Resolved
I don’t normally make New Years resolutions, and I’ve resolved not to make resolutions this year. Now, if you want to make New Years resolutions, that’s great! I simply choose not to do so.
But, it is good to reflect on your life. As a follower of Jesus, it’s good to compare your life to what we read about in Scripture and to ask yourself in which direction God is leading you. New Years (and every day really) is a good time to do this.
So, where am I? And, where is God leading me?
Currently, I’m in a pretty good place. My family is doing well. God has surrounded me with wonderful brothers and sisters in Christ who are taking their responsibility to one another (including me) seriously. I have a couple of really good jobs – although, I would prefer to have a different job, but I’m learning to be content in that as well.
I have a big decision coming up within the next two months. I’ve been invited (along with three of my brothers from Messiah Baptist Church) to spend two weeks in Ethiopia in July. We would be helping several churches in a region of that country. So, by February, I have to decide if I’m going or not. (I’ll write more about this later.)
So, what is my resolution this year? The same as it has been every year, and every day: attempt to live my life in a way that brings glory to God by loving and serving other people. That could happen in North Carolina, or in Ethiopia, or anywhere else God leads me.
What will that look like in the next year? I have no idea.
Bad Influence?
So, my friend Jason at “Fight the Good Fight” has posted an “End of Year Recap.” I wonder if I (and a few other miscreants) have been bad influences on Jason. He writes:
This summer’s internship with Mike had several influences. First of all, it solidified the fact that I love working with youth, teaching them, building relationships, showing them how to live. Second of all, it solidified the thought that was circling in the back of my mind that vocational ministry is not what God was “calling†me to. It’s been made pretty clear to me over the past year, through the scriptures that God does not call individuals to “ministryâ€, but rather everyone to ministry if they are a Christian. Elders/Pastors are a necessary part of the church body, yes, they oversee and teach, but they are not the head of the church. It seems that experience has shown me this past summer that vocational ministry (paid ministry) is the cause of many of the things wrong with the way the church functions today. It pervades the way people think, regardless of if it is scriptural or not. It influences the body’s idea of ministry to the point of creating the idea that ministry is for those in vocational ministry. Not only that, but the idea of hiring out that position to someone who you have no relationship with is definitely not the way scripture presents it. If we hold the standard of watching our deacons live to make sure they are qualified, why do we not hold that same standard for pastor/elders? How can we as a church, entrust the oversight of our body to a man we don’t even know. There is no way that a “search committee†could effectively analyze a pastor and the way he lives with a few interview questions. Ultimately, God has shown me that I need to be a “tent makerâ€, if you want to put it that way. Support my family in the best way I can and do ministry (what God calls every Christian to do, disciple, spread the gospel, etc…) and utilize whatever spiritual gift I have within the body to encourage them, whether it be teaching, playing guitar, whatever.
I hope that we can continue to influence young men like this.
What is God doing in your life lately?
Our life with God in Christ by the Spirit is not a past experience nor an intellectual exercise. It is an ongoing life.
My friend, Maël, who made the mistake of moving to Texas a few months ago, taught us to ask ourselves and others this simple question: “What is God doing in your life lately?”
It is encouraging to look back and see what God is doing in your life, but it is also encouraging to hear what God is doing in other people’s lives. I like to ask this question occasionally on my blog to see what God is doing in the lives of my readers.
So, I ask you: “What is God doing in your life lately?”
Christmas ’93 and eternity
I wrote the post “Christmas ’93 and eternity” three years ago just after my son Jeremy turned 13. A few days ago, he turned 16. I don’t know why, but his birthday is always a time for me to reflect on the “gifts” that I’m giving – eternal gifts. This post explains why…
———————————————————-
A few days ago, we celebrated my son’s 13th birthday by taking him to see the movie Eragon. He and his friends enjoyed it, though the story was a bit predictable for me.
Anyway, celebrating his birthday and preparing for Christmas reminded me of the Christmas of 1993. Our son was born on the 22nd of December that year. We brought him home on Christmas eve, stuffed in a red stocking. The next morning, we gave him his first Christmas gifts: clothes, a stuffed animal, and a full-size football (autographed by Bo Jackson, which is only important to half the population of the state of Alabama).
My wife was surprised that I would get my newborn son a football. But, he quickly outgrew both the clothes and the stuffed animal, but he can still play with the football! So, the football turned out to be a better gift than she thought at first. True, a three day old baby can do nothing with a football but drool on it. But, eventually, he grew to love football.
