Chapter 11 THE TENSION OF THE CITY

当今许多基督徒，特别是在美国，对城市持冷漠甚至敌对的态度。有人认为城市是一种负面力量，会削弱信仰和道德；也有人认为城市对基督徒的使命和生活无关紧要。此外，一些年轻的基督徒可能正在接受一种浪漫化的城市观。¹ 但圣经作者的态度却大不相同。圣经对城市的看法既不是敌对的，也不是浪漫化的。因为城市是人性的放大——一面放大镜，既能凸显人性的光辉，也能暴露人性的黑暗——因此，它具有双重属性。²

这就是为什么圣经将城市描绘为邪恶与暴力的场所，同时也将其视为避难与和平之地。创世记第 4 章和第 11 章描述了建造城市的人是该隐（第一个杀人者）的后代。创世记还描述了所多玛和蛾摩拉这两座邪恶之城。然而，诗篇 107 篇却提到了一群流浪的人“找不到可安居的城市……他们的生命渐渐衰微。于是他们向耶和华呼求……祂引导他们走直路，使他们到达可安居的城。愿人因耶和华的慈爱和祂向人所行的奇事感谢祂！”（4-8 节）。诗人将无城可居的生活描述为一种困境。

这首诗篇背后的假设是：城市是人类生命繁荣昌盛的地方——是一种积极的社会形态。因此，圣经对城市的描绘十分微妙。它既强调这种积极社会形态如何被用来荣耀神，也揭示了城市如何成为助长人类悖逆神的工具。而正如我们将在第 12 章中看到的，城市在救赎历史的发展中扮演了关键角色。

在本章中，我希望探讨城市在彰显神荣耀的应许与高举人本主义的阴影之间的张力。我们将在圣经的篇章中发现这种双重属性，并在当代世界中找到它的映射，因为在大多数方面，我们今天的城市仍然和过去一样。

THE CITY DEFINED

但首先，我们必须问：什么是“城市”？今天，城市通常是根据人口规模来定义的。大型人口中心被称为“城市”（city），较小的被称为“城镇”（town），最小的则称为“村庄”（village）。然而，我们必须谨慎，不要用当前文化对城市的理解来强加于圣经中的“城市”概念。

圣经中最常见的希伯来语“城市”一词是 ir，其含义是指任何被某种防御工事或城墙围绕的人类聚居地。³ 在古代，大多数城市的人口通常仅在一千至三千人左右，但居民被紧密地集中在城墙内。因此，根据圣经，城市的本质并不在于人口的规模，而在于人口的密度。城市是一种社会形态，在其中，人们在物理空间上彼此紧密相邻地生活。

诗篇 122:3 便提到了这种密度：“耶路撒冷，被建造为一座城，连络整齐。”（和合本修订版）⁵ 在一座设防的城市里，人们居住在狭窄的街道旁，房屋紧密相连。城市生活就是“街道生活”——在所有时间、所有地方都充满了人类的实体存在。事实上，大多数古代城市的面积估计仅为 5 至 10 英亩，每英亩平均居住约 240 人。相比之下，现今纽约市的曼哈顿岛，即便有高楼大厦，每英亩的居民仅为 105 人。尼希米重建耶路撒冷城墙后，城中空房太多，导致耶路撒冷无法真正发挥城市的功能（尼 7:4）。换句话说，当时的耶路撒冷人口密度不足，不能正常运作。因此，尼希米要求全国 10% 的人迁入城中（尼 11:1）。

当城市首次出现时，它们在城墙保护下创造了一种独特的城市生活方式。而正是这种高密度的聚居形态，促成了城市生活的三个显著特征。

有什么区别？

这里所描绘的城市、郊区和城镇的对比是概括性的，在世界许多地方，这些界限并不清晰。例如，纽约市的皇后区（Queens）曾由多个独立的城镇和郊区组成，后来被城市扩张所吞并，因此既具备郊区的特征（如低密度、依赖汽车、独立单户住宅），也具备城市的特征（如多元化、土地用途混合）。这意味着，像纽约法拉盛（Flushing）这样的亚裔人口占多数的地区，虽然在技术上属于纽约市，但它不仅仅是一个普通社区，而需要有属于自己的城市愿景。类似地，许多老欧洲城市的外环地区也呈现这种特征——即典型的“都市化郊区”。

SAFETY AND STABILITY

首先，由于早期城市有城墙，城市意味着更大的安全性，从而带来稳定。城市最重要的功能在于抵御外部威胁，无论是敌军、掠夺者、复仇者，还是野兽。城市的城墙提供了安全保障，使城市生活比城外生活更加稳定，从而推动了人类文明的发展。事实上，“文明”（civilized）一词的字面意思就是“城市化”（citified）。当以色列人征服迦南地时，他们对迦南坚固的城池感到惊讶（申命记 1:28；9:1；约书亚记 14:12），而当他们定居下来时，也为自己建造了城市（民数记 32:16-42）。因此，在圣经中，城市常常被用作信心和安全的象征（箴言 21:22；参见申命记 28:52）。箴言 25:28 甚至说，一个没有自制力的人就像一座没有城墙的城市。城市是人们可以摆脱无序与危险的地方。

正因为这种稳定性，法律和秩序体系首先在城市环境中得以发展。早期城市设有城门，长老们坐在城门口，根据法律裁决案件。在城外，争端往往靠武力解决，这导致血仇、破坏和社会混乱。而城墙和城门的存在，使得人们有必要也有可能建立法律制度，以公正地解决争端，而不是诉诸暴力。神命令以色列人设立“庇护城”，让误杀他人的人可以逃到那里，向长老申诉自己的案件（民数记 35:6）。

对现代读者来说，“城市是安全和稳定之地”这一观念可能并不直观。我们或许能够理解城市在古代是安全的，但如今，人们往往认为城市犯罪率较高。然而，最新研究表明，认为“城市犯罪率必然较高”是一种误解。而且，我们需要扩展“城市作为安全之地”的定义。这一概念至今仍然推动着许多城市的发展和成功，尤其是在混乱地区。例如，现代城市如香港、新加坡和博茨瓦纳的哈博罗内（Gaborone）之所以繁荣，很大程度上是因为它们在动荡地区建立了严格的法治环境，从而吸引了大量经济投资和人才。

此外，城市之所以兴旺，还因为它们成为了弱势群体和个人逃避强权势力的避难所。在圣经时代，被指控犯罪的人可以逃到城市，躲避复仇者，并由城中的长老审理他们的案件（民数记 35 章；申命记 19 章；约书亚记 20 章）。即使在今天，许多因经济困境或政治压迫而不得不离开家园的人，通常也选择迁往城市以寻求更好的生活。在人口密集、生活紧密的城市里，移民群体能够建立“微型城市”，发展自己的机构，帮助新来者融入新国家的社会。不仅仅是移民，许多社会少数群体（如年长的单身人士、种族少数群体）也认为城市是一个更安全的居住地，因为在那里，他们的存在不会显得过于显眼或格格不入。因此，从广义上讲，正是因为大量人群将城市视为安全的居所，城市至今仍然蓬勃发展。

