm Korea's national objectives, but also put other Koreans under a tremendous amount of duress.2

Now such provocative words may be expected from the press. The church responded

apologetically. After 43 days of captivity and the martyrdom of two of its members,

Kyeong-sik Yu spoke on behalf of the team and said, “All of us owe a big debt to the

country and the South Korean people . . . . When thinking about the trouble we have

caused them, it is proper for us to bow deeply and ask for your forgiveness.”3 Rev. Eun-

1 This paper was first presented at the Asian Theology Section of the Evangelical Theological Society in Providence, R.I., on November 20, 2008. I am grateful for the helpful feedback from the members of that group. The argument of this paper is an abridgement of “The Blessing of the Curse: Exploring a Canonical Trajectory of Suffering in the Fulfillment of Gen 1:28” (Ph.D. diss., Wheaton College; forthcoming) under the supervision of Prof. G. K. Beale. 2 Chosun Ilbo, July 23 Editorial (accessed http://english.chosun.com/w21data html/news/200707/200707230006.html). 3 Michelle Vu, “Criticisms Mount against ‘Rash’ Korean Evangelism,” Christian Post, Sept 2, 2007 (accessed http://www.christianpost.com/article/20070902/29150_ Criticisms_Mount_Against_%27 Rash%27_Korean_Evangelism.htm).

2

jo Park, the senior pastor of Saemmul Church, concludes, “Remorse is the face of the

church.”4

This troubling turn of events and their ensuing controversy demand a careful

exploration of the relationship between suffering and mission. Asia in general and

Korea in particular are increasingly recognized as a major missionary force in the world.

Yet what role does suffering and martyrdom play in this mission? While unnecessarily

reckless and naïve strategies of mission are rightly to be dismissed,5 missions even

rightly pursued demands sacrifice and sometimes death. For the early church,

persecution ignited joy not remorse (Acts 5:41). What does a distinctively evangelical –

evangel (gospel) centered, Scripture-submitted – theology of suffering look like?

In this paper, I will trace one interpretative trajectory through Scripture, beginning in

Gen 1:28 and then along the path of its fulfillment by the patriarchs, in the Exodus, the

early church and the new creation. Specifically we will see how sin brings suffering into

the fulfillment of Gen 1:28 as suggested by Gen 3:16.

4 Interview with Park Eun-jo, Christianity Today. Accessed at http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2007/septemberweb-only/136-22.0.html?start=2. As a result of this challenge, Saemmul Church in no way shrank back from their vision for global missions; instead the high cost of missions galvanized their focus on missions, despite opposition from the mainstream Korean public. 5 Granted, the criticism comes for a number of reasons. Some say that the churches were naïve in doing short term missions in such a dangerous region, others that they were competing with each other to see who could perform the most dangerous missions. See further discussion in Leslie Hook, “Further Fervor: Why those South Korean missionaries were in Afghanistan,” Wall Street Journal, 3 August 2007, p. W11.

3

I. GETTINGS OUR BEARINGS: GENESIS 1:28 AND MISSION

We begin with the foundational mandate for mission as presented in Gen 1:26-28

(ESV):6

Then God said, “Let us make man in our image (Mlx), after our likeness (twmd). And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” So God created man in his own image (Mlx), In the image (Mlx) of God he created him; Male and female he created them. And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”

Adam, created in the image and likeness of God, is commissioned to fill the earth with

progeny in the image and likeness of God (cf. Gen 5:1-3). As images of gods in the

6 Traditionally Gen 1:28 has been called a “creation mandate.” Joüon sees the five imperatives in Gen 1:28 as direct imperatives with an explicit sense of a direct command; P. T. M. Joüon, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (vol. 14; Roma: Editrice Pontificio Istituto biblico, 1991), 373; cf. similarly W. Gesenius, et al., Gesenius' Hebrew grammar (Oxford: Clarendon, 1910), 324, who sees it as a command “altogether out of the power of the person addressed.” Wenham sees this as a command with an “implicit promise that God will enable man to fulfill it;” G. J. Wenham, Genesis 1-15 (Waco, Tex.: Word Books, 1987), 33. Contra J. H. Walton, Genesis (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 2001), 134, who sees this as a “blessing…delineating a privilege.” The parallel blessing given to the animals in 1:22 would seem to argue in Walton’s favor. However, the reiterations of Gen 1:28 certainly do imply a certain degree of responsibility on the part of the recipient (e.g. 12:1-4, where Abraham’s obedience in going follows straight upon the heals to Yahweh’s command to “Go” in verse 1). Consequently, Wenham’s position seems to be most helpful here. I will use the language of primeval blessing and command/mandate interchangeably, since both seem to be at work here. See similarly, G. K. Beale, The Temple and the Church's Mission: a Biblical Theology of the Dwelling Place of God (Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 2004), 86 n 13.

4

ancient Near East served to represent a god in that area,7 the propagation of such images

implies the extension of that rule to other areas. Multiplication of progeny in the divine

image should be seen as expanding the boundaries of God’s rule until it fills the entire

