Living the Christ Hymn of Philippians 2
I’m certain that my readers are familiar with the “Christ Hymn” of Philippians 2:
Who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, 10so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Philippians 2:6-11 ESV)
There have been volumes written about the Christological implications of this passage. Although Christ was God in his nature, he chose to become a man… not just a man, but a servant. He obeyed to the point of death. Because Jesus Christ gave himself, God the Father exalted him.
But, have you thought about the context of this great Christological passage? Let’s take it backwards. This is the sentence that introduces the hymn:
Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God… (Philippians 2:5-6a ESV)
Thus, Paul wrote this “Christ Hymn” to show his readers how they should think about themselves. Regardless of their position or importance, they were to consider themselves as servants. Jesus, then, among other things, serves as an example of the way the Philippians should think about themselves in relation to others.
Why was this important to Paul? Again, read the sentences before this:
So if there is any encouragement in Christ, any comfort from love, any participation in the Spirit, any affection and sympathy, complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. Do nothing from rivalry or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. Have this mind among yourselves… (Philippians 2:1-5a… ESV)
Paul reminds his readers of Jesus’ example not just so they can meditate on the nature of Christ, nor just so they can think rightly about themselves, but so that they have an example and an impetus for treating others as more important than themselves… so that they can live in unity and harmony with one another… so that there is no rivalry or conceit between them.
In other words, the “Christ Hymn” gives us a model for living. We are to live among one another as servants. If even the greatest among us (Jesus Christ) could become a servant and become obedient to God unto death, surely we can also serve others, thinking of them as more significant than ourselves.
Just as God exalted Christ, we should be willing to humble ourselves and trust God to lift us up. As James wrote, “God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble. Submit yourselves therefore to God… Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will exalt you.” (James 4:6-11 ESV) Thus, one of the ways that we humble ourselves before the Lord is in the way we humble ourselves before other people.
For leaders – for those who are attempting to live their lives as an example for others in following Jesus – this should be doubly true. Leaders should be known more for humbly allowing others to have their way than for demanding to have their own way. Leaders should be known more for serving than for being served. I think Jesus said something about that also, and again offered himself as an example specifically for leaders. (Matthew 20:28)
Obviously, we are not Jesus Christ. Our service and our obedience does not carry the same meaning that his carried. However, his service and his obedience serve as an example to us in how to live with our brothers and sisters in Christ. The Christ Hymn of Philippians 2 is just one example of how a New Testament author used the life of Jesus as an example for us to follow, not just contemplate.
Breaking through man-made boundaries
I’ve noticed recently that some of my younger friends (teenagers especially) are better at breaking through the man-made boundaries of church organization.
I’m certain that you know what I mean by “man-made boundaries of church organization”? You know, those boundaries that say we should only attend meetings with a certain group of people, or we should only discuss spiritual things with “our church,” or we should only hang out with the right kind of Christians, or we only have responsibilities toward other “church members”.
But, I’ve noticed that my children and their friends do not have those same kinds of hangups. In fact, among their group of friends, there are people from many different church organizations. Yet, they all hang out together, and they all share in one another’s lives.
They often meet with one another’s churches, and even attend events put on by other churches. (Of course, the church organizations don’t always know what to do about this. I can’t tell you how many times we’ve been “visited” because our children attended some function. The assumption is that we’re not “happy” with our church and want to “join” their church. More indication of man-made boundaries…)
I’m encouraged at the way I see these young believers living and sharing their lives. Not only does it give me hope, but it also makes me wonder if us older folks could learn something from this teenagers.
Church Life #7 – Sunday
This series is about our life with the church as we attempt to live together as brothers and sisters. (For a more detailed description of this series, see my post “Church Life – A New Series.”)
In this post of my Church Life series, I want to talk about the Sunday (or weekly) church meeting. There are ways to modify the traditional method of meeting in order to foster community and fellowship. These are some of the things that we’ve done, but certainly not all of the changes that could be made. Similarly, some of these changes may not be helpful in your situation.
One of the first changes that we made to the traditional method of meeting (at least the tradition that we were all accustomed to) was in the area of teaching (preaching). In Scripture, it seems that multiple people had opportunity to speak, teach, exhort, etc. when the church met. So, we wanted more than one person to have the opportunity to teach.
To begin with, we maintain a teaching schedule. Any of the men can sign up to teach a passage (we teach through books of the Bible, and we currently do not allow women to sign up to teach). This means that from week to week, different people will be speaking as the main teacher (preacher).
Each person that teaches has the option of teaching in whatever method they choose, since people both teach differently and learn differently. More and more have recognized the value of discussion and have included discussion in their teaching method.
