Theological Sources – Tradition
In this series, I want to discuss the various sources that inform our theology – that is, our understanding of God. For an outline, I will use John Wesley’s Quadrilateral: Scripture, Tradition, Reason, and Experience. I realize that this is not new information for many of my readers. However, perhaps we can all help ourselves think about this important topic.
The word “Tradition” conjures up different thoughts to different people. Some think about the confessions and creeds that they hold to. Other think about the details of their practices. But, when “Tradition” is used in the realm of theological sources, it means that group of teachings which is handed down from person to person.
As I mentioned in the previous article in this series, “Tradition” was originally equated with the regula fidei, or the rule of faith, which was passed down from Jesus to the apostles, then from the apostles to their followers, etc. These lists of beliefs were later collected in the form of the early creeds, such as the Nicaean Creed or the Apostles Creed or the Chalcedonian Creed, and later into the various confessions of the Protestant denominations. As time progressed, more and more “beliefs” were added to the various Traditions as well.
However, Tradition is much more than a series of “We believe” statements. The regula fidei was also seen as a protection against misinterpreting the Scriptures. Thus, Tradition formed a hermeneutical fence around the Scriptures, helping readers understand the meaning of the writings.
Today, we still have Tradition. Each denomination – and sometimes groups within denominations and groups that cross denominational lines – have a hermeneutic Tradition. These Traditions guide believers as they read Scripture. Even for those believers who – like myself – grew up with a non- or anti-Traditional, free church background, Tradition plays a huge role in our understanding of God.
Thus, the same Scriptures yield both dispensational and covenantal understandings because of the Tradition of the readers. The same Scriptures yeild emphases on the sovereignty of God or the liberty of man based on the Tradition of the readers. The same Scriptures reveal either a premillennial, postmillennial, or amillennial eschatology due to the Tradition of the one reading.
Yes, Tradition still plays an important role in developing a person’s understanding of God. In some ways, this is very good. Tradition can keep someone from straying into unorthodox beliefs based upon a few select texts from Scripture. In some ways, Tradition can be bad. Tradition can cause people to over-emphasize certain texts that agree with their Tradition while ignoring or de-emphasizing other texts which disagree with their Tradition.
However, Tradition does not merely affect our understanding and application of Scripture. In similar ways, Tradition forms how we view and use Reason and logic, and to what extent we allow Experience to inform our theology. Some Traditions rely heavily on Reason, while others view Reason with skepticism. Similarly, some Traditions emphasize Experience, while other Traditions de-emphasize Experience.
As we have already seen, there is interaction between these various theological sources. There is certainly interaction between Scripture and Tradition – and the interaction works in both directions. In all Traditions, Tradition both works with Scripture and also works against Scripture. Similarly, Scripture both works with Tradition and also works against Tradition. These are good and valid interactions.
Here is a simple illustration. In Genesis, God tells Noah to build an ark. In Genesis, God tells Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac. In Matthew, Jesus tells the rich, young ruler to sell everything and follow him. In John, Jesus tells Nicodemus that he must be born again. In John, Jesus tells Peter to feed his sheep. In Timothy, Paul tells Timothy to proclaim the word of God. Each of these commands are given to one person in Scripture. Do the commands apply to only that one person, to a group represented by that one person, or to all people? Scripture will not answer this in all cases. However, Tradition will tell us how to interpret these various passages, and by the way, different Traditions give us different interpretations of some of these very passages.
Recognizing your own Tradition can help you understand why you interpret Scripture the way that you do. Trying to understand another person’s Tradition can also help you understand their interpretation of Scripture and their understanding of God. However, neither Scripture nor Tradition alone can completely answer the question of why we understand God the way that we do. As we keep studying, I think we will see that both Reason and Experience inform our theology. Also, I hope that we will begin to think about other possible sources of theology.
————————————————————-
Theological Sources Series:
1. Introduction
2. Scripture
3. Tradition
4. Reason
5. Experience
6. Conclusion
Theological Sources – Scripture
In this series, I want to discuss the various sources that inform our theology – that is, our understanding of God. For an outline, I will use John Wesley’s Quadrilateral: Scripture, Tradition, Reason, and Experience. I realize that this is not new information for many of my readers. However, perhaps we can all help ourselves think about this important topic.