earth, as argued by Augustine as well as a number of recent commentators.8

7 In Mesopotamia, Assur-naṣir-apli II relates that “at the source of the river Subnat where the steles (ṣa-lam) of my fathers Tiglath-pileser and Tukulti-Ninurta, kings of Assyria, stood, I made a stele (ṣa-lam) of my kingship and set it up beside them” (E. A. W. Budge and L. W. King, The Annals of the Kings of Assyria [vol. 1; London: The British Museum, 1902], 290). In this manner, kings established their authority through images, Mlx, set up in different places. Similarly, gods established kings as their image. In the Tukulti-Ninurta Epic, from the Middle Assyrian period(1244-1208 B.C.E.), the king is described as “the eternal image of Enlil, attentive to the people’s voice, the counsel of the land” (B. R. Foster, Before the Muses: An Anthology of Akkadian Literature [vol. 1: Archaic, Classicla, Mature; Bethesda, Md.: CDL, 1993], 1.208-29.). Also in Egypt, Pharaoh Ahmose I (1550-1525 B.C.E.) is described as “a prince like Re, the child of Qeb, his heir, the image of Re, whom he created, the avenger (or the representative), for whom he has set himself on earth” (D. J. A. Clines, "The Image of God in Man," TynBul 19 [1968], 85). 8 Augustine comments on Gen 1:28, “Should we understand it carnally or spiritually? For we are permitted to understand it spiritually and to believe that it was changed into carnal fecundity after sin. For there was first the chaste union of male and female…and there was the spiritual offspring of intelligible and immortal joys filling the earth, that is, giving life to the body and ruling over it” (On Genesis against the Manicheans [trans. R. J. Teske; Washington D.CH.: Catholic University of America Press, 1991], 1.19.30). Yet this spiritual propagation is not to be understood only in terms of moral improvement; if there was no transgression of God’s commandment, propagation would have happened without pain and death so that “the earth would have been filled with immortal men…[a] just and holy society” (The Literal Meaning of Genesis [trans. J. H. Taylor; New York: Newman Press, 1982], 3.21.33). Yet even after the Fall, some sense of this spiritual propagation must be in view; indeed, “the procreation of children is a part of the glory of marriage and not of the punishment of sin” (City of God [trans. M. Dodds; New York: Modern Library, 1993], 14.21). G. K. Beale provides the most extensive defense of this position today, as “Adam was to widen the boundaries of the Garden in ever increasing circles by extending the order of the garden sanctuary into the inhospitable outer spaces” (Temple and the Church's Mission, 85). Walton, Genesis, 186, makes a similar argument, though not as extensively.

5

The Fall does not eradicate this original commission, as reiterations of this commission

to Abraham and his descendants make clear (Gen 12:2-3; 17:2, 6, 8; 22:17-18; 26:3-4,

24; 28:3-4; 35:11-12; 47:27).9 Differences, though, with the original commission to

Adam should be noted.10 The original command, “Be fruitful, multiply and fill the

earth,” is repeated in the sense of a promise, “I will multiply you exceedingly . . . . and I

will make you exceedingly fruitful” (Gen 17:2, 6; cf. 22:17-18; 26:4, 24; 28:3-4). God

therefore enables the commission to be fulfilled. Yet the original aspect of the

commission is not lost, as implied by the imperatives introducing Gen 12:1-3: “Go forth

from your country… be a blessing.”

II. SUFFERING, THE FALL AND THE FULFILLMENT OF GENESIS 1:28

1. Genesis 3:16

The Fall complicates the fulfillment of Gen 1:28 in another way. God not only

enables the fulfillment of this commission, but also sets its fulfillment in a context of

suffering. The consequences of the Fall for the woman (as well as the man, though

space prohibits exploring this dimension here) suggest this:

9 So similarly N. T. Wright, The Climax of the Covenant: Christ and the Law in Pauline Theology (Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress Press, 1992), 21-26; Beale, Temple and the Church's Mission, 94-95. See also J. Cohen, Be Fertile and Increase, Fill the Earth and Master it : the Ancient and Medieval Career of a Biblical Text (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1989), 28-31, 39. C. J. H. Wright, The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible's Grand Narrative (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Academic, 2006), 334, 65-68, similarly sees humanity’s mission in Gen 1:28 as foundational for Israel’s mission as given to Abraham and the church’s mission. 10 So Wright, Climax of the Covenant, 22, followed by Beale, Temple and the Church’s Mission, 114.

6

v. MT LXX My Translation 16a 16b 16c 16d 16e

rma hvah_la Knwbxo hbra hbrh

Knrhw Mynb ydlt bxob

Ktqwvt Kvya_law

:Kb_lvmy awhw

kai« thvØ gunaiki« ei•pen plhqu/nwn plhqunw◊ ta»ß lu/paß sou kai« to\n stenagmo/n sou e˙n lu/paiß te÷xhØ te÷kna kai« pro\ß to\n a‡ndra sou hJ aÓpostrofh/ sou kai« aujto/ß sou kurieu/sei

To the woman he said, “I will surely multiply your pain in conceptions; in pain you shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.”

The use of hbra hbrh (“I will surely multiply”) in Gen 3:16 suggests an allusion to the

hbr (“multiply”) in Gen 1:28. The allusion is ironic. As a result of the Fall, not only

offspring but also pain in the bearing of offspring is multiplied. Indeed, the Hifil

imperfect form of hbr is consistently used as part of an interpretive stream with its

headwaters in Gen 1:28 (Gen 28:3; cf. Gen 16:10; 17:2; 22:17). Also, in all twenty-

eight occurrences of hbr in Genesis, twenty-two feed into this interpretive stream.

Lawrence Turner rightly notes, “In 1:28, humans had been commanded to ‘multiply’

(rebû); in 3.16 what actually multiplies (harbå ‘arbeh) is ‘your pain in childbirth.’”11

This conclusion can be further supplemented by the translation of Nwrh, typically

rendered as “childbirth.” Yet this hapax legomenon probably comes from the verbal

11 L. A. Turner, Announcements of Plot in Genesis (Sheffield: JSOT, 1990), 23-24. Sarna, Genesis 27-28, comments that “this verse, like the preceding, presupposes the blessing of 1:28, ‘Be fertile and increase.’” Further, D. J. A. Clines, What Does Eve Do to Help? (JSOTSupp 94; Sheffield: JSOT, 1990), 34-35, sees both Adam and Eve locked into “inescapable cycles of pain” while fulfilling the divine programme of Gen 1:28.

7

root hrh, “to conceive, be pregnant” (22x in Genesis; e.g. Gen 4:1; 17; 16:4).

