C. PETER WAGNER (AUGUST 15, 1930 - OCTOBER 21, 2016)

I first knew C. Peter Wagner from his books – I was then still in my high school. Between 1991-1994, I was instrumentally active in National Prayer Network. In those years, Peter Wagner’s books are to me must to read. Through the chairman and the founder of National Prayer Network, Dr. Iman Santosoand his library, my knowledge of Peter Wagner grew. In 1993, National Prayer Network facilitated a meeting for church leaders to arrange for Peter Wagner to come to Indonesia to speak on a National Prayer Conference. The meeting was led by the late Reverend Jerimia Rim only a week before his passing. The late Jerimia Rim had been in conversation with Peter Wagner and planned to invite him to Indonesia the following year. He also introduced to and invited participants of that meeting to attend Global Consultation on World Evangelization (GCOWE) in Seoul, Korea(1995) in which Peter Wagner was one of important figures of the movement.

I was appointed to be member of steering committees for 1994 Indonesia Berdoa, a national prayer conference in which Dr. Peter Wagner was the main speaker. Gereja Kristus Yesus, an evangelical Chinese church hosted the conference. More than 3,000 Christian leaders attended that prayer conference. I had the opportunity to talk with him personally during one meal. That conversation focused on united prayer movement and global mission. At the end, we also talked about the plan for 1995 GCOWE and the likelihood for me to study at Fuller School for World Mission.

Few months after that conversation, I went to pursue my theological education not in Fuller, but in Chicago. In those years, I was introduced more to Dr. Wagner’s works – some of them are course required readings. His contributions in theological education, mission and Christian life are without doubt significant. Together with Donald McGavran, he is called the father of church growth movement. His writing covers the wide area of spiritual gifts, spiritual warfare, church planting, church growth, mission, Christian leadership, and the history of Pentecostalism and the Charismatic movement. It is interesting to me to know that those wide ranges of topics are all by Dr. Wagner related to mission and church ministry. Among his works, The Third Wave of the Holy Spirit is my favorite. The book inspires me to looking forward for the fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh waves.

I had some e-mail conversation with him during my stay in Chicago, but never get a chance to meet with him again. I am thankful for his significant contributions that influenced many theologians, missiologists, missionaries and churchgoers. From his testimonies, I am also grateful to understanding him as a significant academic figure whose encounter with the Holy Spirit is real and alive. In Dr. Wagner’s life, one sees the Gnosisand the Pneuma come together integrally and in harmony.

EV. DRG. YUSAK TJIPTO (12/03/1935-23/06/2016)

Satu persatu orang-orang yang besar pengaruhnya di dalam masa-masa awal kehidupan iman dan kerohanian saya dipanggil pulang ke rumah Bapa. Pa Yusak, demikian saya biasa membahasakan Penginjil dokter gigi Yusak Tjipto. Saya dan beliau sama sekali tidak memiliki sejarah hubungan yang istimewa. Apakah saya senang mendengar kotbah-kotbah dan pengajaran beliau? Secara jujur, saya senang mendengarkannya. Apakah saya setuju dengan segala hal yang diajarkan oleh beliau? Saya tidak dapat menjawabnya. Setiap kali saya mendengarkan kotbah, saya menetapkan diri untuk belajar tentang sesuatu yang tidak sekedar mengenyangkan otak dan memuaskan pemahaman saya mengenai kebenaran,  namun terlebih penting adalah tentang sesuatu yang berguna bagi kehidupan. Dibalik segala pertentangan tentang pribadi pa Yusak dan segala yang pernah diajarkan serta dikotbahkannya, saya mencatat setidaknya dua  kontribusi beliau yang sangat penting dan mendasar bagi kehidupan iman Kristen dan kehidupan saya sendiri. Apa yang akan saya tuliskan ini, saya yakin tidak hanya sebatas perkataan-perkataan yang indah, namun sesuatu yang hidup di dalam hati pa Yusak.