DIVERSITY

其次，圣经对城市的理解还意味着更大的多样性，而这种多样性是高密度和安全性的自然结果。在安提阿的教会中，我们看到来自不同族裔的领袖（使徒行传 13:1）。当福音进入城市时，不同民族群体的融合是自然而然的现象。由于少数群体往往将城市视为安全的居所，城市往往具有种族和文化的多样性。然而，这种多样性不仅体现在人口上，也体现在土地利用方式上。

人类社会需要几个基本要素：

如果把这些元素比作披萨的配料（番茄酱、奶酪、意大利辣香肠、面团），那么城市就像是一块完整的披萨，每个街区都是一片切下来的披萨。城市不仅有住宅，还包括工作场所、商店、书店、学校、艺术馆、音乐厅、礼拜场所、娱乐场所，以及市政厅、法院等公共建筑。这些不同功能的场所相互交织，彼此紧密相连，通常都在步行可达的范围内。

在古代，乡村地区甚至小村庄都无法提供这些要素，只有城市才能支撑起如此全面的社会功能。因此，一些人将城市定义为“可步行的、多功能混合型聚居地”。而在现代，主导性的城市模式——郊区，刻意避开了这种城市形态。郊区通常被规划为大面积的单一用途区，居住、工作、娱乐和学习的场所彼此分隔，只能通过汽车到达，而且通常缺乏适合行人的空间。因此，郊区和乡村虽然也具备“披萨的配料”，但它们的配置方式却不同——番茄在这里，面团在那里，香肠又在另一个地方。

城市提升生产力

在《城市的胜利》（The Triumph of the City）一书中，爱德华·格雷泽（Edward Glaeser）写道：

“公司之所以愿意忍受城市高昂的劳动力和土地成本，是因为城市带来的生产力优势足以抵消这些成本。生活在百万以上人口大都市区的美国人，其生产力平均比生活在较小都市区的美国人高出 50% 以上。即使考虑到教育水平、工作经验和行业类别，这种关系依然成立。即使计算个体工人的智商，这一模式依旧存在……”

历史上，反城市主义者一直对城市持批评态度。例如，圣雄甘地曾说：“真正的印度不在少数几个城市，而是在 70 万个村庄里”，“国家的增长依赖于乡村，而不是城市。”然而，这位伟人错了。印度的经济增长几乎完全依赖于城市。在全球范围内，城市化程度与繁荣程度之间的相关性几乎是完美的。平均而言，当一个国家的城市人口比例提高 10%，该国的人均产出就会增加 30%。在人口主要居住在城市的国家，人均收入几乎是主要居住在乡村国家的四倍。

PRODUCTIVITY AND CREATIVITY

第三，在圣经中，城市是更高生产力和创造力的中心。正如我们将看到的，人类文化——技术、建筑、艺术——随着城市的建立而开始发展（见创世记 4 章、11 章）。城市的街道生活和市场交易使人与人之间的互动和交流远超其他地方。在城市中，同一行业的人聚集在一起的频率更高，这促进了新思想的诞生，并加快了这些思想的传播速度。人才供给越多，生产力就越高，相应的需求也会随之增加。

现代会议的目的便是建立连接——一个人与专业知识、同行、资金和其他资源建立联系的场所。而最有效的方式，正是创造一个“临时城市”！这些联系最终会促成创造力的爆发——形成新的联盟、思想、艺术和社会运动。

因此，自人类历史有记载以来，城市一直是文化高度集中的中心——无论是正面的还是负面的。而真正定义城市的，并不仅仅是人口规模，而是人们之间的紧密接触。爱德华·格雷泽（Edward Glaeser）写道：“城市的本质是消除人与人之间的物理距离。”正是这一点，使城市在所有人类居住形态中独具特色，并拥有强大的影响力。

THE CITY THROUGHOUT THE OLD TESTAMENT

我们已经提到，圣经对城市中的善与恶有着平衡的理解。我们可以称之为圣经对城市的“张力”（tension）。这种张力需要时间才能显现出来，因为城市在整个救赎历史的每个阶段都扮演着重要角色。

随着救赎历史的推进，圣经对城市的描述从最初的负面（强调城市的悖逆）逐渐转向更积极的视角（强调城市的优势、力量和战略重要性）。为了更清楚地说明这一点，我们将深入研究早期圣经历史中的城市。

THE PRIMEVAL CITY

圣经中“城市”（‘îr）一词首次出现于《创世记》4:17。在那里，该隐犯下弑兄之罪后，被逐出耶和华的面前，来到伊甸东边的挪得地（创 4:16）。随后，这位悖逆者建立了一座城市。这使一些人认为《创世记》可能带有某种“反城市的偏见”。但这样的解读忽略了叙事的微妙之处。

首先，城市的建立源于该隐在世界中寻找安全感，并且上帝回应了他的请求（创 4:14-15）。换句话说，从一开始，城市就被视为一个避难所。此外，创世记 4:17-22 将城市的建立与文化创造的起源联系在一起。紧随该隐建立城市之后，我们看到了艺术的首次发展——犹八成为音乐之父（4:21），以及技术的首次发展——土八该隐制造工具（4:22）。建筑、农业、艺术和技术的发展都始于城市的兴起。城市是人类生产力的集中地。

这些文化表达的列举对以色列的古代近东邻邦来说无疑是令人震惊的，因为他们普遍认为科学、文字和艺术等文化进步源自神祇或神话人物。然而，在《创世记》的叙述中，我们看到人类在上帝之下，成为创造世界的一部分，通过文化的发展来参与创造的持续工作。这表明，城市生活并不仅仅是人类被逐出伊甸园后的惩罚。相反，城市本身具备一种内在能力，能够使人类聚集在一起，以促进安全和文化的繁荣。

然而，正如我们在该隐的后裔中所见，这种能力在罪和对上帝的悖逆之下，也可能成为极大的罪恶之源。该隐的后代拉麦的歌表明，该隐的城市居民利用他们的进步来塑造一个充满暴力和死亡的文化（创 4:23-24）。这是城市双重本质的第一个明显例证：它既具有极大的善——可以创造艺术、科学和技术等文化成就，同时也能被用来制造极大的罪恶。

亨利·布洛舍（Henri Blocher）指出，艺术和工程的进步源于该隐的城市并非巧合，但他警告不要得出错误的结论：

“毫无疑问，在《创世记》4章中，艺术和工程的进步来自该隐的‘城市’。然而，我们不能因此得出‘文明本身就是罪的产物’的结论。这样的推论将使我们陷入摩尼教或让-雅克·卢梭的观点……圣经既不谴责城市（因为圣经最终以‘上帝之城’的异象作结），也不谴责艺术和工程。”