As I was thinking about his first Christmas and his first Christmas gifts, I wondered how often I focus on things that will truly last. I don’t even mean things that will last a few years or even a lifetime. But, how often do I focus on things that will last eternally? As I understand it, the only things on earth that are eternal are people. Do I give gifts that will make an eternal difference? Do I give things that will eventually fade? Or, do I give of myself to people who will last for eternity?
One day, I will join with multitudes around the throne of God. I hope that even this year I am giving eternal gifts.
p.s. Last year, we give our (then) 12 year old son a special gift. We asked several men who had impacted his life to write him a letter. We asked them to tell him something that they wished someone had told them when they turned 12. We then took all of the letters and bound them in an album. It turned out to be a very special gift!
Solo or Orchestra?
Andy at “aBowden Blog” has written an excellent parable across two posts called “2nd fiddle,” “2nd fiddle cont,” and “2nd fiddle, concluded.” Here is the story in its entirety (published with Andy’s permission):
Once upon a time there was a Grand Musician who loved music. He decided to assemble a group of unlikely characters together, give them each an instrument, and let them together learn to make music. So they met regularly, helping one another keep their instruments in tune, and learning to play as they together made music. Every week they met, each bringing his own particular instrument: trumpets, bugles, drums, pianos, clarinets, oboes, french horns, flutes, guitars, violins, and many others.
After making such wonderful music together, they would leave, still humming the tunes, and letting the music spill over into each day of the week.
Eventually, the fiddle became the most valued instrument of the assembly. The band continued assembling, but forgot that they were there to make music. They became confused and thought they gathered to hear the violinist perform. Oh, what beautiful solos the fiddler gave, playing classics, writing new pieces, arranging medlies. The other musicians, in fact, forgot that they themselves were musicians. Their various instruments went unused, gathered dust, and became idle.
They developed a fine appreciation for the fiddle. After hearing his performance weekly, they would discuss his strengths and weaknesses. They knew of the emotion and passion possessed by a good fiddler. Fiddlers appeared in many places. The really good ones were listened to worldwide, and filmed and traveled and wrote books. Whole theories and styles and methods were developed for the fiddle. Fiddlers became so good and professional, that now the rest of the musicians were forgotten. The thought of not hearing weekly fiddle solos was unthinkable. How could corporate participation compare to the beauty and grace heard by the one? Surely, if all the musicians were involved, the weaker, less trained instrumentalists would detract from what they were so accustomed to in the fiddler.
And so, the fiddling continued. Deep down in the heart of each observer, however, was a longing to make music. They could not quite describe this desire, implanted in them by the Grand Musician, to contribute a piece to the melody.
The forgotten musicians reacted in different ways. Some actually liked being able to watch the fiddler. Watching took the pressure off themselves. They could sit back and enjoy the simplicity; no expectations, no responsibility, no challenge to their own skill.
Other musicians could not shake the longing in their souls to make music. And this led to a very surprising turn of events. They knew that the only music people tolerated was the sound of the fiddle. Wanting to contribute to the music because of the Grand Musician, they did what it was only possible for them to do. They picked up the fiddle, a foreign, awkward instrument, thereby receiving their passport to participation, their license to make music. And so a great number of the oboe players, the guitarists, the pianists, the trumpeters, the banjoers, became fiddlers. Their own instruments remained at home, forgotten in the dusty corners of their closets. And they managed to learn the fiddle alright. In fact, many could really learn to play quite nice.
So fiddlers appeared everywhere. In the South (where people appreciated a good fiddle more than other parts of the country) there was an overabundance of fiddlers. Fiddlers played on every street corner. Fiddlers played for great crowds and small crowds. Fiddlers played most days of the week. When the fiddlers weren’t fiddling, they wrote about fiddling, tuned their fiddles, and drew pictures of them. Most music halls employed several fiddlers. There was the main fiddler, and then the second fiddler, and the third fiddler, and the fiddler who played for teenagers, and the fiddler for children.
(This conclusion will be a very loose paraphrase/analagy of 1 Cor 12-14).
But the solution to their musical inklings was not to be found in becoming a guild of fiddlers. The solution was found in the Grand Musician’s original instructions for the band. And here’s what He said:
Now, about the band, I don’t want you to be ignorant…
To each one an instrument is given for the common good,
To one the banjo,
To one the organ,
To one the piano,
To one the guitar,
To one the flute,
and to one the fiddle.All of these originate from the one Grand Musician, who gives to each the instrument according to His own plan.