Pada saat saya masih SMA (tahun 1986 atau 1987), untuk pertama kalinya saya bertemu dengan pa Yusak. Waktu itu beliau sedang berkotbah di salah satu ruangan di Hotel Borobudur, Jakarta. Saya masih sangat belia dan bukan siapa-siapa bahkan bukan tamu yang diundang hadir dalam pertemuan tersebut. Saat itu saya hanya sekedar membantu  panitia angkat ini dan itu. Setelah pa Yusak selesai berkotbah, ia duduk sendiri di dekat pintu ruangan ibadah, Kebetulan tidak ada orang lain yang sedang berbincang dengannya. Saya menghampiri beliau untuk bertanya dan minta nasihat jika seandainya saya ingin menjadi hamba Tuhan. Memang pada saat saya duduk di bangku SMA, mulai ada kerinduan untuk melayani Tuhan, namun saya belum yakin benar. Ini kira-kira kata pa Yusak dengan logatnya yang khas: “Sembahyang – Tanya sama Tuhan.” Well, jawabannya to the point dan menurut saya tepat sasaran. Meskipun tidak salah meminta nasihat orang lain di dalam memahami panggilan Tuhan, pa Yusak mengingatkan bahwa yang terpenting dan yang paling mendasar adalah bertanya kepada Tuhan sendiri. Kita tidak perlu membuat jurang untuk memisahkan hikmat Tuhan dan hikmat manusia, karena tidak jarang nasihat manusia juga berasal dari Tuhan – namun betapa sering kita ‘terburu-buru’ bertanya dan tidak jarang mengandalkan hikmat manusia tanpa pernah bertanya kepada dan minta pimpinan Tuhan yang sesungguhnya memanggil kita? Pada masa-masa itu saya banyak bertanya kepada hamba-hamba Tuhan mengenai panggilan hidup saya dan kerinduan untuk terlibat dalam pelayanan sepenuh waktu. Jawaban pa Yusak terasa berbeda dan khusus. Tidak berarti hamba Tuhan yang lain salah menjawab, namun pa Yusak berbeda: “Sembahyang - Tanya sama Tuhan.” He nailed it. Saya pikir itu yang paling mendasar sebelum bertanya pada orang lain sehebat apapun orang tersebut.

Kali waktu yang lain saya mendengar rekaman sesi tanya jawab antara pa Yusak dan peserta ibadah. Pertanyaannya sesungguhnya sederhana: Bagaimana cara membedakan suara Tuhan dan suara Setan? Jawaban pa Yusak ternyata jauh lebih sederhana lagi: “Aku ndak tahu.” Jemaat tertawa. Pa Yusak melanjutkan, “Soale aku kan bukan Tuhan dan bukan Setan!” Jemaat tertawa terbahak. Jemaat seakan tidak sadar bahwa pa Yusak sesungguhnya serius. Lalu pa Yusak melanjutkan kira-kira begini: “Bagaimana caranya para suami ngenali suara istrinya? Caranya ya kalau keduanya sering ngobrol dan bergaul. Jadi kita bisa tahu itu suara Tuhan, ya kalau kita sering ngobrol dan bergaul sama Tuhan.” Bagi pa Yusak, iman Kristen itu bukanlah sekedar daftar panjang doktrin dan teori semata. Pa Yusak tidak menjawab pertanyaan di atas dengan definisi panjang dan batasan-batasan tentang apa itu suara Tuhan untuk membedakan dari suara Setan. Pengalaman dan kedekatan kita kepada Tuhan adalah pengujinya. Iman Kristen itu bagi pa Yusak adalah sesuatu yang riil yang dilahirkan dari hidup bergaul karib dengan Tuhan.