Consequently, there is little lexical basis to translate this “childbirth.”12 Commentators

typically justify rendering Nwrh as “childbirth” by connecting v. 16b and 16c as a

merism, encompassing the painful process of pregnancy from conception to birth.13 Yet

this still fails to explain how conception is painful.14 Another possibility is that the root

of Nwrh is not hrh but rrh, understood in light of the Akkadian arāru “trembling,

pain.”15 However, an explanation based on an Akkadian parallel is unnecessary if a

plausible explanation could be furnished based on a common Old Testament root hrh,

12 Carol Meyers rightly notes that Nwrh cannot be “childbirth” but “pregnancy, conception;” a rendering of “childbirth” exceeds its semantic range. C. L. Meyers, Discovering Eve: Ancient Israelite Women in Context (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), 102-103. 13 A. P. Ross, Creation and Blessing: a Guide to the Study and Exposition of the Book of Genesis (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1996), 146, calls this a synecdoche, while Walton, Genesis, 227, calls this a merism. 14 A merism is “the art of expressing a totality by mentioning the parts, usually the two extremes, concerning a given idea, quality or quantity; consequently polar expression is the most usual form of merism” (J. Krasovec, "Polar Expression in Biblical Hebrew," Bib 64 [1983]: 232; see further, idem., Der Merismus im Biblisch-Hebräisch und Nordwestsemitischen [Rome: Pontificatio Istituto Biblico, 1977]). The extremes here are part of the whole. Other biblical examples of merisms are inclusive of terms on both extremes. For example, “God created the heavens and the earth” (Gen 1:1) implies that God created everything including the heavens and the earth, not only that which is between them. Similarly, “good and evil” (2 Sam 14:17), “burnt offerings and peace offerings” for the entire sacrificial system (Exod 20:24), and “first and last” (Isa 41:4) – all these merisms would be quite odd if they referred only to the points in between the extremes and not the extremes themselves. Yet if the Gen 3:16b, c is seen as a merism, it is quite odd that the process of conception is not seen as painful. 15 D. T. Tsumura, "A Note on Nyrh (Gen 3, 16)," Bib 75 (1994)400. He further supports this by the LXX’s translation, to\n stenagmo/n, “groaning,” as a faithful reflection of the meaning of Nwrh.

8

“conception.” The translation as “conception” is confirmed by the LXX versions of

Aquila, as well as Symmachus and Theodotian. Aquila translates Nwrh as sullh/yeiß,

“conceptions,” while Symmachus and Theodotian use kuh/seiß, “conceptions,

pregnancies.”16

How then is conception painful? The matriarchs in Genesis consistently

encounter great pains in overcoming their barrenness to have children (Sarai [Gen 16:2],

Rebekah (Gen 25:21], Rachel [Gen 29:31]). Carol Meyers entertains this possibility as

an explanation for Gen 3:16 but rejects it, since “none of the texts in Genesis . . . that

deal with themes of barrenness and pregnancy associate conception with pain.”17 Yet

pain (Nwbxo) is not only physical but also emotional. Each of the subsequent

occurrences in Genesis of bxo denote emotional, not physical, pain (Gen 6:6; 34:7;

45:5).18 Barrenness itself is seen as a “reproach” (Prj; Gen 30:23), and Hagar looks

16kuh/seiß is probably from the verbal form, ku/w or kue/w, “to conceive, become pregnant” (BDAG, 579). sullh/yiß BDAG, 3rd ed., 956, says, “of pregnancy, conception.” Liddell and Scott, rev. 1996, 1673, renders it, “conception, pregnancy.” 17Contra Carol Meyers, who objects to this idea, since “none of the texts in Genesis, for example, that deal with themes of barrenness and pregnancy associate conception with pain” (Meyers, Discovering Eve, 103). Yet if pain is understood not only in physical terms but also emotional, pain is certainly associated All the wives of the patriarchs mentioned in Genesis (except Abraham’s second wife Keturah [Gen 25:1]) are barren. Even Leah, who is not explicitly seen as barren, conceives because the Lord “opened her womb” just as he did for Rachel (Gen 29:31; cf. 30:22). Genesis not only shows pain in conception but also pains in childbirth of Benjamin (Gen 35:16-19). 18 HALOT notes that the ending Nw- indicates the duration of the condition of bxo. The only other occurrences of Nwbxo are in Gen 3:17 and 5:29, which can be construed as both physical and emotional pain.

9

at Sarai with contempt because of her barrenness (Gen 16:4, 6). A marginal gloss of

Targ. Neof. Gen 25:22 alludes to Gen 3:16 in describing Rebekah’s pains as “the pains

of childbirth.” Consequently, it is not a stretch to see the pain of conception understood

in terms of barrenness in Genesis. In this way, Gen 3:16 provides a rationale for the

prevalence of barrenness in Genesis.

2. The Initial Fulfillment of the Primeval Blessing in Exodus 1

Genesis 1:28 finds initial fulfillment in Exodus 1.19 Exodus 1:7 (cf. 1:12, 20)

alludes to Gen 1:28 as a fulfilled reality: “But the people of Israel were fruitful (hrp)

and increased greatly; they multiplied (hbr) and grew exceedingly strong, so that the

land (Xrah) was filled (alm) with them.”20 Intriguingly though, this multiplication is

19 C. M. Kaminski, From Noah to Israel: Realization of the Primaeval Blessing

After the Flood (JSOTSupp 413; London: T&T Clark International, 2003), 124-138; cf. also W. H. Schmidt, Exodus (Biblischer Kommentar, Altes Testament 2; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag des Erziehungsverein, 1974), 30; W. Brueggemann, “The Kerygma of the Priestly Writers,” ZAW 84 (1972): 297-414.

20 Terence E. Fretheim provides the most perceptive analysis of the intertextual relationship between these verses:

Verse 7 connects not only with historical promises but also with the creation/re-creation accounts of Gen. 1:28 and 9:1, 7. Israel has been fruitful, has multiplied, and fills the earth/land (Hebrew ’eres can be translated either way; it refers both to the “earth” in Gen. 1:28 and 9:1 and to Egypt – to have mentioned Egypt would have obscured this verbal link). The point here is that God’s intentions in creation are being realized in this family; what is happening is in tune with God’s creational purposes. This is a microcosmic fulfillment of God’s macrocosmic design for the world (cf. 40:34-38). Israel is God’s starting point for realizing the divine intentions for all. The reader should be prepared to see other such realizations of creative design in Exodus.

This perceptive connection between the themes of creation and re-creation at the Exodus are very helpful. See further T. E. Fretheim, Exodus (Louisville, Ky.: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1991), 25; idem., God and World in the Old Testament : a Relational

10

explicitly set in a context of suffering: “But the more they were oppressed, the more

they multiplied (hbr) and the more they spread abroad” (Exod 1:12). Here oppression

is the catalyst for the multiplication of Israel.

