By Jonathan T. Iorkighir
Introduction
No amount of reflection on city ministry or urban mission during our age can be proven to have covered all we need to know about God’s intention for the city. The little that one reads on urban ministry will reveal that there are lots of gaps that still need to be filled on the subject matter. This work is one effort at filling the gap in a small way on further reflection upon God’s calling of the church to the city. This paper will, therefore, consider one vital aspect on urban ministry, namely, a theology of urban mission. What does God say about the city and his covenant
community’s involvement with and in the city? Is urban mission just an infatuation of some over zealous mission minded Christians who feel overburdened with the spiritual needs of today’s urban dwellers, or is their zeal biblical? If it is biblical how does that unfold in God’s redemptive plan for fallen humanity including the city? How can our mission to the city rest on a firm biblical
foundation? These and other questions are the concern of this work.
Before we proceed, the question needs to be answered as to why we need a theology of urban ministry. A related question could be as to whether there is even a theology of or for urban ministry. The first question presupposes the second and both will be addressed as we seek to respond to the first – why do we need an urban theology? Eugene Rubingh informs us that those Christians as are involved in urban ministry have a certain zeal with them, it is a zeal they feel is biblically valid. He says such people are “convinced that they possess an authentic instinct as to the biblical validity of and imperative for their work.”1 And it may be added, such people appear to be saying they have experienced the presence of God in the city, and so they celebrate the city as a marvelously diverse repository of God’s gifts and creativity, and they believe God desires his people to work for the salvation of the city. But is such zeal enough or even relevant theology for urban ministry? A good and authentic urban mission can only be embarked upon from a solid biblical framework if such ministry is to receive God’s approval and blessings as Roger Greenway rightly observes:
The kind of mission work that pleases God and can expect his blessings is done carefully on sound biblical foundations…. We cannot expect lives to be changed, city neighborhoods improved, and vital churches established if our labors spring from feeble, even distorted, theological roots.2
Therefore, it means that we need a theology of urban ministry to enable us have a biblical basis for what we do. This prevents us from arbitrariness and the use of only human thoughts and ideas as basis for what we do in today’s cities. Besides having a biblical basis, we need biblical guidance in what we do. It is so important to have a guide for all we do in life, and even more for what we do in theology. We cannot call anything we do as Christian theology if it does not receive its basis and guidance from Scripture. The necessity for seeking biblical guidance in urban mission becomes even more apparent due to the emphasis placed on urban mission in modern times. It used to be
1 Eugene Rubingh, Strategies for Evangelisation in Cities (Grand Rapids: CRC Pub., 1986), 29.
that western churches sent missionaries to the developing world, especially to Africa, to engage mostly in rural or village mission work. Today most of that has changed and most missionaries, if they come, will be involved in ministry settings that will be at least partially urban. Missionaries who work in Africa today, have their residence in cities even when they are involved in mostly rural mission work. Most villages have been turned to at least towns, and people’s life styles have largely changed from a typically rural setting to an urban-like lifestyle. This means the church in Africa needs to squarely face a new dimension of ministry that is urban conscious. But such theology needs to receive its guide from the Bible and hence the need to carefully develop a biblical theology of urban mission to guide the church in her new role in the cities of Africa.
The rapid growth of cities makes urban theologizing an imperative. Predictions of the growth of cities turn out to be so accurate when viewed in the light of the growth of Abuja, the Nigerian capital. Abuja is a city of a million today, but it was founded as the new capital in 1985. Other African cities show a similar growth pattern. The church cannot fold her arms and watch this growth. Something has to be done and a theological basis for what needs to be done is unavoidable just as Ray Bakke observes that “the way to reach the city is not through programs but by being biblical people.”3 This means if we see the urgency for urban mission we need to develop a biblical basis and guidance for it. The need for concerted urban ministry in Africa has been highlighted by several and hence the need for a biblical theology of the city. Aylward Shorter while highlighting the need for urban ministry in Africa, fails to even hint at developing a biblical basis for it. But rather, he sees the need in terms of the social injustices of the city in Africa.4 Poignantly missing in his stated reasons is the biblical mandate or basis for the church’s involvement in urban mission. But one thinks if we should be involved in any city ministry we should be so biblical about it in the first instance.
The Urban Reality of our day
The need for a biblical theology of urban mission is made more apparent by the urban reality of our day. People have moved or are moving to the cities. Manuel Ortiz refers to a prediction by Rafael Salas that “by the end of the twentieth century the world would experience radical and overwhelming change, with the majority of people living in urban centers, primarily in the cities of Asia, Africa, and Latin America.”5 Raymond Bakke goes straight ahead to say this prediction has come to pass since according to him, “the whole world has come to the city.”6 In 1979, Timothy Monsma in An Urban Strategy for Africa, had already wondered what the cities of Africa will be like by the year 2000. He went on to the predict that:
3 Ray Bakke, The Urban Christian: Effective Ministry in Today’s Urban World (Downers Grove: IVP, 1987), 62.
4 Alyward Shorter says “Urbanization is reality that cannot be wished away. In the final analysis, however, it is the unjust reality of in contemporary Africa—the producer of and product of a systematic injustice…. There are at least four reasons why urbanization is a life or death issue. These can be stated as follows: (1) urbanization pollutes. (2) urbanization impoverishes; (3) urbanization disorientates; (4) urbanization secularizes” (Urbanization: Today’s Missionary Reality in Africa,” African Ecclesial Review 35:5 [October 1990], 290-300]).