Saya mengetahui bahwa beberapa pemimpin Kristen dan kelompok-kelompok Kristen menilai pengajaran-pengajaran pa Yusak itu salah dan keliru. Ada juga yang mengatakan bahwa pengajaran dan kotbah pa Yusak itu menipu jemaat. Tulisan ini bukanlah tempat untuk mendebatkan komentar-komentar tersebut. Kalaupun benar bahwa pa Yusak salah, keliru dan menipu di dalam beberapa kotbah dan pengajarannya, maka seharusnya sekarang ini beliau sudah tahu – kan beliau sudah ketemu Tuhan. Dan saya yakin pa Yusak sudah minta maaf pada Tuhan. Jadi untuk teman-teman yang memiliki memori buruk tentang pa Yusak, ini saatnya untuk melupakan dan meninggalkannya. Sebaliknya kontribusi positif pa Yusak tentang kehidupan kristiani seperti yang saya coba sarikan di atas, kiranya dapat terus dilestarikan, digaungkan dan dialami oleh mereka yang mengaku percaya kepada Tuhan Yesus Kristus.

Bon voyage pa Yusak. Saya yakin sekarang ini pa Yusak menikmati hari-hari terindah bersama dan mengalami Tuhan Yesus ‘tanpa batas.’

PETRUS AGUNG PURNOMO (20/03/1962-13/03/2016)

 Pada sekitar tahun 1979-1980, ketika saya baru saja mengambil keputusan terpenting di dalam hidup saya untuk percaya kepada Tuhan Yesus, ada seorang pemuda yang ‘literally’ membawa saya bertumbuh di dalam iman Kristen. Seminggu sekali ia menjemput saya dari rumah di Jalan Gedangan dengan Vespanya menuju rumah persekutuan Sangkakala yang pada waktu itu di Jalan Pringgading, Semarang. Setelah persekutuan anak-anak Sangkakala selesai, iapun mengantar saya pulang ke rumah. Sampai hari ini saya masih ingat rutenya, meskipun saya tidak ingat sama sekali jika ada pembicaraan yang penting selama di perjalanan bersamanya.

Pada awal-awal tahun 90-an, beberapa kali ibu saya mengajak saya untuk beribadah di gereja yang didirikannya pada tahun 1991. Lokasi gereja tersebut di kompleks Ruko di Jalan Hasanudin, dekat perumahan Tanah Mas, Semarang. Pada tahun 1993, saya melayani sepenuh waktu di Jaringan Doa Nasional yang memiliki visi untuk menggerakan doa syafaat di dalam kesatuan dan diantara gereja-Nya bagi bangsa dan negara. Salah satu tugas saya adalah bertemu dan membangun jaringan doa dengan hamba-hamba Tuhan di Indonesia. Dalam rangka tugas tersebut, saya menemuinya di rumahnya yang tidak jauh dari lokasi gereja pada waktu itu. Pada saat itu gerejanya sudah lumayan banyak jemaatnya, tetapi juga tidak besar-besar sekali. Yang pasti saya melihat gerejanya bertumbuh. Setelah sekian waktu berbicara mengenai gerakan doa, ia mengajak saya untuk menonton video ibadahKKR kesembuhan yang dilayani oleh Benny Hinn. Pada waktu itu saya menyadari bahwa ia sangat suka dengan Benny Hinn. By the way, ia masih ingat saya.

Pada tahun 2009, diadakanlah reuni 30 tahun kegerakan rohani di Semarang. Reuni diadakan di hotel Patra Jasa, Semarang. Sebelum acara dibuka, saya sapa dia dengan nama aslinya yang mungkin publik tidak tahu. Dan dia masih ingat saya. Kita hanya sempat ngobrol singkat saja – tidak ada yang penting. Empat tahun kemudian, ia hadir dan memimpin ibadah penghiburan ketika ayah saya meninggal dunia (Juli 2013). Di dalam penyampaian firman Tuhan, ia menyinggung pengalamannya bersama kedua orangtua saya.

Beberapa minggu yang lalu saya melihat foto-fotonya ketika berkunjung ke Amerika Serikat pada minggu awal February 2016. Ia nampak sehat. Namun hari Minggu kemarin ia harus pergi (pulang) ke rumah Bapa yang mengasihinya dan dikasihi-Nya. Manusia saya sedih karenanya – namun juga bahagia karenanya.