Almost every religion has some form of sacred writings, and Christianity is no different. There are very few Christians who would not list Scripture as their top theological source. This has been true from the beginning – even from the writing of the New Testament. If we go back even farther to a time when believers could not actually be called Christians, we still see an emphasis on Scripture, especially in the form of Torah (or Law or Pentateuch).
Of course, this raises a big question: When we say “Scripture”, to what are we referring? When most Protestants say “Scripture”, they are referring to the 66 books usually called Old Testament and New Testament. However, it seems fairly clear that the word “Scripture” in the Old and New Testaments did not refer to these same books. Thus, in the Scriptures themselves, the word “Scripture” refers to the Pentateuch, the Pentateuch and the Law, the entire Old Testament (Pentateuch, Prophets, and Writings), or the entire Old Testaments and parts of the New Testament. We may infer that the word “Scripture” in the writings themselves can refer to our entire Bible, but we will not find that designation within the pages of the Bible.
But, then, we must also ask ourselves why the 66 books (Genesis-Revelation)? Some Christian Traditions (a term which will be examined later, but has to be introduced here) include additional books when they refer to Scripture. Some Christians, whether intentional or not, remove certain books when they refer to Scripture. In many ways, a person’s Tradition helps shape their view of Scripture. But, to what extent? That is a question that cannot be answered here, but perhaps we can pick it up at the end of the series.
So, as you can see, before we even begin to ask ourselves how should we learn about God from the Scriptures (a question of hermeneutics), we must first ask ourselves what we mean by the term “Scripture”. This meaning cannot be determined from Scripture itself. For example, it is reported that the early Christians used three tests to determine whether or not a certain writing would be considered part of New Testament “Scripture”: 1) Was the writing by an apostle or based on the teaching of an apostle? 2) Was the writing universally accepted by the church? 3) Does the writing claim inspiration? However, we should recognize that different Christians applied these tests in different ways with different results. But, of course, these tests fall under the realm of Tradition, not Scripture.
Are we then left completely clueless about Scripture? No, I don’t think so. However, we can’t use Scripture itself to define the term “Scripture”. This definition must come from another source, and this source is very important in our understanding of God, since it helps us define Scripture.
Once we are confident that we understand what we mean by Scripture, we should ask another question: How does Scripture help us understand God? The simple answer is that Scripture speaks of God, narrates God, describes God, and even speaks for God. But, history repeatedly demonstrates that different Christians read Scripture in different ways and come to different understandings of God. Why is this? Because Tradition, Reason, and Experience all play a role in understanding and interpreting Scripture (hermeneutics). There is no such thing as a completely neutral hermeneutic, and in fact, it can be argued that Scripture was not meant to be understood with a completely neutral hermeneutic.
The early Christians talked about something called the regula fidei or rule of faith (analogy of faith). According to the apostolic fathers, this rule of faith is the faith that was handed down from Jesus to the apostles, and from the apostles to their followers, etc. So, for them, Scripture should be understood through the hermeneutical lens of the rule of faith.
But, what is the rule of faith? Unfortunately, the rule of faith changed from writer to writer. While each post-apostolic writer agreed on certain aspects of the rule of faith, they all disagreed over other aspects. Similarly, as time progressed, more and more “doctrines” were added to the rule of faith. However, we must recognize that even if we knew exactly what the rule of faith encompassed, this is also part of Tradition, not Scripture.
So, we are left with Scripture being a very important theological source, but not a source that can or should stand on its own. In fact, two believers can both believe that Scripture is the most important theological source (even claiming sola scriptura), and the two may interpret Scripture in different ways because of the influence of Tradition, Reason, Experience, and possibly other sources.
When we are discussing our differences with other Christians, it is not always helpful to argue points from Scripture without understanding the person’s Tradition, how they apply Reason, and what Experiences they bring with them. Without understanding these additional sources, we will not understand how the other person is interpreting Scripture.
Even for those of us who pride ourselves in being un-Traditional or even anti-Traditional, we must recognize that we bring our own Traditions to the hermeneutical task. We have our own methods of interpretation. Even these hermeneutical methods affect the way that we interpret and apply Scripture. Sometimes, un-Traditional or anti-Traditional hermeneutical methods lead to haphazard interpretations of Scripture.
While we may not be able to remove all influences outside of Scripture – and we probably should not attempt to remove all influences – we can recognize our Tradition, Reason, and Experience, and how these three interact with Scripture to inform our theological understanding. Then, we may be able to recognize when an outside source is causing us to misinterpret Scripture. Perhaps, we may also recognize that there is another source (or other sources) besides these four which is/are important in our theological understanding.