Furthermore, the types of pain inflicted upon the people of Israel directly

correspond to the male and female dimensions of the curse. God originally placed

Adam in the garden “to work it” (hdbol, Gen 2:15), and this labor is cursed by the Fall

(Gen 3:17-19). Similarly:

[Egypt] made their lives bitter with hard service (hdbob), in mortar and brick, and in all kinds of work (hdbo) in the field. In all their work (Mtdbo) they ruthlessly made them work (wdbo) as slaves. (Exod 1:14)

Thus, Pharaoh’s oppression first affects the male dimension of the curse, labor.

However, when this fails to stymie Israel’s multiplication, affliction through childbirth

becomes the next means of oppression (Exod 1:16), corresponding to the curse on the

woman. Nevertheless, in the face of such affliction, “the people multiplied and grew

very strong” (Exod 1:20).

Also, stenagmo/ß, which first appeared in the LXX for Nwrh in Gen 3:16b,

appears next in Exod 2:24-25. During their slavery in Egypt, “God heard their groaning

(stenagmo/ß), and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with

Theology of Creation (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2005), 112-113. Others who make this intertextual link include J. Siebert-Hommes, Let the Daughters Live! : the Literary Architecture of Exodus 1-2 as a Key for Interpretation (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 1998), 61; G. W. Ashby, Go Out and Meet God : a Commentary on the Book of Exodus (Edinburgh: Handsel Press, 1998), 8; N. Lohfink, "Macht euch die Erde untertan," Orientierung 38 (1974), 138; Bezelel Porten and Uriel Rappoport, “Poetic Structure in Gen 9:7), VT 21 (1971): 363-369.

11

Jacob. God saw the people of Israel—and God knew.”21 The LXX translators of the

Pentateuch bring together Gen 3:16 with the affliction of the Exodus. This groaning of

Exod 2:24-25 leads to the birth of Israel as the firstborn son of God (Exod 4:22). Just as

the affliction of barrenness to the matriarchs in Genesis moved them to prayer before the

blessing of children was given (e.g. Gen 25:21; 30:22), so the affliction of slavery to the

Israelites moves them to groaning before the blessing of their birth as a nation. Along

these lines, William Propp observes:

Fertility bears a threat for Israel. In stories in which a barren woman finally bears, temporary danger to the child often ensues (e.g., Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, the Shunammite’s son…). The corporate “person” Israel also belongs to this group. After the lifting of the matriarchal sterility, danger (and salvation) should follow.22

The conceptual parallels here may further highlight that the barrenness of the matriarchs

can be understood as the groaning implied in the LXX translation of Gen 3:16.

The affliction of the Exodus should, therefore, be seen as an important context

for the fulfillment of the primeval blessing of Gen 1:28. As God establishes his people

21 This reference to Exodus is not insignificant since the Pentateuch was probably officially sanctioned and translated together. Let. Aris. 302 says that the translation of the Pentateuch was accomplished by different people, they made their work agree. This account is embellished even further by Philo, Vita Mosis II, 37-40, who says that though the translators worked independently, divine dictation produced the same translation, word for word. While virtually no scholars today see the account in the Letter to Aristeas as occurring as presented, nevertheless most see some truth at the heart of this account; see further discussion in N. F. Marcos, The Septuagint in Context (trans. Watson; Leiden: Brill, 2000), 35-52. Sidney Jellicoe sees six elements which embody some measure of reliability, including that the LXX translation of the Pentateuch was officially sanctioned by Jewish authorities and was together the first part of the Jewish Scriptures to be translated into Greek; see S. Jellicoe, The Septuagint and Modern Study (London: Oxford University Press, 1968), 55-56. 22W. H. Propp, Exodus 1-18: a New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (New York: Doubleday, 1999), 135.

12

as his firstborn son, his inheritance, and his treasured possession, the reader whose ears

have been attuned by Gen 1:28 and 3:16 will see this affliction not as peripheral but

essential to the process of her propagation.

III. THE FULFILLMENT OF GENESIS 1:28 IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

What direction does this trajectory take after the life, death and resurrection of

Jesus? The foundational texts of Gen 1:28; 3:16; Exod 1:7 are developed in the New

Testament. Specifically, I will focus on the use of Exod 1:7 (based in Gen 1:28) in Acts

6:7; 12:24; 19:20 and the use of Gen 3:16 in Rom 8:22-23, 26.

1. The Fulfillment of the Primeval Blessing in Acts

God’s plan in the fulfillment of his promises literarily brings Luke and Acts

together.23 The gospel of Luke opens with an announcement of the imminent fulfillment

of God’s promises to Israel (Luke 1:32-33, 54-55, 68-79). The programmatic statement

in Acts 1:8 alludes to Isa 49:6, which then is quoted again in Acts 13:47, and it

concludes with a lengthy quotation from Isa 6:9-10 about the obduracy of Israel.

Specifically in Acts, Luke emphasizes how Jesus’ crucifixion (Acts 2:23; 13:27) and the

23 So, e.g., Carson and Moo, Introduction to the New Testament, 322-323. This emphasis on the divine plan in Acts and Luke stands, regardless of one’s position on the literary unity of Luke-Acts. C. Kavin Rowe argues against the literary unity of Luke-Acts, since the early church seemed to read Luke as an integral part of the fourfold gospel and Acts as the story of the apostolic church, and no ancient manuscripts places Acts together with Luke alone; see further C. K. Rowe, "Literary Unity and Reception History: Reading Luke-Acts as Luke and Acts," JSNT 29 (2007), 449-457, which builds upon M. C. Parsons and R. I. Pervo, Rethinking the Unity of Luke and Acts (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993).

13

inclusion of the Gentiles in the people of God (e.g. Acts 10:1-16; 13:47; 15:15-18) are

both rooted in the plan of God as prophesied in the Old Testament.

In light of this, it is not surprising that the growth of the church is also

understood against the backdrop of the growth of the people of God in the Old

Testament. At critical junctures, the church’s growth is marked the phrase oJ lo/goß …

hu¡xanen (“the word grew,” 6:7; 12:24; 19:20). Acts 6:7 concludes a section in Acts

which chronicles the expansion of the gospel in Jerusalem. Acts 12:24 warps up a

section where the gospel spreads to Judea and Samaria. And Acts 19:20 occurs after the

gospel penetrates Ephesus, the epicenter for the gospel to spread to the ends of the earth.