Also, besides the main teaching (through a book of the Bible), we also leave time in our meeting for anyone to speak, exhort, give a testimony, ask for prayer, etc. So, not only is the main teacher (preacher) changing from week to week, but there are also several people speaking during each meeting. Although several people speak, they always take turns so as not to be disorderly.
We’ve also changed the way we sing together. Each week, instead of having the same person or people choose songs for everyone to sing, there is a different person from week to week. Sometimes, this person chooses a few songs. Usually, there is also opportunity for anyone to choose a song for the church to sing. Also, anyone is allowed to take part by playing an instrument if they want to.
Another change that we’ve made is in the way we arrange our chairs. (Yes, this would be difficult for those with pews.) We typically arrange our chairs in consecutive circles. (If there is a presentation – slideshow, etc. – then we set the chairs up in a horseshoe pattern.) This arrangement allows much more interaction than is possible in rows of chairs. We’ve also found that we no longer need our sound system, since people are facing one another.
Finally, we eat together almost every Sunday. Usually, this is an informal meal. People bring food (or go to fast food restaurants to pick up food) for themselves. Occasionally, a few families will get together and decide to fix food together. For example, a few weeks ago, three families decided to fix soup. They emailed everyone and invited the church to join them.
All of these changes were not made for the sake of changing. Also, the changes were not forced on the church from the elders. Instead, the changes were made as the church recognized that something was hindering their meeting together.
Review of When the Church Was a Family – Decision Making and Leadership
Joseph H. Hellerman’s book When the Church Was a Family: Recapturing Jesus’ Vision for Authentic Christian Community is more than a book about the church, but it is certainly not less than a book about the church. Given the importance I place on the church identifying and living as a family, I am going to review this book in three parts: Strong Group Identity, Sharing Life Together, and Decision Making and Leadership. This post contains the third part of my review: Decision Making and Leadership.
Of the three parts of my review, this one will probably be the most difficult for Western thinkers. Why? Because aside from our personal times, individualistic thinkers pride themselves on making their own decisions.
But, according to Hellerman, one of the aspects of strong group thinking is shared decision making, both decisions that affect the group and decisions that seemingly only affect the individual. Why? Because all decisions actually affect the group. This includes life decisions such as occupation, marriage, and place to live.
Hellerman writes:
[B]ig decisions are best made in community, in the context of the church family – especially big family decisions. (pg 168)
More than advice-seeking is at work here. It will not do simply to challenge American evangelicals, who otherwise live life as isolated individuals, to seek counsel from others only when they come to a defining fork in the road of life. In the strong-group church family model, input from others is a way of life, not a resource to occasionally draw on as one of several items on a checklist that purports to tell us how to find God’s will for our lives…
This is quite important because what I am advocating here is not an institutional program… More often than not, input comes in a less structured, more organic way, as long-term relationships with brothers and sisters in the church family provide the natural context for speaking wisdom into one another’s lives in a variety of settings. (pg 170-171)
Hellerman recognizes that Christian leaders can be helpful in making decisions, but he says that most decisions should be made in the context of the whole church. Unfortunately, I think Hellerman’s examples fail him at this point. All of his examples (unless I missed some) were of church leaders (pastors) instructing individuals about decisions they should make. I wish he would have included many examples of community-wide decision making that affected individuals. (I’ll touch on this point again later in this review and interaction.)
Hellerman suggests several methods of helping a church organization transition to a “family-oriented church model” – recognizing that this is not a model to be implemented but a different way of understanding and living life. He says that the content of teaching and reconsidering the social context can be very beneficial.
What does he mean by “reconsider the social context”? He says:
But teaching our people about the church as a family will not suffice to alter deeply ingrained patterns of behavior. We must also reevaluate the social contexts of church life, the ways in which our ministries are executed. The priority most churches place upon the success of the Sunday service subtly but powerfully communicates the message that this impersonal, once-a-week social environment is quintessentially what “church” is all about… [S]o it is essential to provide for our people the kind of social settings in which church family relations can be experienced firsthand. (pg 177-178)
I think Hellerman is correct that we (that is, all believers) should recognize that all interactions with other believers are important. (This is one of the reasons that I started my “Church Life” series.) I would add that it is also possible to make the Sunday (or weekly) meeting of the church less of an “impersonal, once-a-week social environment.” The church meeting can be very personal and interactive, but we must be willing to change from our current models and ways of meeting together.
Finally, in a strong group community such as Hellerman describes (that is, the type of community that he finds in the New Testament), he recognizes that there exists the danger of abuse, especially from leaders. Hellerman says that following the biblical mandates of plural leaders and servant leaders will help to balance this danger.