————————————————————-
Theological Sources Series:
1. Introduction
2. Scripture
3. Tradition
4. Reason
5. Experience
6. Conclusion
Theological Sources – Introduction
In this series, I want to discuss the various sources that inform our theology – that is, our understanding of God. For an outline, I will use John Wesley’s Quadrilateral: Scripture, Tradition, Reason, and Experience. I realize that this is not new information for many of my readers. However, perhaps we can all help ourselves think about this important topic.
Everyone thinks theologically. Whether a person believes in one god, multiple gods, or no gods, they think theologically. This series of posts is intended to help all of us think theologically. Specifically, I hope we are able to think about the sources of our understanding of God.
Wesley (and others) suggested that people generally develop their understanding of God through four sources: Scripture, Tradition, Reason, and Experience. According to Wesley, Scripture must be our primary source. In fact, he said that Scripture is our only true source, while Tradition, Reason, and Experience work to help us understand Scripture.
In this series, I’ll comment briefly about how each “source” is related to theology in general, I will primarily focus on Christian theology. Of course, focussing on sources for Christian theology does not mean that this will be a simple task. Unfortunately, there is no single understanding among Christian concerning how to develop a theology. Different followers of Jesus – different “Orthodox” followers of Jesus – think differently about God.
While it would be simple and perhaps expedient to suggest that my way of thinking about God is right, and all other ways are wrong, it would also be prideful and arrogant, and it would say more about ourselves than about God himself. Therefore, I think it would be beneficial for all of us to think seriously about our understanding of God, and specifically why we understand God the way that we do.
By the way, these theological sources affect more than our theology proper – that is, our thinking about God. These sources affect our thinking about salvation, mankind, sin, even the church. In fact, it is common for Christians to use the sources in different ways and in different proportions for different aspects of their theology. Perhaps we will be able to discuss some of these differences as well.
I hope that more people than myself are interested in this topic. I’m hoping for a great discussion in the comment concerning each theological “source”. This is one area in particular where I think we can learn from one another.
Here are a few questions to help all of us think about these various theological sources and to kick-off our discussion:
1) Do you think that Scripture, Tradition, Reason, and Experience inform our theology? Are there other theological sources besides these four?
2) Do you think theological sources work independently of one another, or do you think there is interaction between the different sources?
3) What happens when different people place different emphases on different theological sources?
————————————————————-
Theological Sources Series:
1. Introduction
2. Scripture
3. Tradition
4. Reason
5. Experience
6. Conclusion
A Follow-Up on Following
Yesterday, I published a blog post called “Follow Jesus to do WHAT?” In that post, I stepped through the first part of the Gospel of Matthew to demonstrate that Jesus called Andrew, Peter, James and John. Then, after calling them, Jesus went through Galilee proclaiming the gospel, healing the sick, casting out demons, and setting the oppressed free. Finally, after modelling this for his followers, he told them to go out and do the same.
So, here are a few follow-up quesitons: 1) As followers of Jesus, are we also called to proclaim the gospel, heal the sick, cast out demons, and set the oppressed free? Or, was this only the mission of Jesus and his first twelve disciples? 2) If we are called to this same ministry, then how do we carry it out? 3) Also, if we are called to this same ministry, then should our service focus on each aspect of Jesus’ ministry, or are certain aspects more important than others? 4) If some aspects are more important, how do we decide which aspects are more important?
Follow Jesus to do WHAT?
As I’ve mentioned previously, we’re studying through the Gospel of Matthew, with different brothers teaching through the passages on Sunday mornings when the church meets (see the posts “What’s with the begats?“, “Baptized with the Holy Spirit and with fire“, “A Sympathetic High Priest“, and “Playing with Blocks“). Next Sunday, Mael is planning to teach through the end of chapter 4 of Matthew. As our family has discussed this passage before our Sunday meeting, we’ve noticed something interesting.
First of all, in Luke’s Gospel, he says the following about the start of Jesus’ public ministry:
And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit to Galilee, and a report about him went out through all the surrounding country. And he taught in their synagogues, being glorified by all. And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up. And as was his custom, he went to the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and he stood up to read. And the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.” And he rolled up the scroll and gave it back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on him. And he began to say to them, “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.” (Luke 4:14-21 ESV)
Thus, according to Jesus, part of the reason that he came was to fulfill this prophecy. It is interesting that Matthew does not include this prophecy in his Gospel, especially since Matthew seems very interested in showing that Jesus is the fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets.