布洛舍的观点可能是在回应一些学者，例如基哈杜斯·沃斯（Geerhardus Vos）。沃斯在他的《圣经神学》（Biblical Theology）中指出“城市的问题”，并断言：“城市在积累文化能量的同时，也积累了罪恶的潜能（摩 3:9；弥 1:5）。”有时，这些文化创造的中心可以被建立来荣耀上帝的名（林前 10:31），因此成为侍奉上帝和邻舍的方式（例如，《出埃及记》31:3-5 中的比撒列）；但也可能是为了“给自己立名”（创 11:4），从而形成以人类骄傲、自我拯救、暴力和压迫为特征的文化（创 4:17-24）。沃斯补充说，使人类城市堕落的并不是人口的密集度（事实上，这正是城市成为“文化能量积累者”的原因），而是“其对上帝的叛逆性自我依赖的精神。”

一匹马比一只老鼠更有价值，但一匹疯狂的马能造成的破坏远超过一只疯狂的老鼠。同样，城市的优势在罪的掌控下可能释放出更具破坏性的邪恶。随着《创世记》的叙事展开，我们看到城市的巨大潜能与它对腐败和偶像崇拜的深刻倾向之间的战争。

在《创世记》的大部分篇幅中，城市都被描绘为负面的。城市被提及时，与受咒诅的含有关联（创 10:12）。接下来，城市在《创世记》11:4 中再次被重点提及，当时住在示拿平原（创 11:2）的人们聚集在一起建造一座城市。示拿的命名具有重要意义，因为它与巴比伦有着密切联系（见创 10:10；赛 11:11；但 1:2）。正是在这座城市里，人们联合起来，并彼此说：“来吧，我们要作砖，把砖烧透。”《创世记》的作者随即记录道：

他们用砖块代替石头，用沥青当作灰泥 (再次强调，城市被描绘为技术成就的象征)。然后他们说：“来吧，我们要为自己建造一座城和一座通天的塔，好让我们为自己立名，免得我们分散在全地上。”

但耶和华降临，要看看世人所建造的城和塔。（创世记 11:3-5，强调为我所加）

HISTORY OR MYTH?

犹太学者纳胡姆·萨尔纳（Nahum Sarna）指出：

《创世记》4:17-22 的名单实际上是对古代世界神话观念的一种无声的辩驳。在古代神话中，文化的进步被归因于神祇或半神半人的人物。例如，美索不达米亚的传统中，有七位 Apkallu（神话中的贤者），他们是半鱼半人，从海中升起，向人类传授科学、社会制度、书写和艺术……在埃及，神祇托特（Thot）发明了秤和天平；奥西里斯（Osiris）教导人类农业和生活艺术；普塔（Ptah）则是艺术家、工匠和文人的守护神。在乌加里特-腓尼基文化中，神祇 Koshar 被认为是神圣的工匠和铁匠，他发现了铁的用途，并发明了渔具。在希腊世界中，雅典娜（Athena）发明了犁和耙，并教授人类实用与优雅的艺术，而阿波罗（Apollo）建立了城镇，并发明了长笛和七弦琴。

这种现象被称为“欧赫墨主义”（euhemerism），即对人类恩人的神化，在古代世界中十分普遍。然而，在《创世记》4:17-22 中，这种观念被默默否定了。人类文化的发展被去神化并历史化……人类成为上帝在创造世界过程中的合作者。同时，叙述者将技术和城市生活的起源归于该隐及其后裔，这对人类物质进步的评判至少是有所保留的，甚至是带有否定性的。它承认了人类的技术进步往往超越了道德进步，并且人类的才智——尽管潜在地具有巨大的益处——却经常被引向邪恶的方向。

该隐一脉的精神在巴别塔的建造中达到顶点。这座新城及其高塔的设计，旨在帮助居民获得一种独立于上帝之外的身份认同。在这里，我们看到了城市如何放大人类追求自我荣耀和自我拯救的罪性驱动力。人们为自己的荣耀而齐心协力的努力引起了上帝的注意。上帝的回应是混乱他们的语言，使他们“从那里分散到全地”，以免他们的计划成功。最终，上帝的审判导致他们“停止建造那城”（第 8 节）。

THE PATRIARCHS AND THE CITY

创世记的其余部分继续突显城市的阴暗面——尤其是臭名昭著的所多玛和蛾摩拉。同样，上帝“降下”审判所多玛（创世记 18:21），就像他对巴别的审判一样。巴别，后来在圣经中被称为巴比伦，成为反抗上帝的城市文化的原型（参见以赛亚书 13:19）。所多玛的故事处于一个漫长的时期，在这个时期里，我们看到城市居民反对上帝，而上帝的子民依然是乡村的游牧民。上帝呼召亚伯兰离开古代的伟大城市之一——吾珥，终其一生都做牧羊人。创世记向我们展示了亚伯兰的侄子罗得在选择城市生活时犯下的重大错误。虽然他在所多玛是一个义人，并且因那里的罪恶生活而感到痛苦，但他妻子和女儿的行为表明，罗得选择住在没有信仰群体的城市，最终导致了他家庭的属灵灾难。

然而，我们后来了解到，亚伯拉罕拒绝进入他所处时代和地方的城市，源于他对上帝城市的渴望：“亚伯拉罕因信……住在帐篷里……因为他期待那座有根基的城，那城的建筑师和创造者是上帝”（希伯来书 11:8-10）。如果城市作为一种社会形式本质上对人类或我们的信仰是有害的，那么将其理想化为亚伯拉罕持久希望的源泉就没有意义。服务于人类自我膨胀的城市可能会破坏并摧毁上帝所创造的世界，并挑战他对世界的主权。但正如我们将看到的那样，作为上帝的仆人，城市的形式实际上实现了上帝对人类生活的旨意。

ISRAEL AND THE CITY

随着以色列在应许之地的建立，圣经中对城市的描绘变得更加积极。当上帝将以色列人安置在迦南时，他命令他们建立逃城：“你们要选择……你们的逃城，使误杀人的可以逃到那里。这些城将是逃避报仇者的避难所，使被控杀人者在上公会受审之前不得死”（民数记 35:11-12）。为什么上帝命令建立城市？拥有城墙和聚集人口的城市能够保护被控告的人，并以一种乡村和农村地区无法做到的方式进行审判。如果没有城市，一起犯罪或事故可能导致无休止的暴力和报复循环。城市的安全性和密度使得基于法治的司法制度得以发展。在那里，长老们可以平安地听取并解决案件（申命记 19:11-12）。上帝命令以色列建立城市，以实现公正。

但是，城市在救赎历史中的角色发生的最大变化出现在耶路撒冷的建立。与巴别不同，巴别的建立是“为了我们自己建立名字”（创世记 11:4），耶路撒冷成为了上帝名字的居所（列王纪上 14:21）。这一切开始于大卫攻占耶路撒冷（撒母耳记下 5章），约柜被带到城市（撒母耳记下 6章），最终所罗门在此建造了圣殿。耶路撒冷被指定为见证列国的城市，是未来上帝之城的象征（撒母耳记下 7:8-16）。上帝指示圣殿建造在锡安山，即城市中的一个高地，使它在城市上空如同“摩天大楼”一样矗立。上帝的城市不同于人类的城市（如巴别），后者的摩天大楼是为了建造者自己的繁荣和显赫而设计的。相反，上帝的城市是“全地的喜乐”（诗篇 48:2）。这座城市的文化财富不是为了劳作者的荣耀，而是为了整个地球的喜乐和上帝的荣耀。上帝计划中的城市社会是基于服务，而不是自私。