In each case, these passages allude to Exod 1:7, which itself grows out of Gen

1:28, as seen in the following chart:

Gen 1:28 aujxa¿nesqe kai« plhqu/nesqe kai« plhrw¿sate th\n ghvn Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth.

Exod 1:7 oi˚ de« ui˚oi« Israhl hujxh/qhsan kai« e˙plhqu/nqhsan kai« cudai √oi e˙ge÷nonto kai« kati÷scuon sfo/dra sfo/dra e˙plh/qunen de« hJ ghv aujtou/ß And the sons of Israel were fruitful and multiplied and became numerous and were prevailed greatly, and the earth was multiplying them.

Acts 6:7 Kai« oJ lo/goß touv qeouv hu¡xanen kai« e˙plhqu/neto oJ aÓriqmo\ß tw◊n maqhtw◊n e˙n ∆Ierousalh\m sfo/dra And the word of God was fruitful and the number of disciples multiplied greatly.

Acts 12:24 ÔO de« lo/goß touv qeouv hu¡xanen kai« e˙plhqu/neto. And the word of God was fruitful and multiplied.

Acts 19:20 Ou¢twß kata» kra¿toß touv kuri÷ou oJ lo/goß hu¡xanen kai« i¶scuen. So the word according to the power of the Lord was fruitful and prevail mightily.

While both aujxa¿nw and plhqu/nw are commonly used by themselves in the LXX and

the NT, the combination of both of these words together is relatively rare in the NT

(Acts 6:7; 7:17; 12:24; 2 Cor 9:10). Furthermore, since Acts 7:17 explicitly connects

14

these words to the initial fulfillment of the primeval blessing in Exod 1:7, it is far more

likely that the other occurrences in Acts similarly refer to Exodus 1. As noted earlier,

Exod 1:7 itself grows out of Gen 1:28.24 Furthermore, since the Exodus may form the

interpretive backdrop of the entire book of Acts, the plausibility of this reference to the

Exodus is greatly increased.25

Now an important shift is made from the use of Gen 1:28 in Exod 1:7 (and Acts

7:17) and its use elsewhere in the book of Acts. While it is clear in Genesis and Exodus

that people grow and multiply on the face of the earth, in Acts it is the word of God that

grows and multiplies. Why this shift? The parable of the sower in Luke 8 must be taken

into consideration. In this parable, Jesus prepares his disciples about how the word of

God (oJ lo/goß touv qeouv; 8:11) will grow in people’s hearts. When this seed is planted in

good soul, it multiplies a hundredfold (8:8), just as those who “hearing the word, hold it

fast in an honest and good heart, and bear fruit (karpoforouvsin) with patience”

(8:15).26 The parallel text in Mark, which Luke may be drawing from,27 is even more

24 Cf. J. Kodell, “‘The Word of God Grew’: The Ecclesial Tendency of Lo/goß

in Acts 6,7; 12,24; 19,20,” Bib 55 (1974): 505-19; I. H. Marshall, “Acts,” in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 555-556; D. Pao, Acts and the Isaianic New Exodus (WUNT 130; Tübingen : Mohr Siebeck, 2000), 167-171.

25 Pao argues that the Isaianic New Exodus is appropriated in Luke’s narrative framework for the entire book of Acts; see his Acts and the Isaianic New Exodus. However, he only identifies the background of these passages in Exod 1:7 and does not comment on the background of Gen 1:28 in Exod 1:7.

26 The verbal similarities between Acts and Mark are even stronger. In Mark 4:8, similar terminology is used in connection with the propagation of the Word, as If Luke knows the Mark in some form, as many scholars argue, then he would be familiar with this form of the parable. 27 So, e.g., Christopher Tuckett, “The Synoptic Problem,” in NIB (ed. Leander Keck et al.; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995) 8: 88. Marcan priority is often simply

15

similar to its use in Acts. Here, the seed on good soil “grew (aujxano/mena) and

produced a crop, multiplying thirty, sixty or even a hundred times” (Mark 4:8).

Furthermore, the exposition of this parable in Luke is prefaced by a clear allusion to Isa

6:9-10 in Luke 8:10, verses which are quoted again explicitly at the climax of the book

of Acts (28:26-27) to explain the unbelief of the Jews in Rome. It seems then that Luke

takes this parable to explain the growth (and lack of growth) of the word of God in and

through the hearts of people in the book of Acts.28

In light of the parable of the sower then, it is the word of God planted in the

hearts of people that grows and multiplies in the book of Acts. Consequently, the layers

of Luke 8:8, 15 and Gen 1:28 are intertextually woven together to present the growth of

the church. This complex relationship may be subtly alluded to by the use of

karpoforouvsin in Luke 8:15. This could be a literal translation of hrp in Gen 1:28

(also occurring in Col 1:6, 10 to allude back to Gen 1:28).29 If so, then the word of God

assumed in gospel scholarship; see, e.g., Richard Baukcham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2006), 7; cf. 42. While the Griesbach hypothesis still holds sway in some circles (e.g. David L. Dungan, A History of the Synoptic Problem [ABRL; New York: Doubleday, 1999], passim), some version of Marcan priority still seems most convincing. 28 J. Kodell similarly wrestles with this Lucan parallel passage because “the growth of the word in the parable is internal and personal; the growth of the word in Acts 6,7; 12,24; 19,20 appears predominantly external, so that there can be no simple transfer of meaning;” see “The Word of God Grew,” 506. He goes on to argue that the word (oJ lo/goß) here represents the Christian message as it is worked out in community; see ibid., 518-519. 29 The terms “in all the world (panti« tw◊ ko/smw),” “bearing fruit (karpofore/w),” and “growing (aujxa¿nw)” (Col 1:6, 10) are all grounded in Gen 1:28. A few differences, though, between the LXX and the NT may be noted. First, the LXX of Gen 1:28 translates hrp, “to bear fruit” with aujxa¿nw, “grow” and hbr, “to multiply,” with plhqu/nw, “to multiply.” Colossians 1:6, 10 seems to render hrp, with karpofore/w, “to bear fruit” and hbr with aujxa¿nw. This is probably because Paul is

16

is presented in Acts as planted in good soil, fulfilling the commission of Gen 1:28, as

earlier it had during the Exodus.