5 Manuel Ortiz, “The Church and the City,” in The Urban Face of Mission: Ministering the Gospel in a
Diverse and Changing World (ed Manuel Ortiz and Susan Baker; Phillipsburg: P & R. Publishing, 2002), 43. 6 Raymond Bakke, “Urbanization and Evangelism: A Global View,” in The Urban Face of Mission:
By the year 2000, African cities will be much larger than they are today, and may also be better organized in terms of intercity communication networks and government…. At the same time there are indications that they will be African cities that will preserve African culture to a greater or lesser extent…. One also likes to dream that at the heart of these cities will be strong Christian churches that have gathered in African believers from many
different ethnic groups. These churches will be strong because of their sizeable membership.7
Monsma’s predictions seem realistically accurate. The Nigerian cities have grown considerably by the year 2000 and so has the urban churches in Nigeria. Elsewhere, Monsma states that in tropical Africa there were (in 1979) over fifty cities of 100,000 population or more and several cities with more than one million population.8 The United Nations Center for Human Settlements published her report on human settlements in 1986. According to the report, only 14 percent of the world population lived in urban areas in 1920, but by 1980, that population rose to 40 percent. The report also predicted that if this trend continues, nearly half the world’s population could be living in towns and cities by the turn of the century.9 In reaction to this report, Alex Zanotelli submits that this rapid urbanization is even more realistic in the developing countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America:
Urban settlements in the poor countries are at present growing three times faster than those in the developed countries. In fact, 85 percent of growth in the world’s urban population between 1980 and 2000 is projected to take place in the poor countries. This heralds a change of truly gigantic proportions.10
Alyward Shorter calls attention to the reality of urbanization in Africa that begs for the church’s response. He rightly observes that urbanization is a reality that cannot be wished away. It is a living concomitant of human history, human culture and human economic development. Urbanization is an unjust reality in contemporary Africa.11
The growth of these cities in Africa and the world in general has become a living reality and the church has to work with it. Today more than 50 cities in Nigeria alone have a population of over one million and several large churches are found all over the cities in Nigeria. A case could be made here of the NKST church in Abuja alone with a communicant membership of 1,200, but this church was founded only in 1995. Cities all over Africa have witnessed a similar growth with accompanying growth in the African urban churches.
Such rapid growth in the African cities and their churches begs for the Christian church to be involved in urban mission, but before she does that well, there is need to provide a sound
theological base for these churches if the church in Africa is to stand the tide of theological relevance in today’s world. This is because the large churches in the cities are experiencing a heterogeneous membership they have not had before. Besides, such churches have had different tribal cultures represented in them giving rise to the problem of which form of worship style to
7 Timothy Monsma, An Urban Strategy for Africa (Pasadena: William Carey Library, 1979), 132. 8 Ibid., xiii.a
9 David Barrett, “Annual Statistical Table on Global Mission: 1989,” International Bulletin of Missionary
Research 13:1 (January 1989), 37.
adopt and which language should be used in the worship services. This need makes it necessary for seeking to know God’s clear teaching on the city and the ministry of the church in it. This will help the church to not repeat the mistake of the past as clearly cautioned by Roger Greenway:
As evangelical churches and mission organizations awaken to the challenges of a rapidly expanding urban world, there is the danger that the urgency of the task will cause them to neglect biblical foundations…. Urban mission has suffered a great deal from such
negligence in the past. As a new era of urban ministry unfolds, we must not repeat the mistake.
The only way to not repeat the mistake as expressed by Greenway is by beginning with a biblical theology of urban ministry. Sound urban ministry and strategies require firm theological
foundations, which come about only through earnest prayer, biblical study and hard work.
A final reason for seeking to establish a theology of urban ministry arises from the fact that the church might reap devastating consequences for failing to work in and for the city. We might face serious consequences if we fail to work in the city. In this connection, Greenway asks the question as to how the cities of Europe were lost by the church. And he responds that the European cities were lost because the church there had neglected them.12 We need not repeat this mistake and lose the cities of Africa at this time. And the right way to start getting involved with the cities in Africa is by being biblical about it and developing a biblical foundation for urban ministry that seeks to engage the issues of urban ministry.
The Shape of Theology of Urban Mission
Now that we have stated the need for a theology of urban mission, what needs to be
addressed is the shape of that theology. What is the nature of this theology and how do we go about it? This question is important because we now live in a world of myriads of theologies. In the years gone by, systematic theology seemed to be the bedrock of all theologizing, but was replaced by an emphasis on biblical theology and the emphasis have shifted now from biblical theology to ethnic theology. This is theology that seeks to interpret scripture in the context of every ethnic community, and in this day we have theologies like black theology, feminist theology, African theology and Asian theology.
These various theologies have proved unhealthy for a responsible theology of urban mission. Unhealthy in the sense that these theologies provide an unacceptable label for urban theology but at the same time gives it a name in order to kill it. It is like the African proverb which translates like, “naming a dog in order to kill it.” Otherwise such labels of urban theology as ‘liberal theology’ have done little to help the church’s reflection on its mission and ministry to the city. David Claerbaut laments what can be described as a slinging mud situation within the evangelical church over the question of the church’s involvement in evangelism and social action.13 One party in the argument is of the opinion that the church does not quite have a biblical mandate to have concern for the poor since such concern smacks of theological liberalism while the other is of the opinion that for the church to minister in the city she must respond and address issues of social justice as a part and parcel of her city evangelism. This is a situation that John Perkins describes as saddening because “much of the church’s energy has been drawn away in criticizing each other, and the result
has been less-than-effective spiritual ministries.”14 This is truly saddening because if the church is to minister to the human beings in the city, it should consider these people as complete persons created in the image of God. This should lead the church to addressing all the issues affecting the human person in the city like poverty, homelessness, unemployment, corruption and injustice etc. But to label these issues and assign them a place outside the scope of the church’s ministry is to also deny that God created humans as complete entities either bodies without souls or souls without bodies. Greenway laments but faithfully informs us that “only a holistic approach to ministry can satisfy biblical directives and the needs of the city.”15 Greenway is absolutely right because at the base of this theological debate is an unsound biblical theological bias on which both parties in the debate base their arguments.
