This episode of The Biggest Table is brought to you in part by Wild Goose Coffee.Since 2008, Wild Goose has sought to build better communities through coffee.
And for our listeners, Wild Goose is offering a special promotion of 20% off a one-time order using the code TABLE at checkout.To learn more and to order coffee, please visit wildgoosecoffee.com.
In this episode of The Biggest Table, I explore various aspects of Christian faith and community with Dr. Scott McKnight.
The discussion emphasizes maintaining curiosity, humility, and ensuring Jesus remains the focal point in church activities and teachings.
Key themes include addressing deconstruction in modern Christianity, the importance of communal gatherings around a table akin to early Christian traditions, and the transformative nature of interactive church settings.
The symbolism of Jesus as the Bread of Life is examined both in spiritual and social contexts, advocating for equitable practices and support within the Church.
The conversation underscores fostering community, imagination, and fellowship, reflecting on personal experiences and the symbolic power of shared meals in embodying God's love.I hope you enjoy the episode.
Hello, and welcome to another episode of The Biggest Table.I am your host, Andrew Camp.And in this podcast, we explore the table, food, eating, and hospitality as an arena for experiencing God's love and our love for one another.
And today, I'm thrilled to be joined by Dr. Scott McKnight.
Scott McKnight is an American New Testament scholar, historian of early Christianity, theologian, and author who has written widely on the historical Jesus, early Christianity, and Christian living.
He is the author of more than 90 books, including Jesus Creed, The Blue Parakeet, Kingdom Conspiracy, A Fellowship of Difference, A Church Called Tove, and Pivot, the last two of which he co-authored with his daughter, Laura.
Dr. McKnight is also an ordained Anglican deacon and canon theologian for the Diocese of Churches for the Sake of Others with Anabaptist leanings, and has also written frequently on issues in modern Anabaptism.
So thanks for joining me today, Dr. McKnight.It's just an honor to have this conversation.
And like I said earlier, I've been following your work for 20 years, and your work has informed my thinking and probably many of our listeners, and so I really appreciate this opportunity.
Well, thank you, Andrew.It's good to be with you and to be at the table, the big table.The big table, yeah.
I want to start here before we talk more about the table, and especially in New Testament teachings.
What I've really appreciated about you and your work is your genuine curiosity and humility that you've exhibited, that for the past 37 years in a career that's
spanned a lot and you've seen a lot, you seem to have remained curious and humble, willing to elevate other voices.
And so I'm just, I was curious as I was thinking about you and preparing for this, like how, what has allowed you to stay curious and not become more rigid in certain aspects?
You know, sometimes when people grow older, they, they become more rigid and yet you seem to embrace this curiosity, humility, and what, how have you leaned into that?
That is a good question, and I've never been asked this question.I don't know that I've ever thought of it, but it was interesting.
Someone said that about me recently when I was having lunch with a pastor who said, you should keep teaching, you're still curious.And I guess I'm curious by nature, and so I just, I want to know what's going on.I want to learn.I want to grow.
I'm willing to shift my views, although I tell my students I'm not changing my view on Romans or on the new perspective.It took too long for that to form in my head, and I'm not going to mess around with that for right now.
So, in the last decade, I remained fixed on that. I think part of it is that I continue to read outside my field that has been stimulating, and I continue to listen to the voices of others.
And I think because I grew up in a populist tradition with my parents, my hometown,
I don't have an elitist mentality in my bones, and though I probably should because I have a PhD and I've written all these books, but I've always felt like my students are co-learners with me.
I've always felt like I can learn from students and someone always has something to teach me.So, I don't know. It's a good question.I'm going to have to come up with an intellectually sound answer at some point on this question.
No, and yeah, because you do seem to exhibit this quality that you are willing to learn from younger generations, to listen to questions that they're posing about the church, whereas in some instances, being a pastor and having older congregants, you know, they can be condescending towards younger people, whereas you seem to approach it where you're co-learning with us, and so I really appreciate that.
Well, thank you.You know, sometimes, Andrew, I feel like as someone who's 70 years old, I ought to be respected for my viewpoint.And I find sometimes the younger generation treats me like I'm one of their own.And I think, hey, wait a minute here.
You know, I've been doing this for 50 years.Not five like you.And your opinion is not very well informed, but you know, it's just, It's the way I am, I guess.