What then of suffering? It is interesting that the growth of the church is placed

against a backdrop of persecution and affliction. Acts 6:7 follows the imprisonment of

the apostles in chapter 5 and a conflict within the church in 6:1-6. Acts 12:24 concludes

a chapter which details the martyrdom of James and the imprisonment of Peter. Acts

19:20 follows the persecution by the Jews in Corinth (18:6) and in Ephesus (19:9).

Persecution consistently precedes growth in the book of Acts.

Persecution is not seen as an inconvenient obstacle to growth; rather it is

presented as an essential aspect of gospel proclamation. After the gospel takes root in

different cities, Paul returns to these cities to strengthen and encourage the disciples

there, “encouraging them to continue in the faith, and saying that through many

tribulations (qli÷yewn) we must enter the kingdom of God” (14:22). Paul himself

embraced this message and did not shrink back even when “in every

city…imprisonment and afflictions (qli÷yeiß) await me” (20:23). Intriguingly, these

afflictions are set against an Old Testament backdrop in Acts. The multiplication of

Israel in Egypt (7:17) is presented against the backdrop of “great affliction (qli √yiß)”

(7:11). Similarly, the multiplication of the word of God in the world is placed against a

backdrop of affliction and persecution. Why? Though not explicitly argued in Acts,

making his own free translation from the Hebrew. Karpofore/w is a literal rendering of hrp, though it differs from the LXX translation. Furthermore, the translation of hbr with aujxa¿nw is not unprecedented, since the LXX itself uses aujxa¿nw and plhqu/nw interchangeably (see, e.g., Symmachus and Theodotian on Deut 30:9).

17

Gen 3:16 provides rationale for the persecution in Acts as the backdrop for the church’s

multiplication.

2. Suffering and the Restoration of the Image of God in Romans 8

In Romans 8, Paul concludes a major section in this letter. After spelling out the

heart of the gospel in justification by faith in chapters 1-4, he develops the hope of the

gospel in Romans 5-8. This hope of the gospel is forcefully presented as an inclusio in

Rom 5:1-11 and 8:18-39, and the intervening sections serve to show how perceived

obstacles to this hope do not destroy it, whether death (5:12-21), sin (6:1-21) or the law

(7:1-25).30 Yet this hope of the gospel does not preclude suffering. Instead, an

eschatological perspective is provided on suffering, as “the sufferings of the present time

are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us” (8:18). What

“glory”? Glory is the theme that begins (8:18) and concludes this subsection (8:30).

This glory in 8:30 is understood as conformity “to the image of the Son” (8:29), while

the glory in 8:18 can be understood in terms of “the revealing of the sons of God”

(8:19). The glory of God is, therefore, bound up with humanity’s conformity to the

image of God. This glory, lost through worship of idolatrous images (1:23) so that “we

fall short of the glory of God” (3:23), is therefore in the process of recovery.31 Since

30 See further in D. Moo, Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1996), 292-293; Niels A. Dahl, Studies in Paul: Theology for the Early Christian Mission (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1977), 82-91; contra Ulrich Wilckens, Der Brief an die Römer (EKKNT; Neukirchen/Vluyn: Neukirchener and Zürich: Benziger, 1978-1981), 1: 287 that parallels are simply superficial verbal ones. 31 While the image of God was not completely destroyed by the Fall, it was considerably distorted, but we are to grow in increasing conformity to this image (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18).

18

this glory is conformity to the Son’s image, then the recovery of that image is in the

background here. Just as a functional understanding of the image of God in Gen 1:26-27

is expressed in the mandate in Gen 1:28, so the recovery of the image of God in Rom

8:18-30 implies a recovery of the functional expression of that image in terms of caring

for creation in Rom 8:19-23.32 Consequently, humans are “to take their places at last as

God’s image-bearers, the wise steward they were always meant to be.”33

Yet this recovery of the image of God is clearly set in the context of suffering

(8:18). Paul argues that sufferings are not worth comparing to glory because (ga»r) all of

creation longs for the release of God’s image bearers, his sons (8:19). The reason for

this longing for redemption in creation is provided in verses 20-21, looking back to the

original sin of Adam.34 After the Fall, creation itself is cursed because of Adam’s sin

(Gen 3:17-18), and this futility within creation is then explained with terms from Gen

3:16-17 in Rom 8:22-2335:

32 So also S. C. Keesmaat, Paul and his Story: (Re)Interpreting the Exodus Tradition (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999), 101, who see that “the glory which is to be revealed is the wise rule of the children of God over creation (Gen 1:28; 2:15);” cf. also E. Best, The Letter of Paul to the Romans (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967), 98-99. Keesmat goes on to discuss a number of texts which connect suffering and glory, including Daniel 7, Wis. 3:1-5; 2 Bar. 15:8; 29. 33 N. T. Wright, “Romans,” 596. 34 Whether “him who subjected” creation in Rom 8:20 is God or Adam is open to debate. Regardless of what position one takes, though, the sin of Adam is still in view here. 35 So D. T. Tsumura, "An OT Background to Rom 8:22," NTS 40 (1993), 620-621, who argues that the literary and theological background of Rom 8:22 is not only the cursed earth in Gen 3:17 but also the pain of childbirth in Gen 3:16. Cf. also Keesmaat, Paul and his Story, 107-110, 114-123, who sees Gen 3:16 behind Rom 8:22, but then moves to develop Paul’s portrayal of the Holy Spirit groaning with his people (Rom

19

For we know that the whole creation has been groaning (sustena¿zei) together in the pains of childbirth until now. And not only creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan (stena¿zomen) inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. … Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings (stenagmoi √ß) too deep for words.

It is not only creation that groans, but “we ourselves” who groan. Yet this groaning is

part of the process of waiting for adoptions as sons.

