When God Changes Your Focus
Lionel from “A View from the Woods” and I have been (“online”) friends for a while now. We’ve talked on the phone a few times. So far, we have not been able to meet in person, but I think that will happen eventually.
I think Lionel has just published his best post ever. It is called “Too Busy to Love, I Mean Serve Others.” In this very personal post, Lionel talks about how God is changing his perspective to a more kingdom-focused way of looking at the world.
Consider this excerpt:
The problem is what will it cost me? Every year I have told Jesus the same lie “once this year is over, I am good, I just need to get “X†under my beltâ€. And as every waking year passes, I find myself more busy than the year before. From a worldly perspective, nothing I am saying seems to be a conflict of interest; however, from a Kingdom perspective, everything I say is a problem. You see we have developed spiritual phrases such as “seasonsâ€Â to help us defend the fact that we (I, sorry for not owning this) are not doing what Jesus has called me to do. The song says “only whats done for Christ will lastâ€. At the end of this life, I will stand before the Savior who gave up His life and tell Him, that I didn’t want to give up anything. If I were to be diagnosed with a terminal illness, would anything I have done in the last few years mean much of anything?
I have become so busy, so engulfed with my own life, my own passions, my own aspirations, my own career goals, my own….. .that I have forgot that I am a slave to another. I have forgotten that I was brought with the blood of the Son of God and that I am no longer under my own direction, my goals, aspirations and passions must be replaced with the will of another. No matter how honorable those things may be, if they are not for Christ, they are but wood, hay and stubble.
I appreciate Lionel’s honest reflection. I think this is something that we all need to consider. We may be doing good things, but are we doing kingdom-focused things? Are we truly seeking God’s kingdom first?
The Disconnect with Commentaries
Eric from “A Pilgrim’s Progress” shares an “Interesting Commentary on I Corinthians 14:26-33.” Eric is referring to William Barclay’s commentary on 1 Corinthians which was published in 1975. Eric includes this quote from Barclay:
There was obviously a flexibility about the order of service in the early Church. Everything was informal enough to allow any man who felt that he had a message to give to give it. It may well be that we set far too much store on dignity and order nowadays, and have become the slaves of orders of service. The really notable thing about an early Church service must have been that almost everyone came feeling that he had both the privilege and the obligation of contributing something to it. A man did not come with the sole intention of being a passive listener; he came not only to receive but to give. Obviously this had its dangers, for it is clear that in Corinth there were those who were too fond of the sound of their own voices; but nonetheless the Church must have been in those days much more the real possession of the ordinary Christian. It may well be that the Church lost something when she delegated so much to the professional ministry and left so little to the ordinary Church member. (page 134)
Eric adds some great remarks to this quote in his post. But I wanted to mention something else.
A few years ago, I wrote an exegesis paper on 1 Corinthians 14:26-40 for a seminary class. While doing research for that paper, I came across several commentaries with similar conclusions. In other words, when studying Scriptures, Barclay’s comments above seem obvious (well, perhaps not to everyone, but to most commentaries that I’ve read).
But, there’s a disconnect when it comes to practice. Very few churches actually meet the way that Barclay (and many others) conclude that the early church met.
Why do you think that disconnect exists?
But not MY traditions
Bobby at “Deconstructing Neverland” has written a post called “Replaced by Pointers” that all of us need to read and think about.
He begins the post by talking about the traditional teachings of a certain denomination. But, he shifts the focus to help us think about our own traditions. He says:
When it comes to questioning traditions we find it very easy to challenge other peoples traditions and consider them foolish, even heretical. We never stop to think about the similarities between what we believe and what “they” believe and how we can be the same yet divided. Sure there are lots of differences and that is why we find it so easy to point them out. We are supposed to be defenders of the truth, right? But maybe there is more to it than that. What if our defence of our traditions is an exercise in futility as we defend and cling to what have become meaningless and maybe even harmful practices.
Think about another denomination or two. Can you easily point out meaningless and possibly harmful traditions in those denominations? Certainly. We all can.
But, did you know that “those” people can point out meaningless and possibly harmful traditions in your own practices and beliefs? Did you know that “those” people cling to their traditions for the same reason that you cling to yours?
Perhaps it would help if we listen to one another… learn from one another… and seek to focus on what unites us – Jesus Christ.
Simple Church = Scary Church
You know I love sarcasm… so I couldn’t pass up the opportunity to link to some really good sarcasm. Bethany from “Covered By His Hand” has written a great post called “Why Home Churches Are Scary.” Bethany and her family came up with a list of reasons that people may be frightened by home churches.
Here is her list:
1 – I cannot sit on the back row and escape before anyone greets me.
2 – People want to talk to me… I mean really talk.
3 – People care about me.
4 – I might have to take an interest in other people.