THE PROPHETS AND THE CITY

从大卫时代开始，先知们将上帝未来的世界描绘为一个城市社会。圣经学者J·阿莱克·莫提尔（J. Alec Motyer）写道：“以赛亚的文献可以准确地被描述为‘城市的书’。”他指出，在以赛亚书中，耶路撒冷、锡安、山/山脉和城市是可以互换使用的术语，显示了城市在神的思想和计划中的中心地位。此时，历史上属灵征战的战线 (the spiritual battle lines of history) 变得清晰。历史上伟大的精神冲突不是城市居民与乡村居民之间的对立，而是真正的“两个城市的故事”。这是一场关于巴比伦（代表世俗城市）与耶路撒冷（代表上帝之城）之间的斗争。世俗的城市是没有上帝的结构化人类生活的隐喻，是为自我拯救、自我服务和自我荣耀而创造的。它描绘了一个剥削和不公的场景。但上帝的城市是一个以他荣耀和为上帝及邻人牺牲服务为基础的社会。这个城市提供了一个和平与公义的场景。正如圣奥古斯丁所说：“谦卑的城市是圣人和善良天使的社会；骄傲的城市是邪恶人和恶魔天使的社会。一个城市从爱上帝开始；另一个城市从爱自我开始。”约翰在他的启示录（启示录 22:19）中通过警告那些删减“这预言书”中的话语的人，指出上帝将从他们那里夺走他们在“生命树和圣城”的份额（kai ek tes poleos tes hagias，重点为我所加）。在整个启示录中，约翰持续对比“伟大的城市”巴比伦与上帝之城或耶路撒冷。前者接受上帝的末世审判，而后者接受（并传递）末世的祝福和拯救。

THE CITY OF EXILE

当我们进入约拿书时，我们来到了城市在圣经神学展开中的一个新阶段。在以色列的历史中，先知们被兴起并被派去向上帝的子民传讲，呼召他们悔改和更新。但约拿被赋予了一个独特的使命。第一次，一位先知被派去向一个外邦的异教城市——尼尼微传讲。约拿的反应首先是在约拿书1-2章中逃避这座城市。在第3章中，在他与大鱼的著名遭遇之后，约拿确实去向尼尼微传讲——并且人民回应悔改。上帝没有摧毁这座城市，正如他曾警告的那样。这种反应使约拿极其不满，在约拿书4:10-11中，上帝斥责约拿没有对失落的尼尼微人民心生怜悯。听听上帝的辩解：

“耶和华说，你为那棵你没有劳作、没有使它生长的植物，心生怜悯，它一夜长起，又一夜枯萎。我岂不应该怜悯尼尼微这座大城，在这城里有超过十二万不辨左右手的人，还有许多的牲畜吗？”（约拿书4:10-11，NASB）

在这里，上帝通过城市中居住的人的数量来为城市的重要性辩护。他在说：“你怎么能看着这么多失落的人，却没有在心中产生怜悯呢？”这是今天城市如此重要的一个关键原因。我们可以称之为对城市的直觉性辩护。上帝“对他所造的一切都有怜悯”（诗篇145:9）。但在他所造的一切中，人类在他心中占据着特殊的地位，因为人类是照着他的形象造的（创世纪9:6；雅各书3:9）。城市，从字面上来说，每平方英寸拥有的上帝的形象比地球上的任何其他地方都要多。如果我们关心上帝关心的事情，怎么可能不被这些庞大的人群所吸引呢？

为什么上帝派一位以色列先知去一个异教城市？一些人认为，这是为了为犹太人历史的下一个阶段——流放时期——做准备，在那个时期，他们将不再住在耶路撒冷，而是字面上住在巴别——在巴比伦。耶路撒冷的重要性显而易见；它将是“全地的喜乐”（诗篇48:2），是一个示范城市社会，向世界展示在上帝的主权下，人的生活该是什么样。但当以色列人去住在一个邪恶、异教、嗜血的城市（见耶利米书28-29章）时会发生什么呢？上帝的子民现在如何与地球上的伟大人类城市建立关系呢？

THE CITY IN THE OLD TESTAMENT

关于这个话题的一些基本参考资料包括：

巴比伦帝国战略的一个重要部分是消除其征服民族的精神身份。被打败的国家的专业和精英阶层通常会被带到巴比伦生活，然后才被允许返回家园。犹大曾被流放，部分原因是希望以色列人的子孙能够同化，并失去作为一个独特民族的身份。假先知哈拿尼雅无法想象以色列人在巴比伦的长期生活，虚假地预言上帝将在两年内将以色列带回耶路撒冷（耶28:3-4）。如果流放者听从哈拿尼雅的建议，他们将会在巴比伦保持疏远，等待上帝即将来临的拯救。

然而，上帝通过先知耶利米反驳了巴比伦的策略和假先知的建议。一方面，上帝告诉他的子民“在那里要生养众多，不要减少”（耶29:6），以保持他们独特的社区身份并得以增长，但他也告诉他们要安定下来并参与这座大城市的生活。他们要建造房屋，种植园子（第5节）。最引人注目的是，上帝呼召他们为这座城市服务——“寻求这座城的平安与繁荣”，并“为它祈求耶和华”（第7节）。虽然住在巴比伦，他们不只是要在城市中的贫民区增加自己的族群，而是要用他们的资源为公共利益服务。

这是一个相当微妙的平衡！从创世纪11章一直到启示录，巴比伦被视为建立在自私、骄傲和暴力基础上的文明的典范，是真正的人类之城。这个城市的价值观与上帝之城的价值观截然相反；然而，在这里，上帝之城的公民被呼召成为这座人类城市的最好居民。上帝命令犹太流放者不要攻击、轻视或逃避这座城市——而是要寻求它的平安，爱这座城市，随着他们人数的增长。

上帝仍然主要关注他的救赎计划。他必须建立他的子民；福音必须被宣扬；人类必须与他和好。然而，他向他的子民保证，为这座异教城市谋福祉是这一计划的一部分：“如果它兴旺，你们也必兴旺”（耶29:7）。爱与服务这座城市不仅显示出爱与怜悯；这样做也加强了上帝子民的力量，他们带着福音的信息向世界传扬。因为流放中的犹太人遵守了这一命令，他们积累了必要的影响力和杠杆，最终得以回到并恢复他们的故土。可以说，上帝将他子民的命运与他们城市事工的有效性联系在一起。