I would also add that removing the decision-making authority from leaders will also balance this danger. Remember that when Jesus spoke to his disciples about the way worldly leaders exercised authority, he said, “It shall not be so among you.” That is pretty clear to me. In the church, leaders are servants, not decision makers. Decision making is the responsibility of the whole church together.
I would hope that the church would recognize mature, serving people as their leaders, and that those leaders would offer godly guidance and wisdom. But, the responsibility to make decisions should remain the function of the church, not the leaders.
In the last few years, my thinking about the church has changed drastically. Primarily, my understanding of the church has changed because I recognize that the church is a family – not that the church should become a family, but that the church is a family. Thus, many of the statements in this book are familiar to me. However, Hellerman brings up many aspects of family and strong group life that remain difficult for me to consider. But, I must consider these aspects of family life as well.
I would recommend this book to any Christian. For many, this book will help them along a journey that they have already started (like me). For others, this book may begin to put some pieces into place. For still others, what Hellerman writes will sound strange, impossible, and undesirable. But, for all of us, I think Hellerman can help us understand more clearly what the New Testament authors wrote. It remains to be seen what our response to that understanding will be.
Church Life #6 – The Workplace
This series is about our life with the church as we attempt to live together as brothers and sisters. (For a more detailed description of this series, see my post “Church Life – A New Series.”)
In this post of my Church Life series, I want to talk about the workplace, and primarily, the coworkers that God has brought into my life and the relationships that we’ve developed.
Too often, when we think about sharing life with the church, we limit that “shared life” to specific people, specific days, specific times, etc. However, anytime that God brings people into our lives we should love them as our neighbors (i.e. the parable of the Good Samaritan). This becomes especially true when those people are also brothers and sisters in Christ. Our responsibilities toward one another are not limited to people who share an organizational membership (i.e. church members).
I work in an office with three or four other people (the number changes from time to time). In the seven years that I’ve worked in this office, I’ve met some great people, and we’ve formed very close friendships. In fact, I’m still in contact with several people who have now moved to other states.
We’ve had different beliefs when it comes to the church, or end times, or salvation, etc. However, we found unity and community in Jesus Christ.
Yes, we’ve made each other angry at times. We’ve gotten on each other’s nerves. We’ve let each other down from time to time. That is, we’re human.
However, these were not relationships that we could just drop and move on to someone else. We had to work together. So, we worked through the problems, and we found our relationships becoming even stronger, not because of our agreements but in spite of our disagreements. Why? Because, we discovered that we still have fellowship with one another in Jesus Christ, if we do not hinder that fellowship by some man-made distinctive.
So, even though we were part of different church organizations, and even though we had differing beliefs in some areas of doctrine or theology, and even though there was friction occasionally, we found community together in Jesus Christ. Of course, given that we spent more time with one another than with most other believers (we worked together 40 hours per week), we found these relationships to be much stronger than others, and often more important in our developing maturity in Jesus Christ.
We talked and discussed issues together. We prayed together. We listened to one another. We helped one another (even outside the work environment). In other words, we carried out our family responsibilities toward one another as brothers and sisters in Christ.
So, when you are thinking about Christian community and sharing life with other believers, don’t forget about relationships outside of the church organization (i.e. church members). God may bring coworkers or neighbors or fellow volunteers into your lives. Don’t neglect those people but foster your relationship with anyone that God brings into your life, especially fellow believers.
Review of When the Church Was a Family – Sharing Life Together
Joseph H. Hellerman’s book When the Church Was a Family: Recapturing Jesus’ Vision for Authentic Christian Community is more than a book about the church, but it is certainly not less than a book about the church. Given the importance I place on the church identifying and living as a family, I am going to review this book in three parts: Strong Group Identity, Sharing Life Together, and Decision Making and Leadership. This post contains the second part of my review: Sharing Life Together.
As I mentioned in the first part of this review (Strong Group Identity), Hellerman demonstrates in this book that the early church saw itself as a new group – God’s new family – with a strong group identity in which the group becomes more important than the individual and more important than any other group. This type of group identity affected the way these early Christians lived.
The problem in Western culture is that our individualized way of thinking has left us unable to contemplate sharing life with other people. As Hellerman states:
As cultural analysts will tell us, people in our relationally fragmented, increasingly isolated, techno-culture are highly sensitive to the need for healthy relationships with their fellow human beings. We long for community, but our own family experiences have often left us painfully aware of the tremendous difficulties involved in cultivating such relationships with the resources the secular world has to offer. We are left wholly unequipped to satisfy our deepest relational longings and needs. (pg 138-139)
Thus, the images in Scripture of early Christians sharing not just the gospel but their lives with one another is very appealing, but also very confusing to modern readers. While many would love to share in that type of community, few realize or are willing to sacrifice what it takes to get there.