Yeah.When I was, again, researching and getting stuff ready for this podcast, I was sort of shocked that you were 70.You seem younger, in a good way.Good, good.
So I'm curious then, having written and you've studied and you're remaining curious, as you think about your career, what would you say would be the overarching theme of your studies and your pastoral career?
I have an agenda, and I got this agenda in a class in 1976, in September, at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School.The teacher's name was Walter Liefeld, and he started teaching the Synoptic Gospels, and I was intoxicated with the topic.
And my agenda is Jesus and trying to keep the church focused on Jesus.And this sounds so okay.So, you know, this is boilerplate stuff.Everybody believes in Jesus.
I was just talking on a podcast the other day with an academic, and this person said that his theology, his understanding of Paul was rooted in salvation history. And at several points, he paused and said, you know, it's all about Christ.
It's all about Jesus Christ.And I said, well, then the center of your theology is not eschatology, it's Christology.And he kind of did a double take and said, you know, that's a good thought.Maybe that's what I should be saying.
My agenda is to keep the church focused on Jesus and to make sure that every Sunday when people gather together, that they come away with a fresh or a renewed or a reminded vision of who Jesus is.
People should come to church expecting to encounter Jesus.Not that church, not that church's music, not some special systematic theology. Now, that sounds really good, and like, that's what every church does, and it's simply untrue.
That's not what every church does, and it's so noticeable at times for someone like me.So, my overarching theme is to keep things focused on Jesus.
Because like you said, most churches will say that that is their overarching goal, and yet many churches—too often we hear about it today—are falling woefully short of that.And so how do you challenge, and how could one
you know, for a listener sitting there who's like, okay, my church says that they're doing that, what might be a litmus test?I don't even think that betrays the significance of the question, but how do we go about weighing this then?
Okay, I would say that You don't have exit interviews, obviously, every Sunday.But as people leave, a fair question would be, what did you experience today?What was most prominent?
And I think people would say the sermon, the pastor, the music, the theology, the building, the facilities, the ministry to kids, all those things are useless if they're not leading people to Jesus.
And so to me, it's in a sense, it's a repackaging, but it's more than that.It's not simply a new use of language to say, you know, our Sunday school is about Jesus.That's a nice idea.I think everybody ought to say that, and probably everybody would.
Is Jesus the center of what happens in Sunday school?Do kids come away saying, we heard another story about Jesus?Do young adults come away from their adult Sunday school class, I learned something about Jesus I didn't know.
Or is it, I learned something about systematic theology, or I learned something about the Apostle Paul.Look, I talk about the Apostle Paul a lot because I teach the New Testament.
But I want what I say about Paul in the end to be a story about Jesus, is what he thinks of Jesus.I remember John Barclay wrote a really good article—he's a New Testament scholar—in which he talked about the autobiographical statements about Paul.
And it was really interesting, because he said, Paul is not truly talking about himself.He's talking about Jesus, and Jesus's presence in his life or something.
I died, you know, or when Paul uses ego in Galatians chapter 2, he's talking about Christ.And I think even in Philippians 3, you know, I was this, I was that, I accomplished, but it's all a bunch of garbage.
It's really about what God has done for us in Christ.So I think we have to We don't have to just recalibrate.We have to recenter Jesus intentionally and consciously every day, every hour, every minute, every sermon, every Sunday.
I love that about re-centering Jesus, you know, because there's thoughts—and you talk about it in your new book, Invisible Jesus, about center-set versus bounded-set, you know, and a lot of churches have operated, you know, in a closed, bounded-set mentality, you know, who's in, who's out, you know, but your point
in the book, and other people are pointing it out, is how do we center Jesus in our discipleship?And I think that's so important, just because many people are disillusioned by bounded sets and closed sets.
Yeah, there's a lot of truth in that, and I don't feel like This has been all that much of my own experience in the church.My camera's kind of messed up here.I don't feel like churches that we've attended have been in and out at times.
I one time heard Bill Heibel say that there had been no good evangelical church on the North Shore of Chicago ever.And I thought, well, that's just crazy.
I know several pastors who are doing a great job, and all the way up to Waukegan, there's some great pastors.But I think this new generation is willing to flex and provide, let's say, ambiguity on the edges, if the center is focused on Jesus.