The use of stena¿zw in Rom 8:22-23 alludes to Genesis 3. Genesis 3:16 speaks

of the groaning (stenagmo/ß) and pains of childbirth for the woman, while Rom 8:22

speaks of the whole creation groaning together (sustena¿zw) in and the groaning

(stena¿zw) of the believer. Also “in pains you will give birth to children” (en lu/paiß

te÷xhØ te÷kna) in Gen 3:16 is synonymous with “in pains of childbirth together”

(sunwdi÷nei) in Rom 8:22.36 A number of conceptual parallels connect these

passages,37 and “general agreement” can be seen among commentators for a Genesis 3

background here.38

8:26) rooted in the Exodus, where God first explicitly identifies with the suffering of his people (Exod 2:23-25; Exod 3:7,8; cf. Jer 38:19. Contra, e.g. H. A. Hahne, The Corruption and Redemption of Creation: Nature in Romans 8:19-22 and Jewish Apocalyptic Literature (New York: T&T Clark, 2006), 204, who acknowledges that Paul may have thought of this verse, but concludes “nevertheless, the pains of childbirth in Rom 8.22 are metaphorical not literal as in Gen. 3:16”; cf. also L. J. Braaten, "All Creation Groans: Romans 8:22 in Light of the Biblical Sources," HBT 28 (2006), 131-159. Yet, as argued earlier, if the pains of childbirth in Gen 3:16 are both metaphorical and literal, then this objection by Hahne does not stand. 36 This synonymy is strengthened by observing that Josephus paraphrases Gen 3:16 with wdi÷nw and not lu/ph, as God “made Eve liable to the inconveniency of breeding, and the sharp pains (wdi÷n) of bringing forth children” (Antiq 1:49; see similarly Philo, Alleg. Interp. 3:200, 216; Apoc. Mos. 25:1-3).

20

Is this groaning simply an inconvenient appendage to the process of waiting for

our adoption as sons, or is it somehow interconnected to that process? Paul speaks of

the pains of childbirth here. Physically, the pains of childbirth are intricately related to

the process of childbirth; were it not for the excruciating pain of pushing the child down

and through the birth canal, the child could not be born. Pain is essential to this process.

Similarly, the process of our groaning as we wait for our adoption as sons is more than

just an inconvenient appendage. It is essential – both in the birth of the people of Israel

at the Exodus as well as the growth of the people of God in Romans.

At the birth of the people of Israel, Israel is first identified as the “firstborn son”

of God in Exod 4:22. Yet they are identified as this “firstborn son” in a context of great

suffering in slavery in Egypt. As a result of this suffering, they groaned, and their cry

37

Gen 3:16-19

Rom 8:20-23

Curse on the ground (Gen 3:17)

Subjection of creation (Rom 8:20)

Food from ground (Gen 3:17-19) Hope of creation’s freedom from decay (Rom 8:20-21)

Groaning (stenagmo/ß; Gen 3:16)

Groaning together (sustena¿zw; Rom 8:22)37

Groaning (stenagmo/ß; Gen 3:16) Groaning (stena¿zw; Rom 8:23)

Pains of childbirth (Gen 3:16)

Pains of childbirth (Rom 8:22)

38 J. D. G. Dunn, Romans 1-8 (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1988), , 470; see similarly J. Murray, The Epistle to the Romans: the English Text with Introduction, Exposition and Notes (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1997), 1:303; cf. similarly J. Schlosser, “L'Espérance de la Création (Rm 8, 18-22),” in Ce Dieu Qui Vient (ed. Kuntzmann; Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf, 1995) 334-7; C. E. B. Cranfield, The Epistle to the Romans (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1990), , 416; O. Michel, Der Brief an die Römer (KEKNT; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1978), 268; Lagrange, Épître aux Romains (ÉB; Paris; 1950), 219.

21

came up before God, and “God heard their groaning (stenagmo/ß)” (Exod 2:24; cf. also

Exod 6:5). Yet it is more than coincidence that Israel is identified as a son of God in the

context of their suffering. Deuteronomy 4:20 suggests that their suffering in Egypt plays

an essential part in the process of Israel’s identification as the people of God: “But the

LORD has taken you and brought you out of the iron furnace (rwk), out of Egypt, to be

a people of his own inheritance, as you are this day.” Just as idolatrous images were

typically manufactured in an iron furnace, Moses presents Israel as a proper image of

God taken out of the iron furnace of Egypt. This image-making concept is suggested

further by the image-making context of Deuteronomy 4.39 In this way, the suffering of

39 Verse 16 refers to the prohibition of making a “carved image for yourselves, in the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female.” The language here likely echoes the prohibition on idolatry in the second commandment. Yet while the order of the second commandment is largely retained by Deuteronomy 4 (as argued persuasively in K. Holter, Deuteronomy 4 and the Second Commandment [New York: P. Lang, 2003], 99-100), Deuteronomy changes the order of the species detailed in the Decalogue. The order in the Decalogue proceeds from heaven to earth to sea, but the animals in Deut 4:16-19 proceed from earth to sea to heaven. Intriguingly, this subtle shift in the cataloguing of animals clearly inverts the order of the creation account in Genesis 1 (so also M. Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985] 321-22). Although this change may be accidental, the close similarities between Deuteronomy 4 and the second commandment make such a change unlikely. The final three days of creation move from creating the lights in the heavens (Gen 1:14-19), to the creatures of the water and air (Gen 1:20-23), to the animals which move upon the earth (Gen 1:24-25), culminating in man, created in the image of God (Gen 1:26-27). However, it is this created order which idolatry overturns. Israel is prohibited to make an image in the likeness of male or female (Deut 4:16), in the form of any animal on the earth (Deut 4:17a), in the form of any bird in the air or fish in the sea (Deut 4:17-18), and from worshipping the lights in the heavens (Deut 4:19). The inversion of the order of creation in Deut 4 highlights the inversion of idolatry – while humanity in the image of God was created to worship the Creator, idolatry leads to the worship of the creation by humanity in the image of God (cf. Rom 1:25). Also, Yahweh had taken and brought Israel out of the iron furnace to be his own inheritance (hljn). Israel as Yahweh’s hljn is tantamount to being his hlgs Mo, his treasured people (e.g. 7:6, 14:2, and 26:18; so M. Weinfeld, Deuteronomy 1-11 : a new translation with introduction and commentary (New York: Doubleday, 1991), 207, and J. G. McConville, Deuteronomy (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2002), 108-

22

Egypt is presented as essential – not incidental – to the process of Israel’s formation as

the image of God in Egypt.