For example, Hellerman covers four “New Testament family values”: 1) We share our stuff with one another, 2) We share our hearts with one another, 3) We stay, embrace the pain, and grow up with one another, and 4) Family is about more than me, the wife, and the kids. (pg 145)
Even these four family values demonstrate that community life begins by giving, not getting. It begins with pain, not comfort. Although life in a New Testament community can be encouraging, beneficial, comforting, caring, etc., there will also be friction and disagreement, especially as believers learn to shift from an individualistic mindset to a group mindset. (Of course, there would have been some friction among those first Christians as well, but they would not require a paradigm shift, only a group shift – which can still be painful!)
Sharing material possessions, time, hopes, dreams, tears, decisions, etc. does not come readily for modern Western thinkers. We’ve been taught to demand our own rights and to strike out on our own if necessary. Thus, we never move through the pain of giving in order to live in a real community. (I wrote about this previously in a post called “The depths of community.”)
Another difficulty for modern believers is the lack of example. There are very few people willing to live in and demonstrate community for us. Even many leaders are more interested in making decisions than in being part of a community. Then, once we find a community, we find that it looks nothing like our community. Believe it or not, this is natural. Hellerman says:
What would Christianity look like if we truly recaptured Jesus’ vision for authentic Christian community? It would likely vary considerably from person to person and from church to church, since the surrogate family values we observed among the early Christians would manifest themselves in different ways in different church environments. The values themselves – group loyalty and sharing of material resources, for example – would remain much the same. But these fundamental expressions of social solidarity would surely express themselves in our churches in a myriad of ways. (pg 144)
So, as we share our lives together – beginning with each person sacrificing their own rights for the benefit of the group – the community that forms would probably look different than another Christian community. Each community is made of people (obviously) and all the people are different (obviously), so we should expect the communities to look different, although they will share common values as directed by the Holy Spirit who indwells both the individuals and the community.
Two particular ways that we share life together as a community are in the areas of decision making and leadership. I will discuss these community/family concepts in the next part of my review and interaction of When the Church Was a Family.
Camping Weekend and Elders
We just returned home from camping with the church. Every camping trip is different (this is our sixth camping trip as a church), and this one was different also. I think we all learned alot about ourselves, about one another, and about God.
There were several highlights… really too many to mention. But, a couple of hikes and the baptism were definitely among the top.
I’ve posted some pictures of the camping trip on my facebook profile.
Also, today the church recognized four more elders. When we started meeting together five years ago, we recognized four elders. When Mael moved to Texas last month, I was the only elder remaining. For the last two months, the church has been talking about elders. And, today, as the last step in the process, we recognized four more men as elders. So, I’m excited that I am not the only recognized elder any longer.
Running and Camping
This morning, our family is volunteering to help the Franklin County Humane Society. Normally, we are a foster family for orphaned puppies. Today, we’re also helping them with their 5k run/walk. Some of Jeremy and Miranda’s friends are also helping us.
I’m looking forward to the free Starbucks coffee and free lunch. But, I’m even more interested in continuing to build relationships with some of the humane society volunteers. Actually, Margaret is farther along is developing those relationships than I am, but hopefully I’ll be able to help (and not hinder) her today.
After we help the humane society, we’re heading to the lake to meet up with the church. We’re camping together this weekend. The church has camped together five or six times, but this is only the third time for our family. We’ve either had other plans or have been out of town during the camping trips.
The camping trips have always been incredible. We get to fellowship with one another for almost 48 hours straight – except for sleeping times.
So, today will include two of my favorite activities: service and fellowship. In fact, the service will include time of fellowship, and the fellowship will include times of service. And, God willing, we’ll be making disciples all the time.
Church Life #5
This series is about our life with the church as we attempt to live together as brothers and sisters. (For a more detailed description of this series, see my post “Church Life – A New Series.”)
Monday: I had lunch on Monday with Adam, Danny, and Jonathan. Jonathan had written a paper for one of his classes, and he wanted our input. Concerning his paper, we primarily offered advice about presentation and structure. But, his content led to a great conversation about who we are as brothers and sisters in Christ.
Wednesday: Dave Black invited me to lecture on the topic of the church gathering in Corinth. I knew a few of the students, and I was able to meet more of them before, during, and after class. I appreciated both their questions and their encouragement. It is awesome to see people comparing the modern church to the church in Scripture!