And I can't even say it's the new generation.It's a movement inside Christianity in the United States, and it's impacting evangelicalism in significant ways, is this new generation of deconstructors. we find that they want Jesus.
And Jesus, they go to church and they think Jesus is invisible.We don't see Him.If He's there, we're not seeing Him.And we want to go where Jesus is visible.
And that's why in the new book with Tommy Phillips, Invisible Jesus, we not only point to some of these problems that people are seeing in the church,
But every chapter is also devoted to one of the I Am sayings in the Gospel of John, because those are up front and central.That's about Jesus right there.
And so it's sort of a, it's not like this is the solution to some of these problems of the deconstructors.It's the prophetic voice of these deconstructors speaking to the church saying,
Give us more Jesus, and you'll find us, and you'll find yourself flourishing.
And that's, you know, reading over the book, what I so appreciated was that welcoming the deconstructors voice, whereas so many, maybe not so many, there seems to be a crowd that wants to silence the deconstructors or, you know, like you said, deconstructors are only deconstructing so that they can sin more, which you flatly deny is the case.
Like you say, they, no, they want Jesus.They're looking for Jesus and they're not finding him in the local church.
I mean, I know people who are walking away from the faith and they come up with bogus—they come up with their reasons.They find them on the Internet.They find them in their own studies because they want to live a life.
And I've written a chapter on this in a book called Finding Faith, Losing Faith, on why people apostatize from the faith.And the clear pattern is people want total independence. to be able to do what they want, free agency in that sense.
They don't want God, they don't want Jesus telling them what to do.They don't want the church.
I know there are people like that, but we are concerned with another audience that is getting a bad name when people start talking about deconstructors and deconstruction, is these deconstructors need to be listened to because they're saying something about the church that needs to be heard.
So the original, Andrew, the original title was The Prophetic Voice. of deconstruction.And the publisher, they thought that was a good theme, but they just felt like it wasn't that good of a title.
And Tommy, Tommy's the one who's creative about this stuff.I think Tommy came up with Invisible Jesus, and Zondervan really bit with that one.But we still have this theme.It's a prophetic voice.It's speaking to the church.
And one of the things that we discovered in a study that most people don't know about is that many of these people who use the term deconstruction and leave a church are not leaving the faith.
They're finding another church where Jesus is more central. This is a part of deconstruction that is being ignored, and we want to give these people voice.
I really appreciate that.And listeners, if you're in that phase where you are questioning or wondering where you fit and you're deconstructing and asking important questions, don't stop asking.Find the place where your voice can be heard.
And don't let people silence you.You have something important to ask.
And they need a place that's safe to ask these questions.Because, you know, if your question is just, let's just say, a momentary curiosity, that's fine.And if no one can answer your question, you don't care.
But if your question is profound, you know, how does God's love fit with these war scenes in the historical books of the Old Testament? And you really are troubled by this.
That question deserves to be asked, and that question deserves to be asked in a church, and it deserves to be explored with people who aren't going to try to jam an answer down their mind, because that is a good question about texts that exist, and there isn't an answer that is completely satisfactory.
So anyone who can answer that question is either hiding, or is wrong and foolish.
And I love how you say that, you know, these questions need to be wrestled with in the church.
And, you know, your chapter on Jesus as the bread of life, you know, was one that resonated with me more so just because of the table aspect in which you guys talk about the table.
And you mentioned that, you know, the table can be a place where these questions are wrestled with, and
But before we dive into that, I'm curious your perspective on how the table was viewed in the New Testament around Jesus' time, because Jesus seemed to upend a lot of social mores or even Jewish religious traditions by his table habits.
Yeah, Conrad Gempf wrote a pretty good book on some of this a long time ago, and it didn't sell as well as it deserved to sell.It was a nice book.
First of all, let's transport ourselves back to the first century into the heat, into the sun, into the dust. into the basalt buildings and stones of Capernaum in the first century where Jesus is ministering.
The evenings were spent walking along by the seashore, or sitting on the seashore, or finding some shade, or sitting around a table.
And there's a pretty good chance that this house in Capernaum that is now covered up, a church was built in the third or fourth century, destroyed by an earthquake in the 6th century.
And then in the 20th century, the Roman Catholic Franciscans built a church on top of it.And they're pretty sure it's Peter's house.And if it is, what we know pretty well about this place is that it had an open area where people could sit, like a
like a large backyard.You know, large, I guess, depends on how big your house is.And some people would be sitting on the ground, some people would be leaning against the building, some people might find some kind of stool to sit on.