To further illustrate this half-hearted approach to urban theology is to cite the practice of those who take one biblical reference to the city, or one incidence of the city in which the city is portrayed in some what bad light. Instances of this include references to the city in Genesis like Gen 4:16, 17 where Cain is described as leaving the presence of God and going to dwell in the city of Nod. The Bible describes Cain as building a city and naming it after his son Enoch. Even though this is the first mention of ‘city’ (ir) in the OT, it is built when Cain departs from the
presence of God, it is a city built in rebellion. Secondly, the downfall of Lot in Gen 19 is blamed on his pitching his tent in the city of Sodom and Gomorrah. Third but related to these is the typically western analytical argument, it maintains that incidents of the city in Genesis often show an
eastward movement away from the presence of God. For instance, Adam and Eve moved out of the Garden of Eden and went Eastward (Gen 3:24), Cain went East to found the city of Enoch (Gen 4:17), the Tower of Babel builders were in the East (Gen 11).16 A common mistake to this approach that is also anti-redemptive historical is that it fails to take into consideration what other Bible passages after Genesis say about the city. For instance, one might want to question what is important in maintaining the position that the city is always east bound. What does being east bound imply? Does this not mean that God is also anti-East? But weightier is the counter argument that the Bible after Genesis calls God’s people to the city and causes them to work for the city and to pray for the city. Again, even in Genesis, the Bible nowhere mentions that the city is intrinsically evil and anti-God. After all it is the same Genesis that we find Abraham praying for the ten
righteous in Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen 18). We shall later return to this when we begin a proper theology of the city.
The theological approach to urban ministry that can stand the test of time is one that looks at the whole counsel of God from a redemptive historical perspective.17 The redemptive historical
14 John Perkins, “Urban Church/Urban Poor,” in Metro Ministry, David Frenchak and Sharrel Keyes, eds., (Elgin III: David C. Cook, 1979), 45.
15 Roger Greenway, Calling our Cities to Christ (Nutley: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1973), 27.
16 For a detailed discussion of this, see Harvie Conn and Manuel Ortiz, Urban Ministry: The Kingdom, the City
and the People of God (Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 2001), 85-90.
interpretation of scripture, held and espoused by most reformed theologians in the Calvinistic tradition provides a better method for a holistic theology of urban mission. But to take one aspect of Scripture and build a theology on it is invitation to unwholesome debate and irresponsible interpretation. Such approach might reflect even brilliantly on a facet of divine revelation but may in effect limit the perception of the complete and all-embracing biblical import. What does the whole of scripture say about the city and the involvement of God’s missionary people in it? It is not a choice between evangelism and social concern; it is always and must remain both.
A theology of urban mission must involve the biblical statements concerning the city; it should also involve what the community of God’s people is to do with regards to its mission to the city. In doing this, the progressive redemptive witness of God’s word about the city must be kept in mind and applied as we proceed to do a biblical theology of the city.
A Biblical Theology of Urban Mission
It is important that we take a careful look at how we do any theology at all. The Church of Christ has suffered divisiveness due to the formation of some theologies. In doing a theology of urban ministry, we need to carefully consider the various ways in which the Bible presents the city and how it challenges us to work towards the redemption of humanity including those in the city. In order to accomplish this, we shall look at the Bible and the city, and the biblical injunctions
concerning our involvement in the city. This will be done following the progressive redemptive epochs as found in the Bible.
The Bible and the City
In beginning any theology at all, we need to begin with the Old Testament and progress to the New Testament. The Bible mentions 119 cities and makes references to 1227 cities in various perspectives.18 These references are spread throughout the Bible, and we will commence
considering them from Genesis and in that order.
The City in Genesis and the Patriarchal Period -- Genesis provides the very basis for developing a
theology of the city. It is commonly called the book of beginnings, and thus it is the right place to begin a theology of the city. Even though the word city (ir) begins to appear in Genesis 4,
according to Harvie Conn, the concept of city is present beginning at Genesis 1, the story and history of creation.19 What God put in place was a city, over which he (God) was king as an
This approach simply takes into consideration the comprehensive view of scripture on any issue beginning from creation to new creation, from the garden to the city, from the fall to the consummation of redemption in Christ. For further explanation on this method, see Sidney Greidanus, The Modern Preacher and the Ancient Text: Interpreting and Preaching Biblical Literature (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 96-100; Geerhardus Vos, Redemptive History and Biblical Interpretation, ed. Richard B. Gaffin Jr. (Phillipsburg: P & R Publishing, 2001.
18 Rubingh, Strategies, 30. A wide range of urban theology scholars seem agreed on this number as the exact occurrence of city in the Bible: Francis Duboss, How Churches Grow in an Urban World, Nashville: Broadman, 1978), 101.; Lausanne Committee for World Evangelisation, Thailand Report – Christian Witness to Large Cities (9800), 6.; Claerbaut, Urban Ministry, 18.; Harvie Conn and Ortiz, Urban Ministry; Ray Bakke with Jim Hunt, The Urban Christian: Effective Ministry in Today’s Urban World (Downers Grove: IVP, 1987), 62.
apologetic against other gods as was espoused and believed unto by the peoples of the ancient near east.20 According to this view, as far as the Bible begins in the garden and ends in the city” is enough evidence towards God’s intention to create a cosmic city. Original creation with the cultural mandate given to the first humans, Adam and Eve to fill, rule (Gen 1:28) and subdue was nothing more or less than to develop the garden into a city. All subsequent human culture and tradition that was to follow them was to live in a city form. Following Harvie’s argument, we begin to see that urban involvement is not a novel idea but is as old as the book of beginnings itself.
Cain, and the city of Enoch:- Further into the book of Genesis, we come to the first mention of the city that was built by Cain (Gen 4:16-17). We need to notice that Cain’s city is one built after the fall. As mentioned before, especially Jacques Ellul in his 1970 work, The Meaning of the City, has used Cain’s city project to advance an anti-urban bias. Ellul looks at the city as a symbol of human, destructive technology, and that perspective makes him to consider the city as nothing less than sin.21 This view and those of others, fail to look at the redeeming grace of God for the city. The Genesis record here clearly portrays even the city of Cain as the center of civilization. It is in this city built away from the presence of God, that we find the first technological advances within the human race. The descendants of Cain make developmental strides in the areas of music, technocrats who begin to forge bronze and iron tools (Gen 4:20-22).