5 – I might be expected to participate in a discussion (rather than spacing out while a preacher does his monologue).
6 – I can’t skip church on a whim… but will actually have to call and give a reason for my disappearance.
7 – No nursery?! Who’s gonna watch my kids?!
8 – I have to eat lunch with these people… and they want to talk to me!
9 – These people read my blog! (Credit to Paul)
10 – How will they pay the light bill? The offering plates are never passed. (Credit to Paul)
11 – They want us to stay all day. (Credit to Rebecca… who runs and plays with the children all day, much to her pleasure)
12 – They might want to come to my house.
13 – I don’t know who the preacher is. (Credit to Paul)
14 – Where’s the coffee and donuts? (Credit to Rebecca)
15 – What do you mean, there is no Sunday School or children’s church? (Credit to Rebecca)
16 – Where’s the worship leader? (Credit to Paul)
17 – Saying I am “fine” just doesn’t cut it… they really want to talk to me.
So, which of these “scare” you the most? Can you think of others?
When it affects my finances
I’m encouraged (and often challenged) when believers interpret Scripture in a way that affects their own finances. (I mean, its easy to interpret Scripture in a way that affects others people.) I’m even more encouraged when they then acts on that interpretation.
I’ve linked a couple of times to Eric’s decision to resign from professional pastoring. (See his posts at “A Pilgrim’s Progress.”) Now, a missionary is examining Scripture and questioning a common practice that will also affect his own finances.
Guy at “The M Blog” says “Kingdom Giving trumps Storehouse Tithing.” Now, Guy is a missionary paid from tithes given by SBC churches to the International Mission Board. If people stopped tithing to their local church, Guy knows that he would be affected, but he says that there are more important considerations:
But if everyone practiced kingdom giving, the argument goes that our churches and programs would crumble overnight. The economic system of financing church-as-we-know-it would collapse. Would this be a bad thing? Undoubtedly things would be terribly chaotic for many of us, especially for those of us like myself who depend upon storehouse tithing/giving to pay our bills and buy our food. But I am convinced that after the dust settles from such a 9.0 magnitude earthquake by this transfer of assets from the storehouse to the kingdom, there would be a dramatic surge forward towards the fulfillment of Kingdom purposes in all spheres of life and giant steps forward in making Christ known amongst the nations.
Very encouraging… and challenging. Guy is willing to take a financial hit if it benefits the kingdom of God.
Since we’re talking about church buildings
Since my previous post was about a church deciding to sell their building so they could help more people (see “Church Sells Building to Help More People“), I thought I would also copy this gem from Dave Black (Sunday, October 3, 2010 at 7:41 a.m.):
This morning I’ll be gathering with the Body of Christ in a building dedicated to such gatherings.
Some people call it a sanctuary — a very misleading term, as the room in which we meet is no more sacred in God’s eyes than the restroom across the hall. Many followers of Jesus will prefer to meet in a home this morning instead. They seem to understand, perhaps in a deeper way than many “church-goers,” that in the kingdom, buildings aren’t sacred. When Jesus spoke with the Samaritan woman, He declared that even places we deem most sacred don’t deserve our worship. Jesus is Lord, and He can be worshipped anywhere, anytime. His “church” is nothing more than an assembly of people who have welcomed God’s kingdom into their lives and relationships. Followers of Jesus are therefore always suspicious of man-made structures that seek to replace kingdom values. The church is not a building. The church is not an institution. The church is not a program. These are only and always human creations. They never supersede kingdom authority. Or biblical authority for that matter. None of them is sacred though they often become “sacred cows.”
But there is more. Each of these things I’ve just mentioned — buildings and institutions and programs — each of them can be, indeed ought to be, dedicated as a tool for celebrating the Good News of the kingdom. When this occurs — and I’m afraid it occurs all too infrequently — the focus is no longer on physical or institutional or programmatic objectives. We now view our meeting places as nothing more than that — mere skins of the kingdom’s ferment. They are no longer the focus. We even stop idolizing them.
So, this morning I will meet with the brethren in a structure that some sacralize and that others view merely as a wineskin. The issue is one of attitude and perspective. A “religious” building can witness to our pride or to the wine. The same is true of a home fellowship. Either structure can begin to calcify. Indeed, given enough time, they probably will calcify. Then we will have to come back to the place where we started: recognizing that no place is sacred to God except in the sense that all places are sacred to God.
What a great post! What is a building (any building, even a home)? Simply a place where the church can meet. There are no holy buildings. As long as the place is not idolized (or sacralized, to use Dave’s term) and as long as the building and maintenance is not controlling how the church uses the money that God gives them, and as long as we are able to function as the church when we meet together, then who cares where the church meets?
The question is… when we meet together… whenever… and wherever… are we helping one another to live a mature life in Jesus Christ?
