These are great points. Thanks for this discussion Lon. On a side note, these thoughts come from discussions friends and I have had about planting a church in the urban core of Salt Lake City. I’d be open to any thoughts, comments, or questions.

the sub-urban poor is definitely a growing movement in my city as well.

I definitely don’t want to make suburbanites feel sub-part in anyway – and i’ve posted in the past about how the suburbs if taken seriously can hold the keys to the future.

I think people are probably having a problem with the word ‘bias’ that I stated. I don’t think this means any less love or need in any other areas. Just as God has a bias for the poor, or for the lost (leaving the 99 for the 1), there is a trend towards cities both in scripture and in history that God seems to have a hand in.

I also agree with you reconciliation of every type is needed. Jesus reached out to the rich tax collectors, blue color fishermen, and others on the fringes. I didn’t really do any of that today. Do I think that I wasted my day or God prefers I was elsewhere? I don’t think so.. I think I can still bring honor to God, but it doesn’t negate his desire or bias or tendencies towards those on the margins… or in this case dense and diverse regions we call cities.

And yes, ‘today’s view of the city’ is far from what it can be… but i don’t think that’s the city’s fault itself. And back to my reason for bringing up the post, churches have been fleeing the cities for decades, and we do need to make an effort to return to the city (of course not all of us, i’ve been preaching through nehemiah verse by verse for the year, and we just passed chapter 10 where they tithed 10% of the people back to the city of Jerusalem from the surrounding regions, not a whole lot, but the city still needs people who seek its good).

Those of us who say we follow Christ but didn’t follow him into the city as well need to take some ownership of the mess some of our cities are in. Anyhow, I think we’re along the same lines, and maybe it’s the semantics or we’ve got a tiny different bent on things, either way, thanks for raising the discussion John!

I think though that you’ve skewed the scriptures to fit your message, which is a little misleading.

I don’t interpret those verses to mean that God prefers people to live in today’s view of “the city”, though an argument can be made that we should live amongst the poor. Keep in mind there are poor people everywhere, in the suburbs as well as the city. Many times the downtown areas that you seem to be referencing here are in fact where much of the privileged reside… the poor being gentrified to the outskirts of downtown areas.

We have to be careful with making the argument you are making here because those who live in the suburbs should not feel like they are sub-par followers of Christ because they have chosen not to live in an urban setting. Even the rich are indeed spiritually poor, and Jesus was not exclusive to those in physical poverty. It should be our default to move where there is a need for reconciliation – economic, racial, and spiritual – but I don’t believe that God necessarily “prefers” we live in the “city” do his reconciling work.

I’m a near-treehugger myself – I’d totally live in a commune farming my own food if I wasn’t called elsewhere. I should’ve clarified the statement with ‘solely’ agrarian.

in terms of the government – i’m also as down-with-the-man as it gets as well. And yes – many governments to do don’t reflect nations of peace or justice. sadly. but these cities of refuge in the specific passages were to be places of peace overseen by leaders.

I think what i was trying to allude to was that progress requires some form of structure/formality/institution (i’m personally not fond of any of this), but it’s often these boundaries, rules, that allow creativity to flourish – ie. the fact that we’re communicating right now in english over a standardized set of internet protocols allows for ‘progress’ and other things to happen.

tribes are beautiful in that they’re rooted in the heart/ideas/values rather than structuring the peripherals of a culture – the challenge with them is when completely different values/cultures collide… and i get a sense that’s where the idea of structures/cities come in.

anyhow, i’m totally speaking off the cuff here – but really glad you commented – it takes huge guts to lovingly disagree!

Does that mean you think people who live in “agararian” farming communities are not doing what God wants them to? That somehow the people who grow the food for people in cities to eat are less valued? I also disagree that we need Government for safety and progress, and to say that without it we would be like warring tribes is almost offensive. I think our government and its division could be compared to “warring tribes.” I also think that Native Americans (or “warring tribes”) progressed way more in ideas of community living and family structures than america and its cities/government ever have.

Despite all this I love you, It takes bravery to state facts about God and the way he/she works. Keep searching for truth.

Not much more to add to this post, but was thinking about it these past few days. I think the key word that differentiates “city” above everything else and why there may be a “bias” for God towards city is because of its strategic-ness .

Not going to flesh this idea out here, but strategic in the sense of:
- concentrated poverty because of concentration of people
- therefore, the opportunity to serve/build community and show love and kindness
- rapid spread of information and idea sharing
etc etc

I don’t think that means concrete highways or billboards everywhere – I’m sure there’s a way of being much more urban (dense with life, diverse, progressive, etc.) while being green and creation honoring…