Sejak berita kepergiannya itu, banyak berita yang simpang siur. Dan itu menambah kesedihan saya. Beberapa komentar yang dimuat di media sosial nampak tidak sensitif sama sekali – terutama dari kelompok-kelompok Kristen yang 'berbeda warna' dengannya. Meskipun halus tapi tanpa disertai rasa empati. Kritik kepada keluarganya, kepada para pemimpin gerejanya, kepada jemaat yang dipimpinnya, dan pada akhirnya kepada pengajarannya. Kebetulan mereka yang 'berbeda warna' itu sebagian teman-teman baik saya juga.

Tapi saya masih bersyukur bahwa di antara banyak komentar-komentar yang beredar, saya terhibur kesan-kesan yang disampaikan oleh Ganjar Pranowo ketika melayat jenasah di gedung gereja, yang dinamai Holy Stadium: 

Gubernur Jawa Tengah, Ganjar Pranowo, mengenang Pendeta Petrus Agung Purnomo sebagai pribadi yang gigih berjuang hingga akhir hayat. Ganjar menyatakan, keluarga Pendeta Petrus Agung sudah menerima kepergian pria yang meninggal akibat serangan jantung tersebut. "Waktu masih muda aktif merintis gereja. Perjuangannya sangat panjang dan perjalanan tanpa kenal lelah, sampai detik terakhir. Istri dan anaknya menerima. Saya melihat duka mendalam. Prosesnya tidak gampang untuk keluarga," kata Ganjar Pranowo di Gereja JKI Injil Kerajaan Holly Stadium, Semarang, Jawa Tengah, Senin 14 Maret 2016. Ganjar mengaku sudah mengenal lama Pendeta Petrus Agung jauh sebelum ia menjadi gubernur. "Saya kenal sudah lama. Bukan saat kampanye, melainkan saat aktif dalam bidang sosial, pendidikan, dan kebencanaan," ujar Ganjar.

Saya tidak ingin membelanya, keluarganya atau membela jemaatnya. Bagi saya apa yang terjadi di antara mereka adalah lumrah. Saya juga tidak ingin menilai orang-orang yang telah menghakiminya dan menghakimi jemaatnya. Karena mereka pun berlaku lumrah. Sayapun rentan untuk menjadi yang dihakimi dan yang menghakimi. Tapi bukan itu yang saya butuhkan hari-hari ini. Saya dan keluarganya, dan teman-teman baiknya dan jemaatnya membutuhkan penghiburan yang sejati.

Saya hanya sedih saja karena orang yang telah ‘literally’ membawa saya kepada pertumbuhan iman saya pada masa-masa iman itu masih kerdil kini telah tiada. Dan ketiadaannya secara nalar manusia adalah way too soon.

MOORYATI SOEDIBYO, DIAN SASTRO DAN METAKOGNISI SUSI PUDJIASTUTI BY RHENALD KASALI

I am not trying to offer another praise to these extraordinary ladies:

 

 

 - but to share my learning process from the simple truth offered by Rhenald Kasali. Look at one of his outstanding paragraphs "Manusia itu belajar untuk membuat diri dan bangsanya tangguh, bijak mengatasi masalah, mampu mengambil keputusan, bisa membuat kehidupan kebih produktif dan penuh kedamaian. Kalau cuma bisa membuat keonaran dan adu pandai saja kita belum tuntas mengurai persepsi, baru sekedar mampu mendengar, tapi belum bisa menguji kebenaran dengan bijak dan mengembangkannya ke dalam tindakan yang produktif." Here is the link to his complete article: http://bisniskeuangan.kompas.com/read/2014/11/03/054500426/Mooryati.Soedibyo.Dian.Sastro.dan.Metakognisi.Susi.Pudjiastuti?utm_source=WP&utm_medium=box&utm_campaign=Kknwp

RETHINKING ON WHAT PEOPLE SAY ABOUT POLITICAL PUPPET

Since few months ago, Mr. Joko Widodo, one of the candidates for the next president of Indonesia has been accused to be merely a political ‘puppet’ of former Indonesian president and general chairman of Partai Demokrasi Indonesia Perjuangan (PDIP), Mrs. Megawati Soekarnoputri. This accusation has been launched and popularized by his political oppositions. In political vocabulary, the word ‘puppet’ may not be too positive. That word tells us that such individual does not have independence to make his own decision. Someone else, the more powerful one plays him or her. This short reflective thought invites us to look at some important lessons from the above incident.