So you are a band, made up of many instruments, and though the instruments are many, they form one band.
Now, the band is not made up of one instrument, but many. If everyone were a fiddler, where would the music be? The piano can’t say to the oboe, “I don’t need you.†The guitar can’t say to the harmonica, “You don’t belong!†And if the clarinet should say, “Because I’m not a fiddle, I don’t belong to the band,†it would not for that reason cease to be a part.
But in fact, the Grand Musician has arranged the members of the band, every one of them, just as He wanted them to be. If they were all one part, where would the music be? As it is, there are many instruments, but one band. Those instruments that seem to be weaker are indespensible. The Grand Musician has combined the instruments of the band and given greater honor to them that lacked it, so that there should be no division and so that each musician should have equal concern for each other (not only the fiddler). If one instrumentalist is out of pitch, every part suffers. If one musician dominates the band, every part suffers.
Now, you are the Musician’s very own band, and each of you is a part of it! If you really want to excell as musicians, play in a way that is loving. Therefore, play in a way that is loving, play in a way that is encouraging, play in a way that is participatory, and by all means, include the fiddle (1 Cor. 14:40)!
Great parable, Andy!
I like “playing fiddle.” But, you know, even the best fiddle player needs to stop playing regularly and hear other fiddles, and drummers, and flutes, and …
Considering Mutuality – Implications for ‘Non-Leaders’
So far in this series, I’ve introduced the topic of mutuality (“Considering Mutuality – Introduction“), contrasted mutuality with both individualism and collectivism (“Considering Mutuality – Individualism and Collectivism“), demonstrated that the concept of mutuality is prevalent in the New Testament (“Considering Mutuality – Where in Scripture?“), and explored the scriptural connection between mutuality and maturity for believers (“Considering Mutuality – And Maturity?“). Finally, in my previous post in this series, I discussed some of the implications of living mutually interdependent lives for leaders among the church (“Considering Mutuality – Implications for leaders”).
There are many, many among the church who desire to live mutually interdependent relationships with other believers, and who recognize the importance of these relationships for the maturity of the church. However, these people are not considered “leaders” among the church. They are not elders, or deacons, or pastors, or teachers, or whatever other titles the church may use to recognize leaders. What do these people do? Is it hopeless? Must they “leave their church” in order to find and nurture these kinds of mutually interdependent relationships?
The simple answers are: No, it is not hopeless, and no, they do not have to “leave their church” in order to live mutually with one another.
However, they many need to become leaders. What?!?!? Am I saying that people will need to become elders or pastors for their church in order to seek and see these mutual relationships? No. That’s not what I said.
Instead, I said that they may need to become leaders… meaning, they may need to lead others in forming mutually interdependent relationships. They may need to become the examples that others will need in order to recognize the importance of mutuality.
I get calls and emails from believers all the time. I meet with people for lunch. And, eventually, a question like this comes up: “But, how do I begin to form and live in this kind of relationship with others when our church and church leaders don’t seem interested? Should I leave my church?”
I have never suggested that someone “leave their church” for this reason. Instead, I encourage people to begin forming and living in relationships with those people who are already in their lives. They may know these people through church organizations, work, neighborhoods, etc. Eat together. Serve together. Get together. Play games together. Go to movies together. Help one another.
Invite your church leaders to your house and spend time with them outside of the “formal programs” of the church. Relate to them as brother and sister. Ask them about their problems and concerns and hopes and struggles etc.
In other words, if you want live mutually with others, then you may need to “lead” in this type of relationship. Share your life with others and provide opportunities for others to share their lives with you. And… be PATIENT! People do not naturally think mutually. You may need to listen to others for months, years, decades before they start listening to you. You may need to care for others for a long time before they start caring for you.
But, that’s okay… even though it is very difficult. The goal of mutuality and maturity in Christ is worth the hard work… and it IS hard work. In fact, once there is a group of people living mutually with one another, the hard work remains.
But, mutuality and maturity are worth the hard work. And, remember, you are never working along. In fact, you are never working at all… you are simply allowing the Holy Spirit to work through you doing the work that he already wants to do.
Considering Mutuality – Implications for leaders
So far in this series, I’ve introduced the topic of mutuality (“Considering Mutuality – Introduction“), contrasted mutuality with both individualism and collectivism (“Considering Mutuality – Individualism and Collectivism“), demonstrated that the concept of mutuality is prevalent in the New Testament (“Considering Mutuality – Where in Scripture?“), and explored the scriptural connection between mutuality and maturity for believers (“Considering Mutuality – And Maturity?“).