But the table, we shouldn't imagine necessarily a big flat table that we have in a Norman Rockwell picture. But they didn't have entertainment.They didn't have Monday night football.They didn't have the Olympics.
At least they didn't have them in Galilee.And so the evenings were spent telling stories, talking to one another, thinking, discussing, complaining about Pilate or complaining about Antipas, complaining about Sejanus and Tiberius and
in Rome, and they would be discussing things.And around that table is, I would say, is where Jesus taught most of the things that ended up in the Gospels.
So, for instance, in Luke 15, we know the parable of the prodigal son, but it arose because the Pharisees were grumbling that Jesus was eating with tax collectors and sinners.Now, what Jesus was doing was not contrary to Judaism.
But it offended some kinds of Jews, usually called the scribes and Pharisees in the Synoptic Gospels.John calls them Judeans, or Jews, and he means Judeans, and that's the authorities.
And they're complaining because Jesus is transgressing what they think is appropriate piety. And Jesus, I think, his basic response is, God loves all people.These people have a heart for God, too.
And what I want is for people to sit at the table with me and to learn what the kingdom of God means in fellowship with one another, in conversation with one another, and in watching people's lives who continue to sit at the table with us be transformed.
And it wasn't one of these walk down the aisle, suddenly change, go off to Bible college and become a world famous missionary in one week. It was a question and answer.It was commentary.
It was going home to mom and dad and coming back with answers from a local synagogue instructor and coming back and saying, well, Jesus, what about this?And Jesus would respond.And over time,
A lot of these people, in contact with Jesus, sitting around the table, caught a whole new vision of what God was doing in the world, and they joined the kingdom coalition that Jesus was forming.
And the evidence of the Gospels is the crowds were overwhelmed. and impressed with Jesus, and he was constantly attracting a large audience of people because he had things to say, because he made promises about what the kingdom of God could bring.
Yeah, and so there was this give and take, this idea of the table, you know, and so
we seem to have lost the table, you know, and Jesus gives the, you know, institutes the Lord's Supper, you know, as a means of remembering who he is, you know, and so the table, you know, being raised in the evangelical world back in the 80s, you know,
the Lord's table was minimized, you know?And then I think that has implications for then what we think of as we gather in our homes.And so what should the role of the table be for the church and for Christian formation?
The closest we get to the table in most churches today is in small groups. is when we sit around and maybe read a passage from Scripture or pray together or fellowship with one another.That's where formation occurs.
And in the early church, that was the setting for virtually everything.And it wasn't a sermon on Sunday.But let's transport that into the 21st century.And we go to church to hear a sermon and to hear music. There's no table at all.
And even if we, a lot of churches have the Lord's Supper only four times a year, or sometimes once a month, and they think they're being extravagant.
I'll be honest with you, I've had pastors tell me, we're gonna attack the Lord's Supper on the end of the service.
And I was at a church one time where you, as you left, there was a little cup and a little piece of bread that you took on your own as you walked out the door. And I mean, it's almost like drive-through Eucharist.
I mean, it's not Eucharist, it is drive-through.That's walk-through.So, we don't even value the table as, let's say, a central symbol in what church is.It's something that happens ritually,
Once a week, once a month, four times a year, a couple times a year at big events.However it is done, it is not the central symbol.The central symbol in most churches today is a pulpit.
And then you could say the choir behind them or whatever is behind them, the stage, the screens. Those are the central symbols.
I remember a friend of mine who's a former student, Episcopalian priest, who went to a large church, and I asked him what he thought.He said, there isn't even a cross in the church.I said, what do you mean by that?He said, every church.
ever since we've been building churches have been in the shape of the cross, and at least a cross is at the front of the church.There was no cross in the church at all, and nothing on the stage, nothing on the screens, nothing behind.
The symbol was an entertainment center.It was a platform.And we don't have We don't have the table as a symbol.
But if church is fundamentally about a small group, in other words, a table of people fellowshipping in a living room, whether it's a big table or not, I think all of a sudden the symbol of who we are and what we do has completely changed.
And over time, that will be formative for us. I'm with you, Andrew.I'm with you totally.