  

First, a puppet is dead. It normally represents a living being, animals or humans. Puppets are ‘alive’ only when people play them. Thus, in order for the puppet to perform well and to bring positive impacts in his or her role, there are two basic requirements. One, the people (person) who play behind the puppet has to be a good puppet player. If the player plays the puppet well, the audience who view the puppet show will be happy. Two, a particular puppet will be praised if his or her role is positive and heroic. On the other hand, he or she will be condemned if his or her role is evil and destructive. Though I never ever agree with the thesis that Mr. Joko Widodo is Mrs’ Megawati Soekarnoputri’s puppet, however even if that thesis is true – being Mrs Megawati Soekarnoputri’s puppet is not necessarily a negative reality. If Mrs. Megawati Soekarnoputri is a good puppet player and is able to find positive and constructive roles for Mr. Joko Widodo, then this puppet show will be beautiful and beneficial for the whole country – don’t you think? Being a puppet is not necessarily wrong. It is wrong when a puppet is in the hand of an evil player; it is wrong if that puppet, though in the hand of a gifted player, is given a destructive and evil roles.

Second, at some degree we are actually all puppet of someone else. We often mirror others. Our lifestyle is by no means original; we simply follow our ‘idols’ or predecessors (or ancestors). If we like our leader (father, mother, teacher, pastor, etc.), we start to speak, to act and to think like the way she or he speaks, acts and thinks. Some other have been even easily trapped in a celebrity life-style simply because of the spirit: ‘I want to be like him or her’ or ‘I want to be his or her puppet’ so to speak.

Third, believe it or not, we all like, not only to be a puppet of someone else, but also to have puppets. A political puppet is created often to do things in favor of the real player behind it. And to be honest, we all are happy when people do things in favor of us voluntarily or involuntarily. My point is a simple question: Why does it (if it is true that Mr. Joko Widodo is merely Mrs. Megawati Soekarnoputri’s puppet) bother us? We blame other people based on their actions, but we ourselves love to do those actions. Isn’t that hypocrisy?

Fourth, last and the most important point: Mr. Joko Widodo has not actually been the victim of being Mrs. Megawati Soekarnoputri’s puppet. Mr. Joko Widodo has actually been the victim of being his own fans’ puppet. When his choice of vice president is announced few days ago, some of Mr. Joko Widodo’s faithful fans suddenly were not happy. Some of them expressed their unhappiness frontally in social media. Interestingly enough, these people (previously biggest fans of Mr. Joko Widodo – you can tell from their facebook’s timeline status) started to say that they will not choose Mr. Joko Widodo for the president because of his choice of the vice president. To me – I am so sorry – these people’s dream is to play Mr. Joko Widodo to do things in favor of them. In other words, they want Mr. Joko Widodo to be their political puppet. Or still in other word, these people want to play what they accused Mrs. Megawati Soekarnoputri plays. Are we better off and more experienced than Mrs. Megawati Soekarnoputri in providing leadership for a big country with complex challenges such as Indonesia? Isn’t it also hypocrisy?

The purpose of this reflection is not to support or to justify the idea of political puppet. Nor is it a campaign for Mr. Joko Widodo. The purpose of this article is to assist readers to pause for a while and to do careful reflection on what he or she thinks about political puppet, especially in relation with Mr. Joko Widodo as one candidate for the next Indonesia’s president.