遗憾的是，地球上从未有过一个没有被人类罪恶和腐化所浸透的城市。事实上，借用伍迪·艾伦的笑话，城市就像其他地方一样，只是更为显著。它们既更好又更坏，既更容易又更难以生活，既更鼓舞人心又更压抑，比其他地方更加复杂。随着救赎历史的展开，我们开始看到城市的张力将如何得到解决。上帝的子民与异教城市之间关系的转变，成为了上帝祝福万国、拯救世界计划的一个关键方面。在新约中，我们看到城市在早期教会的快速增长和传播上帝救恩信息的过程中扮演了重要角色。

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION AND REFLECTION

  1. 你如何描述自己对城市的态度？是漠不关心？敌视？理想化？积极的？这一章如何挑战了你对城市的态度？如果我们关心与上帝相同的事情，如何能不被如此众多的人类吸引？人们回避城市事工的原因有哪些？他们为什么会被城市事工吸引？
  2. 城市是安全、多样化和富有生产力的地方。这些特征如何独特地定义城市文化？
  3. 凯勒写道：“城市从字面上来说，比地球上任何其他地方每平方英寸都更能体现上帝的形象。”如果我们关心与上帝关心的事情，如何能不被如此众多的人类吸引呢？
  4. 你和你所属的信徒社区可以如何为“寻求城市的平安与繁荣”而努力？在你的环境中，这是什么样子的？

Many Christians today, especially in the United States, are indifferent or even hostile toward cities. Some think of them as a negative force that undermines belief and morality, while others see them as inconsequential to Christian mission and living. It may also be true that some young Christians are adopting a romanticized view of the city.¹ But the attitude of the biblical authors is quite different. The biblical view of cities is neither hostile nor romantic. Because the city is humanity intensified — a magnifying glass that brings out the very best and worst of human nature — it has a dual nature.2

This is why the Bible depicts cities as places of perversion and violence and also as places of refuge and peace. Genesis 4 and 11 depict city builders as those in the line of Cain (the first murderer). Genesis also depicts the evil of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. Yet Psalm 107 speaks of a group of wandering people “finding no way to a city where they could settle… and their lives ebbed away. Then they cried out to the Lord… He led them by a straight way to a city where they could settle. Let them give thanks to the Lord” (vv. 4–8). The psalmist depicts life for people without a city as a bad thing.

The assumption behind this psalm is that the city is a place where human life thrives — it is a positive social form. The depiction of the city in the Bible is therefore finely nuanced. It highlights how the capacities of this positive social form can be realized for God’s glory yet also demonstrates how it can be a vehicle for enhancing human rebellion against God. And as we will see in chapter 12, the city plays a pivotal role in the arc of redemptive history.

In this chapter I want to look at this tension between the city’s God-exalting promise and its man-exalting shadow. We will find this dual nature played out in the pages of Scripture and mirrored in our contemporary world, for in most ways our cities are still today as they have always been.

THE CITY DEFINED

But first we must ask: What do we mean by a city? Today, a city is usually defined in terms of population size. Large population centers are called “cities,” smaller ones “towns,” and the smallest “villages.” We must be careful, however, not to impose our current cultural understanding of city onto the biblical term. The most common Hebrew word for city, ir, meant any human settlement surrounded by some fortification or wall.3 Most ancient cities numbered only about one thousand to three thousand in population but the residents were tightly packed within the city wall. Therefore, according to the Bible, the essence of a city was not the population’s size but its density. A city is a social form in which people physically live in close proximity to one another.

Psalm 122:3 refers to this density: “Jerusalem, built as a city should be, closely compact.”5 In a fortified city, the people lived close to one another in small residences on narrow streets. City life was street life — physical human presence at all times and in all places. In fact, most ancient cities were estimated to be five to ten acres in size, containing an average of 240 residents per acre. By comparison, the island of Manhattan in present-day New York City houses only 105 residents per acre — with high-rises! After Nehemiah rebuilt Jerusalem’s city wall, there were far too many vacant homes for Jerusalem to flourish as a city (Neh 7:4). In other words, the city wasn’t densely populated enough to function as a city should. So 10 percent of the nation was commanded to move into the city to fill it (Neh 11:1). When cities first arose, they created a distinct kind of human life within their walled, protected space. Out of this dense proximity flowed three signal features that mark urban human life.

WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE?

The contrasts drawn here between city, suburb, and town are generalized, and in many places in the world the distinctions are blurred. For example, the New York City borough of Queens consists of many formerly independent towns and suburbs that became engulfed by urban growth and so share some characteristics of both suburbs (e.g., low density, reliance on the automobile, detached single-family housing) and cities (e.g., diversity, mixed land use). This means that places like the strongly Asian-populated town of Flushing, New York (technically part of New York City) are more than simple neighborhoods and need a city vision of their own. The outer rings of many of the older European cities are much like this — with distinctly “urban suburbs.”

SAFETY AND STABILITY

First, because early cities had walls, a city meant greater safety and therefore stability. Cities’ primary importance lay in their resistance to hostile forces, whether opposing armies, marauders, blood feud avengers, or wild animals. The walled safety of a city allowed for a far more stable life than was possible outside the city, and this led to the growth of human civilization. Civilized literally means “citified.” When the Israelites were conquering Canaan, they were amazed at the strength of its fortified cities (Deut 1:28; 9:1; Josh 14:12), and as they settled the land, they built cities for themselves (Num 32:16-42). It should not surprise us that in the Bible the city is used as a metaphor for confidence (Prov 21:22; cf. Deut 28:52). Proverbs 25:28 tells us that a man without self-control is like a city without a wall. Cities were places where life was not dangerously out of control.

Because of this stability, systems of law and order were able to develop first in urban settings. Early cities had gates where the elders sat and decided cases according to the rule of law. Outside the gates, disputes were settled by the sword, which led to blood feuds, destruction, and social disorder. The wall and the gate made it both necessary and possible to develop systems of jurisprudence so matters could be settled fairly, without violence. God commanded the Israelites to build “cities of refuge” to which individuals who killed someone accidentally could flee and plead their case (Num 35:6).

The idea of the city as a place of safety and stability does not immediately strike modern readers as intuitive. We may accept that cities were safe places in earlier times, but today we think of cities as places of high crime. The latest studies indicate that this concept — that higher crime is inevitable in cities — is a mistake. And we must broaden our definition of “the city as safe space.” This concept continues to drive the growth and success of many cities in chaotic parts of the world. Even modern-day cities such as Hong Kong, Singapore, and Gaborone (in Botswana) have thrived because they have established themselves as bastions of the rule of law in disorderly parts of the world, thereby attracting a disproportionate amount of economic investment and human talent.

But another way in which most cities thrive is that they have become places of refuge to which minority groups and individuals can flee from powerful interests. In Bible times, accused criminals could flee blood avengers, seek refuge in the city, and have their case heard by the city elders (Num 35; Deut 19; Josh 20). Even today, economically pressed or politically oppressed people who need to move out of their homeland to achieve a better life usually emigrate to cities. It is in these places of density and proximity that immigrant groups can create “mini-cities” with their own institutions that enable newcomers to enter and learn the ways of the new country. And it’s not just immigrants who feel cities are safe places to live. All demographic minorities (e.g., older single people, racial minorities) feel less conspicuous and odd in cities where more of the people in their group live. Cities, then, continue to thrive today because significant numbers of people perceive them to be safe places to live-in the broadest sense of the term.