God’s original plan was to build a cosmic city, a perfect city with rivers and security, but without injustice, corruption and pollution. Cain is a typical display of human rebellion after the fall so that he begins to play God, his ambition is to be like God and build a city like God. So with Cain’s city project, we learn that it is not the city that is the problem but Cain, the builder of the city. However, we need to look further into God’s progressive dealings with humanity after the fall. The plan to redeem humanity includes the redemption of also all human institutions that were intended by God at the first creation. So even though Cain’s city is built out of rebellion and away from the presence God, that city and ours too stand in need of redemption before God. And God instituted a plan for redeeming humanity and creation in general (Gen 3:24). Even though humanity might make the city into something else, God’s grace still hovers over the high rise buildings of the city and its slums and this quote from Meredith Kline is helpful:
Man may turn the city into something more dreadful than the howling wilderness, but that is another matter. As the provision of God’s common grace, the city is a benefit, serving mankind as at least a partial, interim refuge from the wilderness condition into which the fallen race, exiled from paradise, has been driven…. Functions that would have been performed by the city apart from the Fall are now modified by being turned to the new purpose of offsetting, to an extent, the evils arising through man’s sinfulness and as a result of the common curse on the race.22
20 Conn, “Genesis as Urban Prologue,” 14-16.
21 For works espousing such argument, see John M. Halligan, “A Critique of the City in the Jahwis Corpus” (Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Notre Dame, 1975); Frank S. Fick, The City in Ancient Israel, Missouls: Scholars Press, 1977, 1-23; Don C. Benjamin, Deuterononmy and City Life: A Form Criticism of the Texts with the Word City (‘ir) in Deuteronomy 4:41-26:19 (Lanham,: University Press of America, 1983), 39-47; Isaac M, Kikawada and Arthur Quinn, Before Abraham was: The Unity of Genesis 1-11 (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1985), 9-35.
Despite the fall of humanity including the city, God still has a gracious concern for the city and Cain’s city cannot be looked upon as bereft of any iota of that common grace of God.
The City at the Towel of Babel – Before we come to the tower of Babel episode, Genesis first, introduces us to the city builder, Nimrod (Gen 10:8-12). He is described as a hunter but his most achievement was in the founding of cities namely, Babel, Erech, Accad, Calneh, Nineveh, Rehoboth Ir, Calah and Resen. It is in one of his cities, Babel, that we have the Tower of Babel episode taking place. The idea of towers was a common one among Near Eastern peoples, but they called them Zigurrats, a high rise building in which the priest of the city held communication with the city deity.23 As such those high-rise buildings were like cosmic links between the gods and the city, heaven and earth.24 However, it must be pointed out that the Tower of Babel event in Genesis 11 is not mere historical legend with no historical facticity.25 It’s a real event that took place and the ziggurat tradition of the ancient Near East might have taken root from it.
We need to observe here that even though God confused the language of the Tower of Babel generation, it cannot be taken as divine wrath against the city with its high-rise buildings. What God is against here is the human pride and rebellion that informs the building of the Tower/ziggurat: Then they said, "Come, let us build ourselves a city, and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves; otherwise we shall be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth" (Gen 11:4). So at Babel, man attempts to create unity and to build a city without God and is doomed to failure.26 What is so tragic about Babel, says De Ridder, is that “man always tries to create unity in disobedience.”27 Even in this prideful rebellion against God, the people of Babel were looking for something good to come from the city, protection. They believe if they build a city tower, they will not be overcome by an invading army and forced to scatter on the face of the earth. The city will provide a certain security. Here again we see the common grace of God in the city being appealed to by a rebellious generation.
Abraham and cities of Sodom and Gomorrah – In Genesis 11:1-9, the descendants of Noah want to build a tower and settle in a city in contempt for God, in contrast, God calls Abraham out of the city in Genesis 12. Abraham expresses his faith in God and leaves the city to an unknown destination (Gen. 11:31-12:5). Conn succinctly develops the contrast between Abraham and the Towel of Babel builders:
The tower builders rebelliously refuse to wander anymore; Abraham wanders faithfully, “looking forward to the city with foundations, whose builder and architect is God” (Heb 11:9-10). The planners of Babel seek to make a name of themselves (Gen 11:4); God promises to make Abraham’s name great (12:2).28
23 Sibyl Moholy-Nagy, Matrix of Man: An Illustrated History of Urban Environment (New York: Praeger, 1968), 42.
24 Mircea Eliade. The Sacred and the Profane: The Nature of Religion (New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1959), 39-41.
25 See Kline, Kingdom Prologue 3:23.
26 Roger E. Hedlund, The Mission of the Church in the World: A Biblical Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1985), 31.
Abraham’s links to the city do not make him appear like a city person as such, his wandering life make him appear like a rural village man. Several sermons speak of Abraham as a village person. In fact, considerable biblical scholarship depicts Abraham as a semi-nomad.29 In those days when most of Africa was rural, Africans tended to equate their rural life to that of Abraham
identifying him as a peasant rural farmer.30 However, a closer examination of Abraham’s life style in his historical and environment context reveal that he was more of a city business traveler than might appear on a cursory look at the biblical records. Cyrus H. Gordon and others want us to look at Abraham more as a traveling merchant prince since that might bring us closer to the truth about his city connections.31 Abraham grew up in Ur and was called out of it. This was the greatest trading city known in the then existing world. His routes of wandering were always along the most heavily traveled urban trade routes. Haran (Gen 12:4), from which Abraham was called, a second time was another great city and caravan center. These city connections make Abraham an unlikely rural dweller as might be thought of. We cannot, therefore, support the argument that God has a dislike for the city and that is why he called Abraham out of the city to a rural life. Abraham still had city connections before and after his call.
The twin cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, which had connections with Abraham are
described as being oppressive, violent, erotic and orgiastically depraved. In Genesis 18:20, the angel says: "How great is the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah and how very grave their sin! And as the angels finally arrive in Sodom, they come face to face with the wickedness and depraved, erotic and orgiastic desires of the city (Gen 18:5, 8-9, 13). Lot had chosen this city just for the very reason that most in Africa flock to the city—its promise of wealth and ease (Gen 13:10-12). But Abraham had refused the wealth of this very city when its king had offered it to him. This action should not be confused with the idea that Abraham’s refusal to accept the wealth of the city was in line with Yahweh’s dislike of the city and its wealth. God, through his common grace, bestows his riches upon the city, as such the wealth of the city cannot be considered as intrinsically evil. The wealth of Sodom and Gomorrah was not evil, but the people were. Abraham refused it because he believed his wealth was coming from Yahweh, his covenant God and not from earthly kings. Later the prophet Ezekiel condemned the people of Sodom for “pride, surfeit of food, uncaring for the poor and prosperous ease:32
This was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy. They were haughty, and did
abominable things before me; therefore I removed them when I saw it” (Ezek 16:49-50).