In the last two posts of the series, I’m going to suggest some implications for both leaders and non-leaders respectively. By the way, when I use the term “leaders,” I’m talking about both those who have been recognized officially by the church as leaders (whatever their titles might be) and those who may not have been recognized officially but are nonetheless leading the church by their example of serving others.
There was a time (and perhaps this still happens today) when leaders were taught to distance themselves from others in the church. This practice stands opposed to the idea of mutuality found in Scripture. Today, leaders (including elders, pastors, even “the senior pastor”) must intentionally seek mutually interdependent relationships with others in the church.
These mutual relationships should include all aspects of life – thus, the term “mutual” – including teaching, admonishing, leading, etc. In other words, for a “leader” to live mutually with others, he or she must also be led. For a “teacher” to live mutually with others, he or she must also be taught. For a “shepherd/pastor” to live mutually with others, he or she must also be shepherded (if that’s a word).
Earlier, I said that leaders must be intentional about living in mutual relationships. Modern church culture automatically places a divide between “leaders” (especially those with official titles) and “non-leaders” – whether this divide is intentional or not. In order for leaders to live in mutual relationship with others, they must intentionally break through this divide, showing themselves to be interdependent with other believers, primarily by showing that they need the other believers in their own lives.
Why are these intentionally mutual relationships important for leaders? For their maturity and for the maturity of the church (i.e. all believers in the church). I’ve already demonstrated that mutual relationships are necessary if believers are to grow in maturity toward Christ.
Thus, when we read that elders are to be “able to teach,” we must not interpret that as “only elders are to teach.” Why? Because this dissuades mutuality and thus hinders maturity. The same could be said for any spiritual gifting or service. Also, if everything in the “worship service” (church meeting) seems to depend upon you, then you must work towards less dependency and more interdependency.
These are steps that only leaders can take in most cases. So many Christians have been taught that to question leaders (especially those with titles) is the same as questioning God. Leaders must show themselves to be humble, needy people who depend upon both God and other believers to help them mature in Christ. Those of us who are leaders among the church must lead the way by living mutually interdependent lives, for our own maturity, for the maturity of the church, and as an example to others.
Happy Holidays?
I have to be honest. It doesn’t offend me when someone says, “Happy Holidays.” Seriously. I don’t mind it.
Why? Because Christmas is much more about tradition and culture than about following Jesus Christ.
“Merry Christmas” is not a profession nor a demonstration that someone is following Christ. In the same way, “Happy Holidays” is not a denial of Christ.
I just think there are many, many more important things to be concerned about than whether or not someone says “Merry Christmas” or “Happy Holidays.”
Considering Mutuality – And Maturity?
In my previous posts in this series, I’ve introduced the topic of mutuality (“Considering Mutuality – Introduction“), contrasted mutuality with both individualism and collectivism (“Considering Mutuality – Individualism and Collectivism“), and demonstrated that the concept of mutuality is prevalent in the New Testament (“Considering Mutuality – Where in Scripture?“).
However, there is one more step that we need to take before we consider some implications for today. In my introduction, I suggested that mutuality – that is, interdependent relationships between followers of Jesus Christ – is necessary for maturity. In other words, my hypothesis is that Scripture teaches that in order for believers to grow in maturity toward Christ, those believers need mutually interdependent relationships.
One of the clearest scriptural presentations of the relationships between mutuality and maturity is found in Ephesians 4, especially verse 16:
Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love. (Ephesians 4:15-16 ESV)
Notice that in this passage “growth” is both from Christ and into Christ. If we remove most of the modifying clauses, we get this: “We are to grow up into Christ from whom the body makes the body grow.”
Thus, the growth of the body is related to both the source of the growth (i.e. Christ) and the channel through which the growth occurs (i.e. the body). But, how does the “body make the body grow”?
Paul says this happens when the whole body (explicitly the “whole” body) is both joined together (again explicitly through two synonymous clauses) and each one (again explicit) does his or her part. Paul is pointing repeatedly toward mutually interdependent relationships – that is, relationships in which each part of the body depends on Christ and also depends on each other in such a way that if either Christ or one of the parts of the body were missing then growth would not occur.