In Matthew 4, the evangelist begins by telling about the temptation of Jesus. Next, he says that Jesus called Andrew, Peter, James, and John to follow him. Then, notice the passage at the end of Matthew chapter 4:
And he went throughout all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom and healing every disease and every affliction among the people. So his fame spread throughout all Syria, and they brought him all the sick, those afflicted with various diseases and pains, those oppressed by demons, epileptics, and paralytics, and he healed them. And great crowds followed him from Galilee and the Decapolis, and from Jerusalem and Judea, and from beyond the Jordan. (Matthew 4:23-25 ESV)
So, while Matthew does not specifically quote Isaiah, and while Matthew does not specifically say that Jesus fulfills Isaiah’s prophecy, Matthew actually demonstrates that Jesus did fulfill the prophecy. In Luke (Isaiah), we see that Jesus says that he is going to proclaim the good news. In Matthew, we see Jesus actually proclaiming the good news. In Luke (Isaiah), we see that Jesus says that he is going to care for the blind and oppressed. In Matthew, we see Jesus actually healing the sick and casting out oppressive demons.
But, I think we need to take this a little farther. I think that it is very important that Matthew 4:23-25 (the fulfillment of the Isaiah prophecy) immediately follows Jesus’ call to Andrew, Peter, James, and John to follow him. When these four fisherman start following Jesus, he immediately starts proclaiming the good news, healing the sick, casting out demons, and caring for the oppressed. I can’t help but think that as Andrew, Peter, James, and John see what Jesus is doing, they also hear his words, “Follow me”. Jesus expected them to follow him – to do what he was doing. We see this specifically when we get to Matthew 10, where Jesus sends out the twelve apostles:
These twelve Jesus sent out, instructing them, “Go nowhere among the Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And proclaim as you go, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’ Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse lepers, cast out demons. You received without paying; give without pay.” (Matthew 10:5-8 ESV)
So, Jesus called people to follow him, showed them what he was there to do, and then instructed them to do the same. What does that mean for us, those who have also been called to follow Jesus?
Once again, notice the progression: 1) Jesus called people to follow him. 2) Jesus modelled proclaiming the gospel, healing the sick, caring for the oppressed. 3) Jesus told his followers to pray that others would do the same. 4) Jesus told his followers to go and do the same thing.
If we are sitting at Jesus’ feet and learning from him, then we are not yet following Jesus completely. This is very important and necessary, but it is not the extent of being a disciple of Jesus. Once we hear Jesus’ words and message, we are then to continue following Jesus by getting up and doing the same things he did.
The Presence of God
Last week, our family helped some friends celebrate the birthday of one of their sons. We had a great time eating and talking and watching a movie together. At one point, I had a great discussion with two good friends concerning the presence of God.
One of my friends is reading Brother Lawrence’s The Practice of the Presence of God, which sparked our conversation. I read this little book (which is available free online) a few years ago, and it had a big impact on me, much like it is having on my friend. Brother Lawrence describes the reality, simplicity, and intimacy of living in God’s presence – not just daily, but moment by moment.
Every aspect of our life – not just our “spiritual” lives – should be affected by the presence of God. For example, if God is always present with his children – and I believe that he is – then everything that we do is in communication with him. When we talk, God hears us. When we move, God knows. What we feel, God is aware of it. There is nothing in our lives that we do not communicate to God. But, if all of life is communicated to God, then what is prayer? What is the significance of prayer? I believe that prayer is when we are aware of our communication with God. Thus, prayer is not only when we sit alone and “talk” to God, although that is prayer. Prayer also occurs during our conversations with other people, if we are aware that God is present and that he is part of our coversation.
But, what about other aspects of life – especially the apsects of life that are not considered “spiritual”? Does God’s presence – and living in the reality of God’s presence – affect those aspects of our lives as well? Yes! Absolutely! For example, consider the concept of contentment. We usually base our contenment on how we feel about ourselves, other people, our jobs, our homes, our money, our health, etc. But God tells us that we can be content because he is with us and will never leave us (Heb. 13:5). If we become less than content because of situations in our life, then that is a demonstration that we are not living in the presence of God – we are not content with God himself. More than likely, we had become content with the blessings that we were receiving from God instead of being content with God himself.