No, you are.And yeah, and that's what I appreciate is you seeing that this table forms us and that, what was it, you had a great quote in your chapter, you know, and told us to tweet it.
You know, when you're talking about Jesus as the bread, you say, the lack of relationship reveals a deep problem in the church. the posture of passive sitting is not forming people for active participation and growth.
And then in parentheses, you say, tweet that.
That probably was Tommy.I know.That's pretty good.I'd like to take credit for that.So I'll have to ask him, Tommy, did you write that or did I?But that's exactly right.
Tommy is the one who talked to me about this one time and then in class, and then and then he wrote some of that about about what happens when you come to church and you're passively sitting there.
And I explained it as it's the lecture hall mentality is that this this was imbibed from classrooms in the ancient world.And then it became a basilica, which was a long, a long thing with everybody up front.That was important.A big, long hall.
That's formative.When we sit there, we're there to listen, to be quiet, to behave, to receive like birds, like baby birds in a nest, and then leave.You don't have that feeling in a living room or at a picnic table in a park.
You don't have that feeling that that's what that you're being formed to be quiet.You're there to engage with one another, to have conversation, to hold one another up, and to embrace one another.
All those things are formative for us, and the table as an image for what the church is can transform that.
And having been, you know, in charge of small groups in a couple churches and well-connected to various small group pastors, how—because there is still a fear, you know, and there's a desire for control, and, you know, we want to form people through small groups, but we also want to make sure, you know, heresy or, you know, wacky theology doesn't find its place, or, you know, you got to choose the curriculum for the people so that they're
you know, but where you seem to be suggesting you want people to expose and, you know, ask the harder questions, you know, and so for a small group pastor who wants people to be formed in community, how do you hold this tension of, you know, protecting Christian faith while also encouraging robust, at times unsafe, dialogue?
It takes place over time through what the church has traditionally called catechism, is that we teach the essence of the Christian faith, and I think we should all be teaching the Nicene Creed as a foundation for what we believe.
I mean, of course, we're going to develop it, and we're going to expand it, and we're going to have another line, and we're going to do that in different settings.But we should be teaching that as what the Christian faith is.
But at the same time, we need to be exposing people on a regular basis to Jesus in the four Gospels.You know, the four Gospels are first in the New Testament.
not because they're first in the New Testament, but because they were first that had to be read in order to understand the rest.
And until you understand the Gospels, or at least one of the Gospels, moving into the book of Acts or the letters of Paul and Peter and John, etc., you're not going to be ready for them.
So, catechism is catechism in Jesus and in the basics of the Christian faith, and we should be able to form a robust center that can handle some ambiguity on the edges.And of course, there's going to be discipline as well.
I mean, someone's teaching that you know, something crazy, like you see in Colossians or you see in Galatians, then you have to, you know, correct some people.
Yeah, you know, because then, you know, when you're talking about these small groups, it becomes an avenue where we're not just taking communion and going back to our seeds, but we're wrestling with the harder questions and using Jesus as the bread of life to actually
physically feed people.If we claim Jesus is the bread of life, it shouldn't just be about an internal life statement of going to heaven, but have real life consequences.
And so as you've talked to deconstructors and you've written this book, what is this group asking for and wanting to see when it comes to Jesus as the bread of life?
Okay, one of the things we've noticed is that the bread of life in Jesus is connected to a miracle of feeding 5,000 men along with children and wives.So it's a pretty big audience.It was provision for the poor.
So the bread of life is not simply the Eucharist morsel. The bread of life is physical provision for those who need provisions.
So we discover that, I mean, this isn't news, we believe that the deconstructors want to see a church that thinks the bread of life is physical bread for all. So distribution, benevolence, compassion, justice, ministry to the poor.
They also know that it is personal. is that Jesus is the one who is the bread of life.It's not just physical bread.It is, in that sense, spiritual bread.
It's a personal relationship to Jesus Christ who can sustain and provide the deepest form of life that we know and want and long for and ache for. And at the same time, it's bread that we share because it's a loaf that we break.
And as we break it, we distribute it to one another in gathering because we think Jesus is this bread.Now, I'm not getting into Eucharistic theology here, but He is the bread, and we share this together.We don't just take this alone.
We take this together. So, all of a sudden, the bread of life is more than, he brings me salvation and eternal life, and I go to heaven when I die.