29 For an extended list of such scholarship consult Claus Westermann, Genesis 12-36: A Commentary (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1985), 774-77.
30 Dr. Shimrumun Yakobu compares Abraham’s life with that of the Tiv, a tribe in central Nigeria and concludes that both lifestyles are similar since they are just agricultural rural farmers. Mbaheberu man Tiv (Makurdi: Lamp Word Books, 1985. See also Jacob Akpera, “
31 Cyrus H. Gordon, “Abraham and the Merchants of Ura,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 17 (1958): 28-31; John van Seters, Abraham in History and Tradition (New Haven, Yale University Press, 1975), 13-38; For an extended discussion of this see Frick, The City in Ancient Israel, 188-93.
Scripture also speaks of Sodom and Gomorrah as a symbol of God’s judgment against wickedness (Deut 29:23; Jer 49:18; Amos 4:11; Luke 17:29). But in all these God did not write off Sodom and Gomorrah. His promise of grace is not forgotten either. Israel is likened to Sodom but God promises restoration and comfort to Israel. Lot and his family were rescued from Sodom and Gomorrah as reminders that the city is not a total write off but there is a remnant of grace for the city in Genesis.
A discussion of Abraham and his urban connections cannot be complete without reference to the covenant and its urban under pinnings. When God called Abraham he made a covenant with him (Gen 15:17-21; 17:1-14). The covenant blessing promised to Abraham included his children after him and also the nations or peoples with their cities (Gen 12:3; 18:18; 22:18). Abraham continues to have connections with city peoples as seen in Genesis 14:1-16 when he enters into alliance with five urban kings and recovers the wealth of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen 14:1-16). It is a result of the covenant blessings that he begins to be a blessing to these city dwellers.
This pattern of covenant blessing and city connections continues in the lives of Abraham’s children. Isaac finds a wife from the city of Nahor (Gen24:10) and there is a prediction of urban blessing and rule for Rebecca’s children: “may your offspring possess the gates of their enemies” (Gen 24:60). The reference to “gates” here is nothing short of city gates, which means the descendants of Isaac will be city dwellers through conquest over their enemies. Isaac himself encounters Abimelech, king of the city of Gerar and makes a covenant with him Gen 26:18-33).
Again in the life of Jacob we see this city connection and divine covenant blessing. Wherever God appears to Jacob a city naturally springs up. During his flight from Esau, Jacob spends a night at Luz where the Lord appears to him at night. He renames the city, Bethel “The house of God, and the gate of heaven” (Gen 28:16, 19). At this place a city springs up bearing the name of the God of Abraham. And when Jacob flees from Laban and spends another night at Penuel, another city springs up in commemoration of what happened to Jacob there (Gen 32:22-32). Jacob names this place ‘Peniel,’ meaning face of God, and it again becomes a city named after the covenant God. Abraham bought land from the people of Hebron (Gen 23:17-20), and Jacob buys land from the citizens of Shechem (33:18-19). The people of Shechem acknowledges Abraham’s presence as blessing and so did the city of Shechem acknowledge Jacob’s presence in their midst (Gen 34:20-24). All these are reminiscent of the covenant blessings that spill over into the cities of the peoples.
We read the concluding chapters of Genesis which are very much dominated by the story of Joseph as he becomes a blessing to the cities of the Gentiles. In Genesis 19:5, we read that
Potiphar’s house is blessed because of the presence of Joseph. “By making use of Egypt’s cities as store houses for grain (41:35, 48), Joseph averts a universal famine. His relief program saves not only Egypt but also the children of Jacob.”33 In this way we can see how grace is contained in
God’s judgment. In the Joseph story we come to realize that God turned his brother’s jealousy and envy to save the earth’s cities and his people. “Again, judgment carries the purposes of grace.”34
Moses, the Egyptian Bondage and the Exodus:- Beyond Genesis, we continue to see the grace of God around the themes of covenant redemption for the cities. In Egypt, the people of Israel become builders of cities for Pharoah’s storehouses. The major occupation of the Hebrew slaves in Egypt was the building of Pharoah’s cities. “They built supply cities, Pithom and Rameses, for Pharaoh (Exod 1:11).” This would make one argue again that cities are an affront to God’s grace as they are built out of oppression and exploitation of the weak and underprivileged. Such argument shares the same fallacy with those who base their argument on one or limited piece of biblical story. Further reading will reveal that God is against city projects built out of oppression and exploitation and that is why he judged Pharoah and Egypt and removed the Hebrews from such oppression with an outstretched hand. The same God that delivers the Hebrews from Egypt freely gives them cities out of his grace and in keeping with his covenant promises (Deut 7:17-19).
Among the outstanding features of Moses as leader of Israel was the legislation mediated through him by God. These laws cover all areas of civil and religious life. They are clear laws against oppression, treatment of the poor, corruption, economics and government, issues of utmost importance for the daily existence in the city. We see here that Moses legislation took care of life and administration of the city as well as rural life. Moses also legislated for the identification of six cities called cities of refuge for the protection of those guilty of involuntary manslaughter (Num 35:9-34). When Joshua took over from Moses the leadership of the nation, he designates those six cities of refuge as symbols of God’s graceful protection (Joshua 20:1-9). One can see here that the argument against the urban ministry because cities are an affront to divine purposes and are east bound, does not always bear the weight of the rest of scripture. Here it is God himself that requires for the establishment of six cities as symbols of divine protection.
When the Israelites finally settle in the land of Canaan, God takes the cities of the peoples in the land and gives them to his people as gifts without their laboring for them like they did for Pharoah’s cities (Deut 6:10-11; Psalm 107:36). “No human hand achievement wins them (Deut 8:17); the same divine hand that delivers from Egypt gives them freely (Deut 7:17-19).”35 Why would God give his people cities? Because they are good and can be enjoyed by his people as they get involved with them.