What other aspects of our lives do you think would be affected if we learned to live in the reality, the simplicity, and the intimacy of the presence of God? How would these areas be affected by our living in the reality of God’s presence?
Playing with Blocks
Sunday morning, during our weekly church meeting, my friend Maël taught from Matthew 4. Part of the teaching concerned Jesus’ call for Andrew, Peter, James, and John to follow him.
I watched one of the brothers sitting on the floor in the back of the room with his infant son. They were playing with a box of wooden blocks which were scattered on the floor around them. The father was picking up the blocks one by one and placing them in the box.
I watched as the son clumsily picked up a block and almost tossed it at the box. Somehow the block managed to go into the box. The boy then reached for another block, seemingly forcing his hand and arm to go places and do things that they did not want to do. Finally, the child grasped the block and forced his arm again to move toward the box, where he released the block.
This played out over several minutes. The father expertly picking up the blocks and smoothly and silently placing them into the box. The young boy tried to mimic his father, but his motions were less than perfect, not quite smooth, and rarely silent. But, the boy was able to put the wooden blocks into the box.
I realized that this was a picture of what it must look like to God when we attempt to follow Jesus. From the most mature believers to the newest follower, how clumsy and awkward and imperfect we must look to him! It would be so much cleaner if God did everything himself without involving us at all. But, God did not choose to work that way. Instead, he called us to follow him as he works in the world.
When we follow Jesus, we will usually find ourselves in the position of the infant child. We may serve, but it will be clumsy, messy service. We may speak, but our words will be awkward and imprecise. We may love, but our love will be less than genuine. We may follow, but we follow with the unsure steps of an infant son – wobbly, unstable, distracted, selfish, wandering. We will follow imperfectly.
So, does this mean that we should not attempt to follow at all? No! When someone is in need, do hesitate because of our imperfections? No! When someone needs a work of instruction or correction or comfort, do we remain silent because our words are often clumsy? No! Do we allow those more capable than us to serve or to speak? No!
Why? Because we have been called to follow; so, follow we must. As Jesus’ hands cared for the hurting, we must care for the hurting. As Jesus called people to repent, we must call people to repent. We recognize that our efforts are feeble and our words are awkward, but this should not drive us to inaction and silence! Instead, this recognition must drive us to complete reliance upon the Holy Spirit to work any good thing through our actions or our words. This recognition removes any source of boasting on our part, and shifts all glory and honor to God through Jesus Christ by the Holy Spirit.
The one who clumsily helps those in need is following Jesus Christ. The one who refuses to help because their efforts may fall short is not following Jesus Christ. The one speaks awkwardly in an effort to encourage and build up others is following Jesus Christ. The one who refuses to speak because their words are not as refined as others is not following Jesus Christ.
By the way, I found out later from the father in my story that this was the first time that his son has attempted to put away the wooden blocks. I’m sure that this father was very proud of his son for his attempt, however clumsy and imprecise it may have been. Perhaps, our Father would be just as proud of those who decided for the first time to actually serve others or speak to others in spite of their own clumsy efforts. We know from 1 Peter 4:10-11 that God receives glory when we serve and speak to others.
House Church Workshop
Tonight and tomorrow I’m attending the North Carolina House Church Workshop in Smithfield, NC. The workshop is being led by Steve Atkerson and Tim Melvin of New Testament Restoration Fellowship. According to the web site, the sessions should cover several topics that I am interested in. I’m also hoping to spend some time with several old friends, and hopefully to make some new friends. Also, my son, Jeremy, is joining me at this conference, so that should make it even better.
I also learned recently that the conference location has Wi-Fi, so I may be able to publish some blog posts about the conference tonight and tomorrow.
House Church Workshop
Session 1 – Apostolic Traditions
Session 2 – Participatory Church Meetings
Session 3 – Elder-Led Congregational Consensus
Session 4 – The Lord’s Supper
Summary Remarks
I am not black
Since February is Black History Month, I thought I would take this opportunity to make a confession: I am not black. I realize that this comes as no surprise to those of you who know me, or to those of you who can see my picture at the top of this page. However, for the remainder of my readers, I thought that I should make this point clear. I am not black.
I have a very good friend who is black (I miss you, by the way). I learn alot about what it means to be a black man in the United States by listening to him. I do not become black by listening to him, but I do gain a different perspective than I would have otherwise. And, as I have learned more about what it means to be a black man in the United States, I have also learned more about how to love and serve people who are different from me.