DIVERSITY

Second, the biblical understanding of a city also implies greater diversity, which is a natural result of density and safety. In the church in Antioch, we see leaders from different ethnic groups (Acts 13:1) — a natural occurrence when the gospel goes forth in cities, in which many different people groups reside. Because minorities find them to be safe places to live, cities tend to become racially and culturally diverse. And this is not the full extent of their diversity. Cities are marked by diversity not just of population but of land use as well.

Human society requires several elements:

If you think of these elements as components of a pizza (tomato sauce, cheese, pepperoni, dough), the city is a place where every neighborhood is a slice of pizza. Along with residences, it has places to work, shop, read, learn, enjoy art and music, worship, and play, as well as public government buildings such as town halls and courts. All are mixed and compacted together within walking distance. In ancient times, rural areas and even villages could not provide all these elements; only cities could sustain them all. This is why some define a city as a “walkable, mixed-use settlement.” And in modern times, the dominant arrangement - the suburb — deliberately avoids this urban pattern. Suburbs are normally dedicated to large, single-use zones - so places to live, work, play, and learn are separated from one another and are reachable only by car, usually through pedestrian-hostile zones. Suburbs and rural areas have the pizza ingredients, but not in pizza form. It is tomatoes here, dough there, and pepperoni over there. 10

CITIES INCREASE PRODUCTIVITY

In his book The Triumph of the City, Edward Glaeser writes the following:

The only reason why companies put up with the high labor and land costs of being in a city is that the city creates productivity advantages that offset those costs. Americans who live in metropolitan areas with more than a million residents are, on average, more than 50 percent more productive than Americans who live in smaller metropolitan areas. These relationships are the same even when we take into account the education, experience, and industry of workers. They’re even the same if we take individual workers’ IQs into account…

Echoing antiurbanites throughout the ages, Mahatma Gandhi said that “the true India is to be found not in its few cities, but in its 700,000 villages” and “the growth of the nation depends not on cities, but [on] its villages.” The great man was wrong. India’s growth depends almost entirely on its cities. There is a near-perfect correlation between urbanization and prosperity across nations. On average, as the share of a country’s population that is urban rises by 10 percent, the country’s per capita output increases by 30 percent. Per capita incomes are almost four times higher in those countries where a majority live in cities than in those countries where a majority of people live in rural areas.2

PRODUCTIVITY AND CREATIVITY

Third, in the Bible, cities were places of greater productivity and creativity. As we will see below, human culture — technology, architecture, the arts - began to develop as cities were built (see Gen 4; 11). The city features street life and marketplaces, bringing about more person-to-person interactions and exchanges in a day than are possible anywhere else. The more often people of the same profession come together, the more they stimulate new ideas and the faster these new ideas spread. The greater the supply of talent, the greater the productivity of that talent, and the demand for it follows. As a testimony to this fact, the purpose of modern conventions is connection — a place where people connect with expertise, peers, money, and other resources - and the best way to facilitate these connections is to create a temporary city! All the connections lead in the end to creativity — new alliances, ideas, art, and movements.

So ever since the beginning of recorded history, cities have been the centers of cultural intensity — for better or for worse. And what makes a city a city is not so much population size but proximity. Edward Glaeser writes, “Cities are the absence of physical space between people.”11 This is what gives the city its distinctiveness and potency among all other human living arrangements.

THE CITY THROUGHOUT THE OLD TESTAMENT

We have said the Bible has a balanced understanding of how both good and evil operate in a city. We will call this the “tension” of the biblical view of the city. The tension takes time to come into focus, as the city plays a definite role at every stage in the history of salvation. As redemptive history progresses, the Bible moves from a largely negative view of the city (emphasizing the city’s rebellion) to a more positive one (emphasizing the city’s strengths, power, and strategic importance). To illustrate, we turn to a detailed study of the city in early biblical history.

THE PRIMEVAL CITY

The first occurrence of the word city (‘îr) in the Bible is in Genesis 4:17, where Cain, after committing fratricide and being sent away from the presence of the Lord, settles east of Eden in the land of Nod (Gen 4:16). Cain, the rebel, then builds a city.12 This has led some to see “a possible reflection of the antiurban bias in Genesis.”13 But this association misses the subtleties of the narrative. First, the founding of the city comes as the result of Cain’s search for security in the world and of God’s granting his request (Gen 4:14–15). In other words, the city is seen as a refuge, even from the very beginning. In addition, Genesis 4:17-22 links the founding of the city with the beginnings of the creation of culture. Immediately after Cain establishes city life, we see the first development of the arts in the musicianship of Jubal (v. 21) and of technology in the tool making of Tubal-Cain (v. 22). Architecture, agriculture, the arts, and technology all begin when cities begin. Cities are places of human productivity.

This list of cultural expressions would have been shocking to Israel’s ancient Near Eastern neighbors who believed that cultural advances like the sciences, writing, and the arts were the product of divine or mythological characters. The historical, human nature of their origins runs counter to the prevailing cultural view of the ancient Near East. In the Genesis narrative, we see man becoming a contributor under God in the ongoing work of creation, through the development of culture. We learn that city life is not to be seen as simply a punishment for humanity after the banishment from the garden. Rather the city has inherent capacities for bringing human beings together in such a way that enhances both security and culture making.

However, as can be seen in the line of Cain, these capacities, under the influence of sin and rebellion against God, can be generators of great evil. The song of Lamech, Cain’s descendant, shows the Cainite city dwellers using all their advances to form a culture of death (Gen 4:23 - 24). Here is the first clear indicator of the dual nature of the city. Its capability for enormous good - 1 — for the culture-making creation of art, science, and technology — can be used to produce tremendous evil. Henri Blocher does not consider it a coincidence that the first mention of anti-God culture making is tied to the first instance of city building, but he warns against drawing the wrong conclusion:

It is no doubt significant that [in Genesis 4] progress in arts and in engineering comes from the “city” of the Cainites. Nevertheless, we are not to conclude from this that civilization as such is… the fruit of sin. Such a conclusion would lead us to Manichaeism or to the views of Jean-Jacques Rousseau… The Bible condemns neither the city (for it concludes with the vision of the City of God) nor art and engineering.14

Blocher may be responding to writers such as Geerhardus Vos, who in his Biblical Theology points to “the problem of the city” and asserts that “the city, while an accumulator of the energies of culture, is also an accumulator of potencies of evil (Amos 3:9; Micah 1:5).”15 Sometimes these seats of culture making can be established to bring glory to God’s name (1 Cor 10:31) and therefore be a means of serving God and neighbor (e.g., Bezalel in Exod 31:3-5), or they can be erected to “make a name for ourselves” (Gen 11:4), resulting in a culture of human pride, self-salvation, violence, and oppression (Gen 4:17-24). Vos adds that what makes the human city fallen is not its density of population (indeed, this is what makes it an “accumulator of the energies of culture”), but its “spirit of rebellious self-dependence over against God.”16 A horse is a more valuable animal than a mouse, yet a crazed horse is capable of far more damage than a crazed mouse; so too a city’s strengths under sin can unleash more destructive evil. As the Genesis narrative unfolds, we see that warring with the city’s great potential is a profound bent toward corruption and idolatry.