David and Jerusalem, the city of God:- In the Old Testament, after Eden, the city of Jerusalem becomes the dwelling place for God. The Bible describes Jerusalem as the cosmic center for God’s administration of the cosmic peace made possible under the covenant (Ps 122:6-9). David
consolidated his rule of the covenant nation at Jerusalem and made it the capital of the twelve tribes. Sometimes the city is named after David, “the city of David” (2 Sam 5:9 see also Luke 2:4, 9)). This use started after David had conquered Jebus, the city of the Jebusites and made it part of
34 Isaac M. Kikawada and Arthur Quinn, Before Abraham Was: The Unity of Genesis 1-11 (Nashville: Abingdon, 1985), 121-22.
Jerusalem.36 This was certainly a synecdoche use as Jebus was just part of the city of Jerusalem. Sometimes the Bible also refers to Jerusalem as ‘Zion.’ It is a synonym for the “City of David” and Jerusalem, but its use is so much limited to the Wisdom Literature and the poetic books, especially the Psalms. It is mostly used figuratively in reference to the heavenly Jerusalem (Isa 60:14; Heb 12:22; Rev 14:1).37 Of particular interest here is the reference in Hebrews 12:22 which describes Mount Zion as the heavenly Jerusalem and the city of the Living God: “But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable angels in festal gathering.” God lives in a city! This is the eschatological fulfillment of the city that was intended to be in the garden but was thwarted through man’s disobedience. According to Hebrews, that intention is realized through God’s grace for the city. Here we have a picture of the description of Jerusalem in the OT that one day Jerusalem will fulfill her role as the “joy of the whole earth” (Ps 48:2; cf. 68:31; 86:9; 137:1-2, 5-6) because at the coronation of her eschatological king, Gentiles will also participate in her messianic feast (Ps 72:10-11). As the city of God, Jerusalem will be set in the center of the nations, with countries round about her (Ezek 5:5).
The Bible gives the city of Jerusalem an exalted place in the plan of God, but we must not forget that it was this very city that Jesus bemoaned her rebellion and arrogance and pronounced judgment against her (Luke 19:41-44). At Jesus weeping over the unbelief of the city of Jerusalem, no one would expect such exaltation will happen to the city, but we are here shown the grace of God again for the city being displayed. Out of covenant faithfulness and love, God cleanses up
Jerusalem and makes her into his own city where he rules the whole universe. This should speak clearly well to the church, as she thinks about involvement in urban ministry. God has not abandoned the city, he will clean it up and save it from eternal damnation and the church is the vehicle through which this becomes possible. The theology of Jerusalem also informs us again that through the redemptive historical progression of events, we realize that the cities of Enoch, Babel, Sodom and Gomorrah and Jericho were all types of the city of God, which will fulfill the perfect role of the city as God had intended them at the beginning. Jerusalem, the city of God, will take up the typological significance of all those corrupt cities and show that God has a grand finale for the city.
So a theology of urban mission should not end with specific cities in the OT but it should foresee the eschatological signification of the city in general while recognizing the grace of God for the city. That will inform the church to better get involved in urban mission with optimism and not disillusionment seeing that our cities today are just as bad. The flight theology of the city does not help matters, as it consigns cities to utter destruction and nothing more.
36W. S. Lasor, “Jerusalem,” ISBE 2:998-1032. So many verses in the Psalms refer to Jerusalem as either
Mount Zion or Zion or daughter of Zion: Psalm 48:2 beautiful in elevation, is the joy of all the earth, Mount Zion, in the far north, the city of the great King.
Psalm 48:11-12 Let Moun Zion be glad, let the towns of Judah rejoice because of your judgments. Walk about Zion, go all around it, count its towers,
Psalm 50:2 Out of Zion, the perfection of beauty, God shines forth
Psalm 149:2 Let Israel be glad in its Maker; let the children of Zion rejoice in their King.
Psalm 147:12 Praise the LORD, O Jerusalem! Praise your God, O Zion!
The Prophets and Cities:- The prophets condemn in unequivocal terms the injustice found in the city and pronounce judgment against it. Looking at such condemnation, it might appear like the prophets are anti-city, but there is a graceful side to such pronouncement of judgment. Isaiah condemns the covenant breaking of Jerusalem, and her desire to be like other cities as well as her injustice to the poor (Isa 10:1-2).38 Micah predicts the destruction of Assyria (5:6) that it will be shepherded by a sword and not a staff. And like Assyria, the prophet continues that the cities of Israel will be demolished (Micah 5:11-14). Isaiah likens the destruction of Babylon to the demise of Sodom and Gomorrah, he observes that instead of being populated by humans, the city will be filled with jackals, owls, and wild goats (Isaiah 13:19, 21-22; Jer 50:39-40). Jerusalem will meet a similar fate and her streets will be populated with similar animals and birds (Isaiah 34:12-15). Damascus will also be reduced to a heap of ruins (Isaiah 17:1-3) and the city will stand desolate, forsaken like the desert (27:10). The city of Jerusalem, which was once the joy of the nations will become the delight of donkeys, and pasture for flocks (Isaiah 32:12-14). While the prophets pronounce judgment on the cities, it must be remembered that they also held out an arm of love and grace towards the cities. The point of bringing judgment upon those cities was for their ultimate repentance in order to avert the pending judgment.39 God will not forget his covenant of grace with either Jerusalem or the gentile cities. Covenant blessing will touch them all. “Mercy will rebuild what justice broke down.”40 As a matter of fact, God did not wait for the cities to become saturated with injustice and all manner of ungodliness before he threatened judgment, but from the onset, he revealed to the nations what he was going to do so that they might repent. When they failed to observe those statutes, he warned them severally through the prophets before judgment would come, but in a situation where repentance happened, the Lord also withheld the pronounced destruction of judgment. A good case in point here is the city of Nineveh.