INDONESIA`S NEXT PRESIDENT AND THE MIGHTY HANDS OF GOD: A PRAYER INVITATION

 

I was invited to preach in a local Indonesian congregation in Vancouver at the end of April 2014. I love this church especially when it come to the area of worship and prayer. I mentioned to members of this church that every time I sing praise and worship in this church somehow my heart is so excited, my relationship with God is refreshed, and my spirit is uplifted. After I finished sharing the sermon, a young lady stood up, moved forward and led the congregation in intercessory prayers. She prayed for four items. First, she led the congregation to pray for me (as a guest speaker) and my family. Then she and the congregation continued to pray for their pastor and his family. Third, she prayed for Indonesia. Then finally, she prayed for Canada.

When she prayed for Indonesia, I felt something different. This young lady was crying and lamenting for the nation. I remember she spent time considerably crying out to God for leaders and future leaders of Indonesia. I assume she understood that Indonesians have been in the midst of general and presidential election these days. I was aware of the issue, and with her also cried out to God for his protection and blessing for this country. 

Few days before the incident, I mentioned to a good friend of mine that I had been feeling strange lately, especially when I pray for Indonesia. My hands and my body often were trembling, and tears voluntarily dropped. My heart is far from peace.

Yet, as I prayed in that church, it seemed that God revealed to me some encouraging messages. First of all, not only me, but many people are crying out to God for Indonesia. In this church, the young lady is the example. I remember some twenty years ago facilitating hundreds of young students to repent and to pray for Indonesia. They prayed extraordinarily: crying, kneeling, fasting, worshiping God in an unexplainable way. I knew the Holy Spirit was there - it was not human made. We were all young and inexperience, but God moved among us. Second, who the next leader of the country is is not the most crucial issue. From which party she or he is is also less significant. Religion, gender, ethnic and academic backgrounds are again not the foremost concerns. The primary and ultimate question is Gods victorious and mighty hands. If God`s hand is with this person, then she or he will do God`s will for Indonesia - and that is more than enough.

One of the presidential candidates is told to be too young, `ndeso` and inexperience. Well, God`s hands are powerful enough to guide the inexperience young people to accomplish God`s will. At the same time, his rival is told to be actively involved in kidnapping and killing pro-democracy activists in the past. People however often forget that God`s hands are powerful enough to change people. Were we better than him when Jesus died for us? (See: Rome 5.1-11). Thus it is less important to me who (name or party) will be the next leader of Indonesia. I believe in the mighty hands of God and trust my country into those powerful hands. God has elected his servant to lead the country, and God`s hand will be with his chosen one.

REMEMBERING THE DEATH OF JFK (NOVEMBER 22 1963-2013)

Today we remember the death of a man who once said, "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzRg--jhO8g). John F. Kennedy, a young, charismatic and brilliant leader of the United States died in one of the worst tragedies 50 years ago today (November 22, 1963).

REMEMBERING FRANCOIS BOVON OF HARVARD AND JEROME MURPHY O'CONNOR OF ECOLE BIBLIQUE

The New Testament scholarship lost two of its finest scholars in November 2013. François Bovon passed away on the first day of the month at 75, while Jerome Murphy-O'Connor died on the 11th of November at 78. The obituary of François Bovon by the Harvard Divinity School is available at http://www.hds.harvard.edu/news-events/articles/2013/11/04/fran%C3%A7ois-bovon-1938-2013. Ecole Biblique also publishes an obituary for Jerome Murphy-O'Connor at http://www.ebaf.edu/?p=3628&lang=fr.