Similarly in Rom 8:22-23, the groaning of the children of God is essential, not

incidental, to the re-formation of the image of God in us as God’s adopted sons.

Romans 8:23 says that “we groan inwardly (stena¿zomen) as we wait

(aÓpekdeco/menoi) for our adoption as sons.” The groaning is described in terms of the

process of waiting for adoption. The focus and goal of our waiting is our hope, as “we

wait (aÓpekde/comai) for it with patience (di∆ uJpomonhvß)” (8:25), a hope which is

defined in terms of our conformity to the image of the Son (8:29) and glory (8:30).

The language of hope of glory is also developed in Rom 5:1-11, which is the first

part of the inclusio in these chapters. Here, “we rejoice in hope of the glory of God”

(5:2). This glory of God is the state of “god-like-ness” lost through sin (Rom 3:23) and

to be restored to every Christian at the last day (cf. Rom 8:17, 18, 21, 30).40 Yet we

rejoice not only in hope, but also “we rejoice in our sufferings (qli÷yesin), knowing that

suffering produces endurance (uJpomonh\n), and endurance produces character (dokimh/n),

and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has

been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us” (Rom

109). As Israel is redeemed from the iron furnace, she becomes Yahweh’s inheritance. And as Yahweh’s treasured people, she is also Yahweh’s firstborn son (Exod 4:22). 40 So Moo, Romans, 302; cf. similarly L. Morris, Romans (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1988), 220; T. R. Schreiner, Romans (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 1998), 254-255; C. K. Barrett, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (New York: Harper, 1957), 104; E. Käsemann, Commentary on Romans (trans. Bromiley; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1980), 133-134; C. E. B. Cranfield, The Epistle to the Romans (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1990), 260; contra, e.g. R. Jewett, Romans (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 352, who sees this as the glory of God “in and of itself,” not that reflected in humanity.

23

5:3-5). Just as groaning is presented in the process of hoping for the glory of God in

Romans 8, so suffering is presented in Romans 5. The suffering of Rom 5:3 is specified

as groaning in Rom 8:23. As groaning is expressed in waiting with patience (di∆

uJpomonhvß; Rom 8:25), so suffering develops endurance (uJpomonh\n; Rom 5:3-4). This

endurance produces character (dokimh/n).41 This character, in turn, “produces hope”

(Rom 5:4), a hope of “the glory of God” (Rom 5:2). In this way, Rom 5:1-11 presents

suffering as essential for producing hope of the glory of God in Romans, which is

understood as conformity to the image of God. Rom 8:22-23 further specifies this

suffering as groaning (while not precluding other types of suffering) in the process of the

recovery of the glory of God.

IV. CONCLUDING REFLECTIONS

We have embarked on a whirlwind tour of a canonical trajectory of suffering,

beginning from creation and consummating in the new creation. What comments can be

made in conclusion? Three are in order.

41 dokimh/n is coined in the Hellenistic period (so M-M, 167, and Walter Grundmann, “doki/moß,” TDNT 2:255, who both see paul as the earliest source of this world, though Jub 10:9 (c.a. 150 B.C.) uses it also), and it is used six times in Paul (2 Cor 2:9; 8:2; 9:13; 13:3; Phil 2:22), in a general sense of proof (2 Cor 9:13; 13:3) but more specifically in terms of a proven character (2 Cor 2:9; 8:2; Phil 2:2). It is this latter sense that is clearly in mind in Rom 5:3. dokimh/n is derived more generally from dokima/zw, a term which frequently has a metallurgical background in the LXX (Psa 66:10; Prov 17:3; 27:21; Zech 13:9) and the NT (e.g. 1 Cor 3:13; esp. 1 Pet 1:7). It is intriguing that this metallurgical concept is in the background of Deut 4:20 as well. However, it is not clear that Paul imported the metallurgical connotations of this word here.

24

First, we should note the relationship between suffering and growth. Suffering is

not usually counted as a key indicator for growing a healthy church. Yet we do well to

heed the words of this house church leader in China:

We have numerous testimonies of powerful revivals that have broken out in places where Christians have spilled their blood and endured many hardships for the gospel. In some areas where there is much opposition, it seems that God’s children must suffer and bleed before demonic powers are broken and people can see the light of the gospel.42

The relative absence of such physical persecution in the West does not thereby shelter

the pastor or genuine Christian from suffering; indeed, earnest shepherding and care for

the people of God inevitably leads to suffering as their brokenness breaks the back of

our own self-sufficiency. Perhaps as we understand the role of suffering for church

growth, we may more fully embrace 1 Pet 4:12-13:

Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice insofar as you share Christ’s sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed.

Second, we can rejoice in sufferings because of its purifying work in our lives,

regardless of whether or not it leads to numerical growth within the church. Sufferings

help form us as the image of God. We saw earlier how Deut 4:20 pictured the suffering

in Egypt as refining Israel to be a nation for God’s own inheritance. Similarly Rom

8:18ff. juxtaposes suffering and glory, so that the suffering plays an essential part in the

process of the re-formation of the image of God within us. 1 Peter 1:6-7 provides a

healthy perspective on this aspect of suffering as well:

42 Brother Yun, Peter Xu Yongze, Enoch Wang with Paul Hattaway, Back to Jerusalem: Three Chinese House Church Leaders Share Their Vision to Complete the Great Commission (Carlisle: Piquant, 2003), 19-20.

25

In this you rejoice, though now for a little while, if necessary, you have been grieved by various trials, so that the tested genuineness of your faith—more precious than gold that perishes though it is tested by fire—may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ.

The metallurgical connotations of this text suggest a similar background to that seen in

Deut 4:20.

Finally, we should not be surprised when the task of missions demands martyrs.

The meteoric rise of missionary activity in the Korean church has come with relatively

few martyrs. Yet as the church strives to see the gospel penetrate the hardest places in

the world, including Muslim and Hindu countries as well as the post-Christendom West,

we must expect and not be surprised by suffering and sacrifice. May God help us to

ground church growth and missions in suffering, that we might joyfully proclaim with

Paul: “Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what

is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body that is, the church” (Col 1:24).