Nineveh was one of three Assyrian capitals, and a biblical theology of urban missions develops around it in the books of Jonah and Nahum. The Assyrian empire was brutal in its warfare41 and Nineveh, the capital, mirrored the brutality and oppression of the empire. When Shalmaneser, the Assyrian king, invaded Samaria in the early eight century BC (2 Kngs 17), he captured the city and took 27, 290 Israelites into captivity. Samaria was then resettled with people form the various cities of the Assyrian Empire, and they developed a mixture of Jewish and pagan religious practices. Their descendants were the Samaritans who feature in the New Testament and developed a hostile relationship with the Jews. Sennacherib was the next Assyrian king who attacked and took away what was left of Israel and Jerusalem. Their philosophy of resettling conquered territories with a mixture of peoples was to totally destroy a sense of homogenous identity and erase a sense of historical roots. This epitomized their brutality and inhumanity. Jonah 1:2 describes the city as great and whose wickedness had come up to God just like the cry of Abel’s blood went up to the Lord (Gen 4:10). Nahum 3:3 describes their brutality in war: “Horsemen
38 Ezekiel’s condemnation of Sodom is already quoted on page 16.
39 See also Sidney Greidanus, The Modern Preacher and the Ancient Text: Interpreting and Preaching Biblical
Literature (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 235. Greidanus rightly observes that the purpose of the prophets announcing impending judgment was “to bring Israel to repentance in order thus to avert the very content of the message.”
charging, flashing sword and glittering spear, piles of dead, heaps of corpses, dead bodies without end they stumble over the bodies.” The NIV Study Bible amply presents the wickedness of Nineveh thus:
The Assyrians were brutally cruel, their kings often being depicted as gloating over the gruesome punishments inflicted on conquered peoples. They conducted their wars with shocking ferocity, uprooted whole populations as state policy and deported them to other parts of their empire. The leaders of conquered cities were tortured and horribly mutilated before being executed.42
Why would God send Jonah to a city like this? Doesn’t this city deserve to be punished right away without any warning? Bakke says this mission is like sending a modern rabbi to Berlin and informing him his ministry will be blessed and the Germans will become an even greater nation than they were under Hitler.43 God did not act like we may naturally expect him. He sent Jonah to Nineveh, but Jonah responded in the usual way we might expect any reasonable person to react – go the opposite direction and avoid going to this city, because the city is just too sinful, it should be destroyed. God forced Jonah to return to Nineveh by burying him in the belly of a fish for three days and three nights. Why would God want to do this to Nineveh? The Lord responds to this question in his exchange with Jonah: “Should I not be concerned about the great city?” (Jonah 4:11). This singular response clarifies and establishes every theology we need to develop for the city. The Lord has concern for the city so much so that God would not even describe the city as evil, but “the great city.” When God sets out to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, a similar thing happens, despite the immorality and injustice in twin cities, the Angel of the Lord is willing to spare them provided he found only ten righteous people there (Gen 18:32). The Lord looks at cities and sees human persons created in his own image and he remembers his covenant with them. To him cities are not just high rise buildings full of corruption, injustice and the like and should be destroyed or avoided, but places of involvement in order to redeem them.
From the prophets one realizes that the prophets not only condemned Jerusalem, the city of God but also the cities of the nations. This is a show of God’s sovereign rule over all nations and cities. All cities come under God’s sovereign rule whether they are in the East or in Africa, America or Europe. Further illustration of this is when the Jews are taken into captivity in Babylon. The Jews themselves refuse to be part of the life experiences of those gentile nations. In Psalm 137:4 they adamantly refuse to sing the Lord’s songs in a foreign land and city. But in Jeremiah 29:4-6, the exiles are told to “interpret these experiences as God’s missionary call to them and not as personal tragedy.” In other words, God is telling them to not live like aliens in the city and to add humor to it, Bakke says, “with your suitcases packed and ready to leave as soon as you can.” Rather than think about the flight theology of those who would rather leave the city, the prophet Jeremiah charges them to seek the good of the city by praying for it: “But seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the LORD on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare” (Jer 29:7). There is no doubting that the Jews hated Babylon. They were living like aliens or refugees in it with their own city, Jerusalem in ruins and God tells them to be
concerned about the welfare of Babylon, the enemy city! God must be out of his mind! But God
has a different sense of territorial integrity for his is covered in a broad mind of grace and love for people. Here it becomes apparent that flight theology does not work with God, but getting involved in the city brings welfare both to the city and to the community involved with the city.
The City in the New Testament
Since we have already covered much about Jerusalem, we might not spend so much time about the New Testament fulfillment stories concerning the city. The life of Jesus is portrayed in the gospels as having an appeal to the poor, the despised, the rejected sinners and the rich and leaders. In his ministry manifesto he makes claims that appeal to city people as well as rural ones:
18 "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring good news to the
poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, 19 to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor" (Luke 4:18-19).
So the NT presents Jesus as the savior for all kinds of people including those living in the city. It has an appeal to city dwellers of all sorts. In the city we have the poor of the worst type, we have captives in the city, those enslaved to drugs, sex, beer, are all represented in the city. We have those who are physically locked up in prisons in the city and the oppressed. Matthew summarizes Jesus ministry as involving both cities and villages: “Then Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and proclaiming the good news of the kingdom, and curing every disease and every sickness (Matt 9:35). Jesus did not flee the city, rather he was involved with it. The repeated saying that ‘the gospel begins in the garden (Gen 1) and ends in a city (Gen 22) shows that God’s purpose was not to remain in the garden with naked Adam and Eve, it was to proceed unto the restored city and Jesus fulfills that goal as well in his ministry.
Fundamental Implications for Urban Ministry in Africa
From the brief biblical teaching on urban mission, we easily deduce some guiding principles for the church’s involvement in urban ministry.
1. That urban contexts are part of God’s creation that have also been affected by the fall. 2. God has a graceful disposition towards the city. He intends the city to be reached with
the gospel.
3. The Church as God’s missionary community must understand that she has to be involved with the city.
4. In order to be involved, the Church must know the nature of the city so that she can most adequately present a holistic ministry approach to the city.
government in the rural areas are the elementary school teachers and the rural pastor. But in the cities you find factories, schools in their thousands, hotels, airports that need cleaning everyday, so many cars that need drivers, road side materials to sell and several others. So the city promises a lot to the African person and for that reason, so many Africans troop to the cities in their
thousands for the hope of a better life to live.