It is a macroscopic provision of God for all people in the world, and we are charged with, by partaking of the bread ourselves, sharing the bread with one another, we become agents of the bread in this world, and we try to pass it out to others in both physical and spiritual ways.
Okay. I don't know if we wrote all that, but that's pretty good, I think.
No, it is, and I think it's a great summary because, you know, you also, in that discussion, bring up 2 Corinthians 5, you know, 13 through 15, where Paul is talking about sharing equally.
You know, he's talking about the offering for the Jewish believers in Jerusalem, you know, but at times we've been so steeped as American evangelicals in American capitalism that this idea of sharing equally rubs a big nerve for a lot of people.Yeah.
Andrew, I just have to make sure—I hope we don't have in the text 2 Corinthians 5, but we have 2 Corinthians 8.You do.Sorry, yeah, I misquoted.Yes, sorry.
I was trying to recall from the top of my head, and that doesn't— I just know that that means 25 letters.Scott, don't you know your Bible?Yeah.
This is an amazing verse by the Apostle Paul, and it's anchored in the fact that Christ is a gift to us, and that as receivers of a great gift, we now are drawn into the reciprocation of returning thanks to God and becoming agents of giving to others.
And then Paul says that the poor of Jerusalem are in need while the haves in Corinth are not in need.And he says, I want you to be people who give to the poor in Jerusalem. because you have what you can give.
And someday, maybe the Jerusalem believers will have what you don't have, and they'll be able to give to you.But Paul uses a very interesting term here.He says, so that there might be isotictos, isotictes.
And this is a term that can only be translated as equality.And, you know, The modern translations are pretty ginger here.They're afraid they're going to sound like Democrats or are stronger.
And so they get real, real soft and they'll say things like fair.And that's not what it means.It means that the image that Paul draws upon and the text that he echoes and quotes is from Exodus about manna.
And manna, I just read Josephus' discussion of the manna, and he says it's like coriander, and it still grows along Mount Sinai.It's a pretty interesting story.That's in 95 AD.
The point about the manna was that everybody had what they needed, and nobody had more than what they needed, and they had to pick it up every day, except on Friday they got to pick it up for two days.
Okay, now, the critical factor here is Paul believes that the church should be agents of distribution so that everybody has what they want.Let me just extrapolate this politically.I am not a partisan American citizen.
I defend what I think is true according to the Bible, and I don't worry which party it's with.If it's with the Republicans, great.If it's with the Democrats, great.I hope they're both doing some good things, but I'm neither of them.
But anybody who doesn't think that equitable wages for full-time work should be provided is deeply mistaken in a Christian sense.If I work 40 hours, I should be making enough money to support my family.
Now, we have a lot of Americans now who have dual incomes in the house.So the two of them together should clearly be able to make, if they're working full-time, equitable living for that family.
That doesn't mean everybody's going to have a country clubhouse of 7,000 square feet, but it should mean that we should have wages that allow people to live in our society in a way where ends meet.
And I think that's an extrapolation from what Paul is saying here.That's a value that Paul placed upon Christians that is because of the goodness of God, and we should extend that into our society. I hope I don't get you in trouble.
No, hey, I'm all about getting in good trouble.And since I'm no longer working for a church, I don't have to worry about what I say.And I think what I've learned from this podcast and hearing different stories and talking to people like you is
Yes, food and the table can be this joyous celebration, but if that table doesn't lead us into the broken stories and the broken systems, we're not doing it full justice, because I think our time around the table
should be motivating us to look at the systems that need to be repaired through Christ's eyes.
You know, and that includes food, you know, distribution and making sure people have adequate food.And I think in our modern system, that shouldn't be hard.
And yet we find it still challenging, you know, and close to a billion people still don't have adequate food.
That's right.That's right.You know, the deconstructors see in the bread of life right there. Too many people who don't have bread.
You know, and like you point out, there are churches doing work, you know, but there's not enough, you know.And so then what, as you think about the table then, what do you hope the table can be for the Christian faith today?
Well, I think the table was the place Jesus incited, stimulated, ignited imagination for what God is doing in this world in the kingdom of God.
I mean, to use the term kingdom for what he was doing in Galilee with absolutely no support from Jerusalem or Tiberias, neither Antipas nor Pilate, gave one rip about what Jesus was doing, and Caiaphas certainly didn't care.Okay, so what
What Jesus did at the table was to stimulate the minds and imaginations of his disciples to think about what God could do in this world if we all began to live out what God is calling us to live out.