REST IN PEACE: RALPH P. MARTIN (1925-2013)

It is sad to learn that another giant New Testament scholar, Ralph P. Martin passed away recently. I remember writing an essay on Paul’s extraordinary hymn in Philippians 2.5-11 back in 1995, in which I was greatly indebted to Martin’s PhD dissertation later published as Carmen Christi: Philippians ii.5-11 in Recent Interpretation and in the Setting of Early Christian Worship (SNTS Monograph Series Vol 4. Cambridge: University Press, 1967). His other major contribution to the New Testament scholarship was his service as co-editor for World Biblical Commentary Series and IVP New Testament Dictionary Series. WBC series, IVPNTD series and other Martin’s works have been influencing my reflections on New Testament as it is clear in the list of bibliography cited at the end of my essays and dissertation. Among my earliest collection of books in the area of New Testament Studies indeed are two volumes of Martin’s work on New Testament Foundations (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975, 1978). These volumes had helped me greatly in enlightening my ‘weekly’ sermons during my undergraduate years in Bogor. And now on my bookshelf stands Ralph Martin's work, The Worship of God: Some Theological, Pastoral and Practical Reflections (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982).

In the following paragraphs is a comprehensive obituary written by IVP senior editor Daniel G. Reid to remember Ralph P. Martin (http://www.sbl-site.org/assets/pdfs/Martin-RalphObit.pdf)

Ralph P. Martin (1925-2013) passed away Monday, February 25, 2013, in his home in Southport, England, from lymphoma. Born in Anfield, Liverpool, England, he attended Anfield Road School and then The Liverpool Collegiate. His early education was interrupted in 1939 by the war, and he was conscripted to work in the coal mines of Lancashire as one of the “Bevin Boys.” This was not an auspicious start for a future New Testament scholar. However, after the war he pursued ministerial training at Manchester Baptist College and in 1949 earned his B.A. at the University of Manchester. In the midst of early pastoral ministries in Baptist churches in Gloucester (1949-53) and Dunstable (1953-59) he earned his M.A. at Manchester in 1956, writing a thesis on “Eucharistic Teaching in 1 Corinthians” under T. W. Manson. From 1959 to 1965 Martin was lecturer in theology at London Bible College, and in 1963 he completed his Ph.D. at King’s College, University of London, under D. E. Nineham. His thesis was later published as Carmen Christi: Philippians ii.5-11 in Recent Interpretation and in the Setting of Early Christian Worship (SNTSMS 4; Cambridge University Press, 1967). Following a year (1964-65) as visiting professor at Bethel College and Seminary, St. Paul, Minnesota, Martin became lecturer in New Testament at the University of Manchester from 1965 to 1969. There he was a colleague of fellow New Testament scholar, F. F. Bruce. 

In 1969 Martin joined the faculty of Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California, where he would serve as professor of New Testament from 1969 to 1988, and director of the graduate studies program beginning in 1979. His retirement from Fuller was premature, necessitated by a decline in his wife Lily’s health. The Martins returned to England, taking up residence in Southport, and he served as professor associate in biblical studies at the University of Sheffield for several years. After Lily’s death in 1995 he continued his writing, editing and teaching at Fuller Theological Seminary (beginning in 1995 as Distinguished Scholar in Residence), the Graduate School of Theology of Azusa Pacific University, and Logos Evangelical Seminary. Throughout his academic career he stayed involved in preaching, teaching laypeople and other pastoral ministry.

Martin was a significant figure in the post-World War 2 resurgence of British evangelical scholarship associated with the Tyndale Fellowship and Tyndale House, Cambridge. The publication of Carmen Christi justly established him as an authority on the Christ hymn of Philippians (the book was reissued by Eerdmans in 1983 and as A Hymn of Christ by InterVarsity Press in 1997, each edition with an extended preface covering the passing decades of scholarship). And that work remains a touchstone for any serious study of Philippians 2, despite the mushrooming of studies produced in the four-plus decades since its publication. In his 1997 preface Martin concluded by saying that this latest survey of scholarship was “the outcome of my latest lucubrations; and I mean it to be final.” But his interest in Philippians 2 was not final, for an edited volume (with Brian J. Dodd), Where Christology Began: Essays on Philippians 2 (Westminster John Knox), appeared in 1998, contributing further to the literature, and he jointly revised his friend Gerald F. Hawthorne’s volume on Philippians in the Word Biblical Commentary (2004).