A Few Good Reads
Here are a few good posts that I haven’t linked to yet:
Dan with “Close to Home”
Arthur with “The danger of being right”
Eric with “God’s Glorification Through Mutual Edification“
Have you read any good posts this recently?
Stepping through his reasoning
As I told you last week, my friend Eric from “A Pilgrim’s Progress” told us that he resigned from professional pastoring. This week, he wrote a post in which he explained his “Reasoning for Resigning.”
In his post, Eric steps through the reasons that he chose to resign from professional pastoring, and the reasons have to do with Scripture, not burn-out, or anger or maltreatment, or anything like that.
Now, I know that many who read here (or at least some) will disagree with Eric’s conclusions. But, you can tell that he is attempting to live according to his interpretation of Scripture and to be true to his convictions. Actually, I’ve talked to many pastors who have come to the same conclusion as Eric regarding professional pastoring, but they have not taken the next step – the step that Eric has chosen to take in resigning.
I hope that Eric continues to post about his decisions and his life. Specifically, I asked him to tell us how he sees non-professional pastoring working in the church today.
Monday-Saturday Church
Everybody knows about church on Sunday. But what about Monday-Saturday?
Josh at “Called to Rebuild” has written an excellent article called “Church Life: More than a Meeting.” Josh says:
A person may go to a meeting once a week, and it might be the best meeting this world has ever seen-full of life, love, and warm-hearted fellowship. But if that meeting alone represents the full extent of their participation in the local Body of Christ than they are still missing out on the majority of real church life. I’ve experienced the difference myself, and there really is no comparison. The writer to the Hebrews didn’t instruct the believers there to exhort one another “daily†for no reason, you know. Daily fellowship is not just a privilege but a necessity if we ever hope to go on unto the fullness of Christ.
Yep. Just last night I was talking with some new friends. I told them that if they wanted to understand who were are as a church, they would need to hang out with us during the week. For example, tonight we plan to help some friends pack their truck as they prepare to move to Georgia. Church life!
This reminds me of something I read a few years ago (perhaps from Jonathan?): If there is no life outside the meeting, there will be no life in the meeting. (Or something like that.)
Distracted by Rightness
Arthur at “The Voice Of One Crying Out in Suburbia” points out one of the elephants in the room in modern evangelicalism in his post “This should go without saying.”
Arthur writes:
A starving child doesn’t care if you are pre-, post- or amillenial.
The widow isn’t really all that interested in congregational or Presbyterian forms of church government.
The fatherless child isn’t going to reject food because the one offering it is an Arminian.
The Christian in a third world country without a Bible is not going to refuse one because it isn’t the right version.
The lost person down the street doesn’t need to hear about your denomination or how great your church is or what a wonderful preacher your pastor is, they need to hear about Jesus.
I agree with Arthur: this should go without saying, it needs to be said.
But, I think there’s a bigger problem. It’s not just that the church has become distracted by these arguments (and others), many in the church feel they are doing “the work of God” when they defend their position on this arguments. In fact, there are many (so-called) “ministries” who exist simply to defend their particular belief in one of these (or similar) areas of theology.
Like Arthur says in his post, these items may be important, but (to me) they are way down on the list of importance. We are never told to spend all (or most, or some) of our time and energy and resources debating and arguing these things. And, we certainly never find these types of debates and arguments called “ministry”… that is, service.
So, we get distracted by these kinds of arguments (eschatology, soteriology, and, yes, even ecclesiology) and we call our distractions “ministry.” Meanwhile, real ministry (serving other people) never gets done… or rarely gets done. But we think we’re doing good things… all the while we’re distracted from the things that God has called us to do.
The foundation of this problem is that we’ve been distracted by rightness. There’s a misconception that our goal is being right and that we should always point out where (we think) other people are wrong. Of course, this is normally true when it comes to the gospel, but (especially since the Reformation) Christians have begun to separate over, demand allegiance to, and defend all kinds of teachings and doctrines that are not related to the gospel.
We think that if we demand “rightness” then we are leading people to the truth, that is, to Jesus. But, this is often not the case. In fact, the debates and arguments that Arthur mentions are generally not related to the truth of Jesus Christ nor to salvation by grace through faith. But, we still demand that others accept what we say is “right.”
What’s the answer? Focus on the gospel. Yes, hold convictions on those other doctrines, hold them tightly if you choose, but let them distract you from the good news of Jesus Christ. That is, don’t let them distract you from fellowshiping with those who hold to the good news of Jesus Christ (but perhaps are “wrong” concerning your favorite doctrines), and don’t let them distract you from proclaiming the good news of Jesus Christ… and please don’t proclaim accepting your favorite doctrines (that aren’t the gospel) to those who are unbelievers.