For most of the rest of Genesis, the city is seen in a negative light. The city is mentioned in connection with the accursed Ham (Gen 10:12). The next substantive appearance is in Genesis 11:4 when the people dwelling in the plain of Shinar (11:2) gather together to build a city. The naming of Shinar is significant because of its associations with Babylon (see Gen 10:10; Isa 11:11; Dan 1:2). It is in this city that the people gather as one and say to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” The writer of Genesis states:

HISTORY OR MYTH?

Jewish scholar Nahum Sarna states:
The list [in Gen 4:17 - 22] constitutes a silent polemic against the mythological concepts of the ancient world, which attributed the advance of culture to divine or semidivine figures. Mesopotamian tradition knew of the seven Apkallu, or mythical sages, half-fish and half-man, who rose out of the sea to reveal to man the sciences, the social system, writing, and art… For Egyptians, it was the god Thot who invented the scales and the balances; Osiris who taught humans agriculture and the arts of life; and Ptah who was the special patron of artists, artificers, and men of letters. In the Ugaritic-Phoenician area, the god Koshar, the divine artisan and smith, was credited with the discovery of the use of iron and the fishing tackle. In the Greek sphere, it was Athena who invented the plough and the rake and who taught both the useful and the elegant arts, while Apollo founded towns and invented the flute and the lyre.

This phenomenon, known as euhemerism or the divinization of the benefactors of humanity, was common to the ancient world. In [Gen 4:17-22] it is tacitly rejected. The development of human culture is demythologized and historicized… Man became a copartner with God in the world of creation. At the same time, the ascription of the origins of technology and urban life to Cain and his line constitute an unfavorable, or at least a qualified, judgment of man’s material progress on the part of the Narrator, a recognition that it frequently outruns moral progress and that human ingenuity, so potentially beneficial, is often directed toward evil ends.17

They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar [again, the city is depicted as the place of technological achievement]. Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves and not be scattered over the face of the whole earth.”

But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower that the men were building. (Genesis 11:3-5, emphasis mine)

The spirit of the line of Cain reaches its climax in this effort to build the city of Babel. The new city and its tower are designed to help residents gain an identity apart from service to God. Here we see the essence of how cities can magnify our sinful drive for self-glorification and self-salvation. The efforts of the people working together for their own glory attract the notice of God, who reacts by confusing their language and scattering them “from there over all the earth,” lest they succeed in their plans. The result of God’s judgment was that they “stopped building the city” (v. 8).

THE PATRIARCHS AND THE CITY

The rest of Genesis continues to highlight the dark side of the city — particularly the infamous Sodom and Gomorrah. Again, God “goes down” to judge Sodom (Gen 18:21), just as he did with Babel. Babel, later called Babylon in the Bible, comes to serve as the archetype for urban culture arrayed against God (see Isa 13:19). The Sodom narrative stands in the midst of a long period in which we see city dwellers opposed to God, while God’s people remain rural nomads. God called Abram to leave Ur, one of the great cities of the day, and remain a shepherd all his life. Genesis shows us that Abram’s nephew Lot made a grave mistake in choosing urban life. While he remained a righteous man within Sodom and was distressed by the sinful lifestyle there, the behavior of his wife and daughters showed that Lot’s decision to live in a city without a believing community led to spiritual disaster for his family.18

Nevertheless, we later learn that Abraham’s refusal to enter the cities of his time and place lay in his longing for God’s city: “By faith Abraham… lived in tents… For he was looking forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God” (Heb 11:8-10). If the city as a social form is intrinsically bad for human beings or for our faith, it wouldn’t make sense for it to be idealized as the source of Abraham’s sustaining hope. Cities in the service of human self-aggrandizement may work to unravel and destroy the world God made and to contest his lordship over it. But as we will see, the city form, in service to God, actually fulfills the will of God for human life.

ISRAEL AND THE CITY

With the establishment of Israel in the Promised Land, the biblical depiction of cities becomes more positive. When God settled the Israelites in Canaan, he commanded them to build cities of refuge: “Select… your cities of refuge, to which a person who has killed someone accidentally may flee. They will be places of refuge from the avenger, so that a person accused of murder may not die before he stands trial before the assembly” (Num 35:11-12). Why did God command the building of cities? Cities with walls and a gathered population could protect an accused person and conduct a trial in a way that villages and rural areas could not. Without cities, a crime or accident could lead to an endless cycle of violence and reprisals. The safety and density of cities enabled a system of jurisprudence to develop around the rule of law. There the elders could hear and settle cases in peace (Deut 19:11-12). God commands the establishment of cities in Israel to establish justice.

But the biggest change in the city’s role within redemptive history comes with the establishment of Jerusalem. Unlike Babel, established “to make a name for ourselves” (Gen 11:4), Jerusalem becomes the city that is the dwelling place for God’s Name (1 Kgs 14:21). This begins when Jerusalem is captured by David (2 Sam 5), the ark of the covenant is brought to the city (2 Sam 6), and finally the temple is built by Solomon. Jerusalem is appointed to be an urban culture that is a witness to the nations and a symbol of the future City of God (2 Sam 7:8–16). God directs that the temple be built on Zion, an elevated location within the city, so it rises above the city as its “skyscraper.” God’s city is different from human cities (like Babel) where skyscrapers are designed for their builders’ own prosperity and prominence. By contrast, God’s city is “the joy of the whole earth” (Ps 48:2). The city’s cultural riches are produced, not for the glory of the producers, but for the joy of the entire earth and the honor of God. The urban society in God’s plan is based on service, not on selfishness.