But, what kind of growth is Paul talking about? In this passage, he only mentions “love,” but more than likely “love” stands as a placeholder for the fuller description that he gave earlier which included bothy unity of faith and knowledge of Jesus Christ (Ephesians 4:13). He explicitly calls this type of growth “mature manhood… the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.”
However, this is not the only passage in Scripture in which maturity is related to mutually interdependent relationships. In the book of Hebrews, the author often instructs his readers toward mutuality. Perhaps the most straightforwards passage is this one:
But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called “today,” that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. (Hebrews 3:13 ESV)
or this one:
And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near. (Hebrews 10:24-25 ESV)
Notice that in each case above, the mutual exhortation is not for the purpose of mutuality. Instead, mutuality serves the further purpose of aiding maturity in Christ – either in a negative sense (“that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin”) or in a positive sense (“to love and good works”).
Similarly, the author of Hebrews provides a very strong call to mutual relationships and demonstrates its relationship to maturity in chapter 12:
Therefore lift your drooping hands and strengthen your weak knees, and make straight paths for your feet, so that what is lame may not be put out of joint but rather be healed. Strive for peace with everyone, and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord. See to it that no one fails to obtain the grace of God; that no “root of bitterness” springs up and causes trouble, and by it many become defiled… (Hebrews 12:12-15 ESV)
While not as obvious in English translations, the commands in this passage are plural (“strengthen,” “make straight,” “strive”). Similarly, the participles (which carry imperatival force – i.e. they act like commands) are also plural (“See to it”). These plural commands are given so that the readers may grow in maturity, once again with both positive and negative implications of maturity (i.e. strengthening or lifting vs. no one fails to obtain).
While there are many more passages of Scripture that could be consulted, the passages above demonstrate that according to Scripture mutuality is not just a good thing, but instead mutually interdependent relationships are necessary for believers to mature in their faith, in their knowledge of Jesus Christ, and in the demonstration of love.
Considering Mutuality – Where in Scripture?
In my previous posts in this series, I introduced the topic of mutuality as “a reciprocal relation between interdependent entities†and suggested that mutuality between believers is related to maturity in Christ (“Considering Mutuality – Introduction“). Next, I described “individualism” and “collectivism” and suggested that “mutuality” stands apart from both (“Considering Mutuality – Individualism and Collectivism“).
In this post, I would like for us to consider where we find the concept of mutuality in Scripture. Unfortunately, because the data is so extensive, I will not be able to list all of the passages. Instead, I want to point out a few instances of mutuality in Scripture.
To begin with, the widespread use of the term “one another” in the New Testament points us toward the importance of mutuality. “One another” is the English translation of the Greek reciprocal pronoun ἀλλήλων (allÄ“lÅn). A reciprocal pronoun indicates that more than one person is involved in both carrying out an activity and in the results of the activity. Thus, when Scripture indicates that we should “love one another,” “teach one another,” “exhort one another,” “serve one another,” etc., these are mutual activities in which more than one person is involved in both the activity and the result.
Second, consider the use of the Greek preposition σÏν (sÅ«n), either as a standalone preposition or as a prepositional prefix to verbs. This pronoun is usually translated “with” or “together with.” An important usage of this preposition is found in Ephesians 2:
But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ – by grace you have been saved – and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus… (Ephesians 2:4-6 ESV)
The highlight English terms are translations of Greek verbs with the σÏν (sÅ«n) prepositional prefix. We understand that we are not made alive, raised up, or seated along or on our own or by our own power, but these occur in mutual relation with Christ.
However, we find often find σÏν (sÅ«n) prefixed words indicating the same mutual relationship between believers. Consider just this one passage:
This mystery is that the Gentiles are fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel. (Ephesians 3:6 ESV)
The highlighted words in the passage above are all single nouns prefixed with σÏν (sÅ«n) indicating a mutual relationship.
As a final example – although I could give many, many more – consider one of the primary forms of “teaching” between believers: the verb διαλÎγομαι (dialegomai). While it is often used in the interaction between believers (i.e. Acts 19:9; Acts 20:7; Acts 20:9), and is sometimes translated “reasoned,” “talked,” or even “preached,” the term indicates less of a one-to-many teaching method than a many-to-many teaching method. Thus, even in teaching we find mutual relationships between believers.
So, in these examples, I’m demonstrated that mutuality – that is, followers of Jesus Christ living in interdependent relationships with one another -Â is not only present in Scripture, but mutuality is widespread in the New Testament. Therefore, we should take mutuality seriously as a means of relating to one another.