Martin wrote a number of commentaries, including two early ones on Philippians, one in the Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (1959, rev. ed. 1987) and another in the New Century Bible (1976). Colossians was also a focus of commentary, with Colossians: The Church’s Lord and the Christian’s Liberty (1972), Colossians and Philemon in the New Century Bible (1974) and Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon in the Interpretation series (1992). But his greatest contribution to the genre was his role as New Testament editor of the Word Biblical Commentary, a project begun at Fuller Seminary during the 1970s. In addition to guiding this series through the decades, he contributed substantial volumes on 2 Corinthians and James.

Students and colleagues were often impressed with Martin’s encyclopedic knowledge of the New Testament and its Greek text. And his command of the secondary literature was equally formidable, stocked as it was by decades of reading and aided by a memory that seemed to recall everything of importance and many details of lesser significance. This not only informed his teaching and writing but also his work as editor (with Gerald F. Hawthorne) of the Dictionary of Paul and His Letters and (with Peter H. Davids) of the Dictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Developments. For the latter volume it was characteristically Martin’s idea to extend its reach to the mid-second century, in order to introduce students of the New Testament to a broader historical context in which the “germination and flowering” of Christian truth might be viewed.

Martin’s interest in the hymn of Philippians 2 overflowed into a broader interest in early Christian worship. His early book, Worship in the Early Church (1964, rev. ed. 1974), long filled a gap in the literature. And he had a continuing interest in identifying hymns and other pre-formed material in the New Testament (particularly in Paul), both as apertures into early Christian worship and as reshaped traditions in their literary contexts. His later thinking on worship may be observed in The Worship of God (1982) and his expansive article on “Worship and Liturgy” in the Dictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Developments.

The range of his work is also exemplified in his Mark: Evangelist and Theologian (1972), which not only surveyed and analyzed recent interpretation, but also contributed to the redaction-critical analysis of the Gospel, and “The Theology of Jude, 1 Peter, and 2 Peter” in The Theology of the Letters of James, Peter, and Jude (with Andrew Chester, 1994), which explored how these letters offer insight into early Jewish Christianity. Nor was he hesitant to tackle the larger questions. Martin’s Reconciliation: A Study of Paul’s Theology (1981) was not simply a thematic study but a bid to locate the centrum Paulinum in a robust understanding of reconciliation in all its dimensions. This book, along with J. Christiaan Beker’s Paul the Apostle, was the subject of a memorable session at the 1981 Annual Meeting of the SBL.

Martin had a speculative mind, but was always grounded in the text. Among evangelical scholars he was known for staking out a habitable space between faith and criticism. In posing a non-Pauline authorship of Ephesians and the Pastorals (where he favored the hand of Luke), he challenged his students to think beyond the scope of what they so easily assumed to be the case, yet always with a nuance that demonstrated a critically informed but confessional faith. Thus in his widely used introduction, New Testament Foundations (2 vols., 1975, 1978) he frames Ephesians by suggesting:

"The Epistle to the Ephesians, in our understanding, adds considerably to our appreciation of Paul’s ministry since it represents and embodies not only the substance of the apostle’s missionary message, but the development and extension of that message to a new set of conditions. Ephesians, with its clearly discerned distinctive, adds a superstructure to the Pauline kerygmatic base" (NTF, 2:238).

Martin’s moderation in dealing with sensitive issues of New Testament criticism are a model in a fractious age. And his deft pen, with its signature clarity and grace, calls for emulation. On his passing, several younger scholars have commented on their experiences of his generosity and sincere interest in their work, traits that characterized this true gentleman and scholar.

Ralph Martin is survived by his wife Doreen, his daughters Patricia Losie and Elizabeth Knode, seven grandchildren, and seven great grandchildren.

(A curriculum vitae reminiscences by Leslie C. Allen and a bibliography of his work, up until 1992, may be found in his Festschrift, edited by Michael J. Wilkins and Terence Paige, Worship, Theology and Ministry in the Early Church: Essays in Honor of Ralph P. Martin (JSNTSupp 87; Sheffield, 1992).