In the spirit of the post, I will continue the confessions: I am not a woman. God did not make me a woman. I have never been a woman. However, my wife is a woman. She has taught me alot about what it means to be a woman. Sometimes, I listen to her and I learn. I learn about the struggles of being a woman and about the difficulties of being a mother. I also learn about many of the joys. Even though I’ve learned from her, this does not make me a woman, but it does help give me a different perspective and, hopefully, to understand women a little more.
Also, I was not born in another country. Even though some people suggest that Alabama is another country, it is not – I checked. However, I have some good friends who were not born in the United States. They struggle with many things because they are in a foreign country. They face many difficulties. I’ve learned about some of these struggles and difficulties by listening to them. This does not make me a foreigner, but it does help me understand their perspective, and it helps me to know how to love and serve others who are not from this country.
By the way, I’ve never been a foster child or an orphan. Never. I was raised in a loving home with my birth mother and my birth father and a younger brother who was my full sibling. I knew that my parents cared about me, and I think my brother liked me most of the time. I do not know what its like to be an orphan or a foster child. But, I have recently met a man who was raised in several foster families. I’ve already started listening to him, and I think he has much to teach me. I’m looking forward to hearing his perspective and learning more about God and life and love from him.
I am not black. I am not a woman. I am not a foreigner. I am not a foster child. But, God has shown me that I can learn from a black man, a woman, my foreign friends, and even a person who grew up in foster families. I can learn about God. I can learn about people. I can learn about life. I can learn about love and acceptance and redemption and hope. I can learn what it means to live together in community in the Spirit with those who are different from me. And, I can learn that I need to hear and grow from their perspectives, just as they can learn and grow from mine.
Positively Positive
Sally Coleman from “Eternal Echoes” suggested “a day of being positive” about the church. While I primarily write about the church on this blog, but otherwise – unless I have a specific question that I want to discuss with someone – I rarely talk about church practices or leadership or meetings outside of this blog. Instead, I try to live out many of the things that I’m learning about the church, sharing life with other believers and helping them determine how God is working in their lives. So, when I think about “positive” things that are going on in the church, I do not think primarily about organizational changes, or movements, or conferences, etc. Instead, I think about the work that I see God doing in and through the lives of the people that he’s brought into my life.
For example, as I mentioned recently in my wedding anniversary post “19 Years“, my most important discipling relationship is with my wife Margaret. I think the discipleship is working both ways between us. In her life, I’ve seen God use her to serve and care for people time and time again. I’ve seen her listen attentively to people who simply needed a listening ear. I’ve heard her speak wisdom and encouragement into situations, some involving me and some involving other people. In other words, I see God maturing her as we – hopefully – grow together.
I also think about Maël, a good friend of mine and fellow elder. While some people talk about being open and honest to other brothers and sisters in Christ, I have personally witnessed this from Maël. Not only has he talked with me and others about very personal things, he shares his struggles openly when we meet with the church. When he and his wife were given the opportunity to move to another state to continue his education, he openly shared this opportunity with the church, asking for prayer and advice in making this decision. I don’t know many elders who would discuss the possibility of moving more than a year before the possible move. He has been a great encouragement and example to me in this area.
When I think about positive things happening in the church, I also think about Theron. He and his wife Cheryl are in the middle of making decisions about their life. And, as they think through these decisions, they are trying to discern God’s will and how he has created them to serve others. They are not looking for the most comfortable path, or the easiest way. They want to know where God wants them to serve and how he wants to use them. I appreciate their openness to share this with others, to ask for help, and to wait patiently for the Lord.
I also think about Lew. As life changes for him and his wife Kati, he is excited about the possibilities. Instead of dwelling on what might be lost or what he might miss out on, he is looking forward to new opportunities that God will present to them. He is focused on getting to know people and to see God work through him to impact their life. He is also thinking about his family – how to best take care of his wife and to help her succeed. This is a great balance that is very challenging to me and my family.
These are just a few of the positive things about the church. God continually introduces me to his children who are learning and struggling and growing and failing and teaching and hoping and trying and waiting. Through all of them God teaches me and challenges me and encourages me. These are all positive things. I find these things in the lives of my brothers and sisters. I find real life – with all of its aches and pains and successes and failures – and I find God working to create abundant life. I find fellowship – fellowship with one another which is really fellowship with God.