But because so many people are going to the cities, the hope for jobs and promise of a better living is no longer there or very limited. The people end up jobless in the cities, but cannot even consider returning to their villages. After all, the city still promises some hope. The net result of all this is that the city becomes crowded with several other concomitant effects. These effects, the Church needs to address in her ministry in the city.
Poverty – The city exhibits poverty in different ways and the church attempting to be involved
with the city must be aware of this. There are tens of thousands of African kids in the cities.44 They do not go to school, but walk the streetlights in search of odd jobs to perform. How can the church respond to this city malfunction? One way the church in Africa can begin to think getting involved is by personally getting involved with the street children and the unemployed.
Religious pluralism in the African city – “Cities in most parts of the world are grand mixtures of
many different peoples, cultures and religions.”45 This is so true of the African city. In Nigeria alone there more than 400 different languages spoken and each tribal language represents a different cultures and religious beliefs. How does the church operate urban ministry in context like this?
Spiritual Encounter -- The urban church in Africa must be prepared to face a strong battle with the
spirit world in the city. There has been an upsurge in cults in all Nigerian cities, especially, where universities are found. While this is an area that needs further reflection beyond the scope of this study, it only needs to be stated that this is a context the urban in Africa must be prepared to work with if it is serious about urban ministry.
Injustice and corruption -- Usually it is the city centers of the world that also have the
government machinery that operates the nation’s economy, employ workers and fix the prices of oil and other services provided by the government. It is here in the cities that corruption begins and spreads. How the church responds to this is the question the church in the African city must consider.
HIV Aids and General Health – Human health is so important, but HIV and Aids have become a
living reality even in Africa and the church doing urban ministry in Africa must know that it is getting involved in context of HIV Aids endemic. But God wants his cities to enjoy life to the fullest.
44 Greenway, Discipling the City, 36. Greenway makes an apt description of poverty in third world cities and Mexico city.
These are some of the many issues that the church must consider to work with if she realizes her biblical mandate to be concerned for the city, to pray for the city and to work to the salvation of the city. Yes, there is theology of the city that sees the city as God’s creation that was affected by the fall, but God has always shown his grace to the city and wants his missionary community to be involved in the salvation of the city.
Bibliography
Bakke, Ray. The Urban Christian: Effective Ministry in Today’s Urban World. Downer’s Grove: Intervarsity Press, 1987.
_______ and Jim Hunt. The Urban Christian: Effective Ministry in Today’s Urban
World (Downers Grove: IVP, 1987.
Barrett, David. “Annual Statistical Table on Global Mission.” International Bulletin of
Missionary Research 13:1 (January 1989): 25-37.
_________. “Urbanization and Evangelism: A Global View.” In The Urban Face of
Mission: Ministering the Gospel in a Diverse and Changing World. Phillipsburg: P & R.
Publishing, 2002.
Benjamin, Don C. Deuteronomy and City Life: A Form Criticism of the Texts with the
Word City (ir) in Deuteronomy 4:41-26:19. Lanham: University Press of America, 1983.
Claerbaut, David. Urban Ministry. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983.
Conn, Harvie and Manuel Ortiz. Urban Ministry: The Kingdom, the City and the
People of God. Downers Grove: Intervarsity, 2001.
Conn, Harvie. “Genesis as an Urban Prologue.” Discipling the City: A Comprehensive
Approach to Urban Mission. Ed. Roger Greenway. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,
1992.
De Ridder, R. R. Discipling the Nations. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1975. Eliade, Mircea. The Sacred and the Profane: The Nature of Religion. New York:
Harcourt, Brace and World, 1959.
Fick, Frank S. The City in Ancient Israel. Missouri: Scholars Press, 1977.
Gordon, Cyrus H. “Abraham and the Merchants of Ura.” Journal of Near Eastern
Studies 17 (1958): 28-36.
Greenway, Roger and Monsma, Timothy. Cities: Mission’s New Frontier. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1989.
________. Calling our Cities to Christ. Nutley: Presbyterian and Reformed. 1973. Greidanus, Sidney. The Modern Preacher and the Ancient Text: Interpreting and
Preaching Biblical Literature. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988.
Halligan, John M. “A Critique of the City in the Jawist Corpus.” Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Notre Dame, 1975.
Hedlund, Roger E. The Mission of the Church in the Word: A Biblical Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1985.
Kikawada, Isaac M. and Arthur Quinn. Before Abraham was: The Unity of Genesis 1-11. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1985.
Kline, Meredith. Kingdom Prologue. Philadelphia. By Author, 1983. Lasor, W. S. Jerusalem in ISBE 2:998-1032.
Large Cities (1980).
Moholy-Nagy, Sibyl. Matrix of Man: An Illustrated History of Urban Environment. New York: Praeger, 1968.
Monsma, Timothy. An Urban Strategy for Africa. Pasadena: William Carey Library, 1979.
Perkins, John. “Urban Church/Urban Poor,” Metro Ministry. Eds. David Frenchak and Sharrel Keyes. Elgin III: David C. Cook, 1979.
Rubingh, Eugene. Strategies for Evangelization in Cities. Grand Rapids: CRC Publications, 1986.
Seters John van. Abraham in History and Tradition. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1975.
Shorter, Alyward. “Urbanization: Today’s Missionary Reality in Africa.” African
Ecclesial Review 35:5 (October, 1990): 290-300.
Ortiz, Manuel. “The Church in the City.” In The Urban Face of Mission: Ministering the
Gospel in a Diverse and Changing World. Eds. Manuel Ortiz and Susan Baker.
Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing, 2002.
Ridderbos, Herman. Redemptive History and the New Testament Scriptures. Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing, 1988.
Vos, Geerhardus. Biblical Theology: Old and New Testaments. Carlisle: Banner of Truth Trust, 1992.
_________. Redemptive History and Biblical Interpretation. Ed. Richard Gaffin. Phillipsburg: P & R Publishing, 2001.
Westermann, Claus. Genesis 12-36: A Commentary. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1985. Yakobu, Shimrumun. Mbaheberu man Tiv. Makurdi: Lamp and Word Books, 1985. Zanotelli, Alex. “Facing Problems of Rapid Urbanization.” African Ecclesial Review