THE PROPHETS AND THE CITY

From the time of David onward, the prophets speak of God’s future world as an urban society. Bible scholar J. Alec Motyer writes, “The Isaianic literature could be accurately described as ‘the book of the city.’ “19 He notes that in Isaiah, Jerusalem, Zion, mount/mountain, and city are interchangeable terms showing the city’s centrality in the divine thought and plan.20 At this point the spiritual battle lines of history become clear. The great spiritual conflict of history is not between city dwellers and country dwellers but is truly “a tale of two cities.” It is a struggle between Babylon, representing the city of and Jerusalem, representing the city of God.21 The earthly city is a metaphor for human life structured without God, created for self-salvation, self-service, and self-glorification. It portrays a scene of exploitation and injustice. But God’s city is a society based on his glory and on sacrificial service to God and neighbor. This city offers a scene of peace and righteousness. As Saint Augustine put it, “The humble City is the society of holy men and good angels; the proud city is the society of wicked men and evil angels. The one City began with the love of God; the other had its beginnings in the love of self.”22 man, John concludes his Apocalypse (Rev 22:19) by warning those who take words away (aphele) from “this book of prophecy” that God will take away (aphelei) from them their “share in the tree of life and in the holy city” (kai ek tes poleos tes hagias, emphasis mine). Throughout Revelation, John draws a consistent contrast between “the great city,” Babylon,23 and the city of God, or Jerusalem.24 The former receives the eschatological judgment of God, while the latter receives (and mediates) eschatological blessing and salvation.25

THE CITY OF EXILE

When we get to the book of Jonah, we come to a new phase in the unfolding biblical theology of the city. Throughout Israel’s history, prophets are raised up and sent to preach to God’s people, to call them to repentance and renewal. But Jonah is given a unique mission. For the first time, a prophet is sent to preach to a pagan, foreign city — Nineveh. Jonah’s response is first (in Jonah 1-2) to run away from the city. In chapter 3, after his famous encounter with the great fish, Jonah does preach to Nineveh — and the people respond in repentance. God does not destroy the city as he had warned he would. This response displeases Jonah greatly, and in Jonah 4:10-11, God scolds Jonah for his lack of compassion for the lost people of Nineveh. Listen to God’s argument:

Then the LORD said, “You had compassion on the plant for which you did not work and which you did not cause to grow, which came up overnight and perished overnight. Should I not have compassion on Nineveh, the great city in which there are more than 120,000 persons who do not know the difference between their right and left hand, as well as many animals?” (Jonah 4:10-11 NASB)

Here God makes a case for the importance of the city from the sheer number of the human beings in residence. He is saying, “How can you look at so many lost people and not find compassion in your heart?” This is a critical reason that the city is so important today. We might call it the visceral argument for the city. God “has compassion on all he has made” (Ps 145:9). But of all the things he has made, human beings have pride of place in his heart, because they were made in his image (Gen 9:6; James 3:9). Cities, quite literally, have more of the image of God per square inch than any other place on earth. How can we not be drawn to such masses of humanity if we care about the same things that God cares about?

Why did God send an Israelite prophet to a pagan city? Some have argued that this is intended to prepare the Jews for the next stage of their own history-the period of exile - in which they will be residing not in Jerusalem but literally in Babel—in Babylon. The importance of Jerusalem had been obvious; it was to be “the joy of the whole earth” (Ps 48:2), a model urban society demonstrating to the world what human life under God’s lordship could be. But what happens when Israel goes to live in a wicked, pagan, bloodthirsty city in Jeremiah 28-29? How will the people of God relate to the great human cities of the earth now?

THE CITY IN THE OLD TESTAMENT

Some basic sources that cover this topic include the following:
Boice, James Montgomery. Two Cities, Two Loves. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1996.
Conn, Harvie, “Christ and the City: Biblical Themes for Building Urban Theology Models.” Pages 222 - 86 in Discipling the City: Theological Reflections on Urban Mission. Roger Greenway, ed. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979.
Conn, Harvie M., and Manuel Ortiz. Urban Ministry: The Kingdom, the City, and the People of God. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 2001.
Kline, Meredith G. “Eschatological Sanctions” and “Prophetic Cult in the City of Man.” Pages 100 - 17 and 165-70 in Kingdom Prologue. South Hamilton, Mass.: Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, 1993. Linthicum, Robert. City of God, City of Satan: A Biblical Theology of the Urban Church. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990. Ryken, Leland, James Wilhoit, and Tremper Longman III, eds. “City.” Pages 150 - 54 in Dictionary of Biblical Imagery. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1998. Timmer, J. “The Bible and the City.” Pages 21 - 25 in The Reformed Journal 23 (October 1973).

A major part of the Babylonian Empire’s strategy was to eradicate the spiritual identity of its conquered peoples. A defeated nation’s professional and elite classes were often taken to Babylon to live before being allowed to return home.26 Judah had been deported, partially in the hope that the children and grandchildren of the Israelites would assimilate and lose their identity as a distinct people. The false prophet Hananiah, who could not imagine Israel’s life in Babylon long-term, dishonestly prophesied that God would bring Israel back to Jerusalem within two years (Jer 28:3-4). Had the exiles followed Hananiah’s advice, they would have remained disengaged in Babylon, waiting indefinitely for God’s imminent deliverance.

Instead God, through the prophet Jeremiah, contradicts both the Babylonians’ strategy and the false prophet’s counsel. On the one hand, God tells his people to “increase in number there; do not decrease” (Jer 29:6) to retain their distinct community identity and to grow, but he also tells them to settle down and engage in the life of the great city.27 They are to build homes and plant gardens (v. 5). Most striking of all, God calls them to serve the city - to “seek the peace and prosperity of the city” and to “pray to the Lord for it” (v. 7). While living in Babylon, they are not simply to increase their tribe in a ghetto within the city; they are to use their resources to benefit the common good.

This is quite a balance! From Genesis 11 all the way through Revelation, Babylon is represented as the epitome of a civilization built on selfishness, pride, and violence the ultimate city of man. The values of this city contrast absolutely with those of the city of God; yet here the citizens of the city of God are called to be the very best residents of this particular city of man. God commands the Jewish exiles not to attack, despise, or flee the city — but to seek its peace, to love the city as they grow in numbers.

God is still primarily concerned with his plan of salvation. He must establish his people; the gospel must be proclaimed; human beings must be reconciled to him. Yet he assures his people that serving the good of this pagan city is part of this very plan: “If it prospers, you too will prosper” (Jer 29:7). Loving and serving the city not only shows love and compassion; doing so also strengthens the hands of the people of God, who bear the message of the gospel to the world. Because the Jews in exile obeyed this command, they accrued the influence and leverage needed to eventually return to and restore their homeland. God ties, as it were, the fortunes of the people of God to the effectiveness of their urban ministry.

Sadly, there has never been a city on earth that is not saturated with human sin and corruption. Indeed, to paraphrase a Woody Allen joke, cities are just like everywhere else, only much more so. They are both better and worse, both easier and harder to live in, both more inspiring and oppressive, than other places. As redemptive history unfolds, we begin to see how the tension of the city will be resolved. The turn in the relationship between the people of God and the pagan city becomes a key aspect of God’s plan to bless the nations and redeem the world. In the New Testament, we find cities playing an important role in the rapid growth of the early church and in spreading the gospel message of God’s salvation.

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION AND REFLECTION

  1. How would you describe your own attitude toward cities? Indifferent? Hostile? Romanticized? Positive? In what way has this chapter challenged your attitude toward cities? not be drawn to such masses of humanity if we care about the same things that God cares about?” What are some of the reasons that people avoid ministry in the city? What are some of the reasons that they are attracted to urban ministry?
  2. Cities are places of safety, diversity, and productivity. How do each one of these characteristics uniquely define urban culture?
  3. Keller writes, “Cities, quite literally, have more of the image of God per square inch than any other place on earth. How can we
  4. How can you and the community of believers to which you belong work to “seek the peace and prosperity of the city”? What does this look like in your context?