So, I'm hoping that table fellowship with one another in our churches today around the table can ignite imaginations for a kingdom kind of life in every community and every church.
I love that idea of igniting imaginations, because as you said that, I'm like, oh—because I've always been intrigued, you know, with Peter's vision before he goes to visit Cornelius, that it centers around food, you know, take and eat, you know, unclean animals, you know, that Peter, before the Gentiles are welcomed in, it's about eating,
unclean animals.And there's something intriguing about that that I think is worth unpacking at a later date.
But if Jesus was igniting Peter's imagination around the table while they were together for three years, it's the table that continues to show up in Peter's dreams.
You know, because it seems the table was a means of equality and breaking down hierarchy so that everyone had a voice.So no, I appreciate that.
You know, a question as we begin to think about wrapping up, and it's a question I ask all of my guests, and it's always fun to hear their response.And so, here's the question, and you answer it how you feel.
What is the story you want the church to tell?
Well, I want the church to tell the story of Jesus as the living embodiment of God, and that in the face of Jesus, we see the face of God.And that as we become Christlike through the power of God's grace and the Holy Spirit,
people will see the presence of God in Christ in us.That's the story that I want us to tell.
Awesome.I appreciate that word.And then some fun questions as we, you know, to wrap up, centered around food, since this is about the biggest table.And so, Scott, what's one food you refuse to eat?
You know, we're old enough that we don't put on the table foods that we don't like.Lima beans.
Is there a story with lima beans?When we went to church as kids, sometimes my mom would serve lima beans and they were just dry.It was like eating dust.
I understand. I find that most people, there's some childhood memory of badly prepared.Then on the other end of the spectrum, what's one of the best things you've ever eaten?Texas brisket.Yeah, come on.
Do you have a favorite place to get Texas brisket?
We go to a place called City Barbecue sometimes, and there's another place in the area called Ed's, Big Ed's Barbecue, it's very good.But we just went to another one called, I think it's called Barbecue Incorporated.
And we just went Friday night, and it was good brisket. Yeah, I like to have brisket.My wife isn't big on beef.She usually gets turkey, but I like to eat brisket when I can.Gotcha.Are you a moist or the lean cut?Moist.
I like the moist, but can't always get it.I understand.Yes.Fair enough.And then finally, there's a conversation among chefs about last meals.As in, if you knew you had one last meal to enjoy, what would it be?
And so for you, Scott, if you had one last meal, what would be on your table?
It's kind of morbid, isn't it?You know, to me, The Last Meal evokes people who are in death row, because I read an amazing book about this in Texas. Oh, I'd probably have brisket.
Brisket and good Texas beans, or the beans, you know, the cooked beans with brisket and bacon in it, and maybe some cornbread and some potatoes, because I wouldn't care about my diet at that point.
Yeah.I know a man who really had, he was dying, and he had diabetes really bad.And he asked the doctor, I know I'm going to die soon, very soon, like within hours.He said, can someone get me a big piece of chocolate cake?
And the doctor said, we'll get you one.And he died shortly thereafter.That's what he wanted, a big piece of sweet chocolate cake.He craved it.
I'm sure. Yeah.Now there was actually a book maybe 15 years ago that asked all these world-class chefs about their last meals, you know, and a lot of them wanted their moms cooking.
And so I think, you know, the question does, it's morbid, but it also evokes something of, you know, what do we crave and who, you know, as we think about our death, what do we want to get back to?
Maybe some prosciutto and risotto, something like that would be pretty good, too.
Yeah, no, for sure.Okay.Well, Scott, this has been a privilege.If people want to follow you and, you know, read about what you're thinking and reading, which you always seem to be reading good books, where could they find you?
I'm on Substack. I'm also on Facebook and Twitter and Threads and Instagram.But if they Google my name, probably Substack would pop up pretty fast.And what's the name of your Substack?Well, Substack goes by our name, so it's Substack Scott Knight.
It's actually called Tove Unleashed, but nobody knows that.
Awesome.Well, thank you, Scott.This has been a real privilege.
Thank you for taking the time to have this conversation, and thanks for joining us on this episode of The Biggest Table, where we explore what it means to be transformed by God's love around the table and through food.Until next time, bye.
Sign in