Thursday:I had lunch Thursday with someone that I met through my blog. We’ve had lunch a few times, and he’s always been an encouragement to me. When we first had lunch together, he had a desire to live in community with his brothers and sisters. It is exciting to hear what God is doing in his life!
I haven’t said anything in this series about my Latin class. I teach a Latin class on Thursday afternoon to several homeschool students (primarily high school aged). I really enjoy interacting with the boys and girls in my class.
Friday: Our friends (the Barbours) had planned another Game Night for Friday night. We took Jeremy and Miranda and hung out for about an hour or so. But, Margaret and I didn’t stay at Game Night this time. Instead, we went out to dinner (to a great Thai restaurant) with some friends. We had a great dinner and even better conversation. These times of fellowship are so important!
After we returned to the Barbour’s house, we hung out with the teenagers for another hour or so before returning home.
Saturday: Margaret and Miranda helped the Franklin County Humane Society with their bi-weekly adopt-a-thon Saturday afternoon. Not only does volunteering with the humane society give us the opportunity to take care of homeless dogs, we also get to interact with some of the other people who volunteer. I could probably fill several posts with those stories!
Sunday: We gathered with the church again on Sunday morning. We had seen many of the people throughout the week. There is still some excitement running through our little group concerning the Black’s presentation last week. They invited us to help them serve the people of Ethiopia, and we are praying individually and as a church to determine how God wants us to help.
After singing, Mark taught from Matthew 22:23-33 – the passage where the Sadducees tried to trick Jesus with a question about the resurrection. The resurrection is so important to who we are as the church. His teaching led to a great discussion about the resurrection and also about being led by God.
I shared with the church that I had been struggling over the last few days. There was not one big issue that I could point to, but I simply shared that I was more easily frustrated and less patient and loving. I didn’t like, and I asked the church to pray for me. The church was very encouraging!
That night, we helped some friends who are out of town for the week. They have goats, and they needed someone to milk their goats. Our family and another family is going to take turns milking their goats for them, so we met together to make sure we all knew what we were doing.
After milking the goats, and before we all headed back to our homes, one of my friends stopped me and prayed for me again. What a great family!
Eating together
In Witness to the Gospel: The Theology of Acts (edited by I. Howard Marshall and David Peterson), Brad Blue writes a chapter called “The Influence of Jewish Worship on Luke’s Presentation of the Early Church.” Blue concludes that while there were a few changes, “[I]t is abundantly clear that the Jewish antecedents to Christian assembly… are felt throughout… The church, then, was a Christian synagogue.” (pg 497)
In one section, called “Eating Together,” Blue discusses the Jewish synagogue practice of “breaking bread”:
[T]he Jewish rite of ‘breaking the break’ or simply ‘the breaking’ was the coinage for the ritual for the opening of a meal. The ritual included the following elements: (1) the host (with bread in hands) would offer a prayer of thanksgiving to God; (2) those at the common table would respond with ‘Amen’; (3) the host would then break and distribute the bread; (4) the host would begin to eat and would be followed by the guests. Thus the ‘breaking (of the bread)’ is a metonym for the prayer of blessing and the distribution. With respects to the NT evidence, this meaning satisfies the contexts (cf. Luke 24:35; Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7, 11; 27:35).
It is clear that ‘the breaking’ is always, at this early date, a constituent of a meal scene: by its definition it necessitates a meal scene here. (pg 488-89)
The early Christians were Jewish. The people who wrote the New Testament manuscripts were Jewish. For the most part, early church practices were Jewish.
Even eating together was part of Jewish “religious” practices. This was not something new or inventive for the church (although it seems new and inventive today). It was as much a part of synagogue and church practices as reading and discussing Scripture (the idea of the sermon came along much later).
However, many things changed. Concerning the common meal, one thing in particular changed: the host. The head of the synagogue was no longer the host of the common meal. Jesus Christ was now the host. It was his meal, his table, and he served his family.
This is Paul’s point in 1 Corinthians 11:23-26:
For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. (1 Corinthians 11:23-26 ESV)
The Corinthians were eating and drinking (1 Corinthians 11:20-21), but they demonstrate by the way they eat and drink (that is, in the way they treat one another while they are eating and drinking) that they are not eating or drinking from the Lord’s table. The Lord is not their host. The people have become their own host.
When Paul quoted Jesus’ words, he was not given the church a formula to repeat. He was reminding them who instituted, who serves, and who hosts when they eat from the Lord’s table. That is, it is the Lord himself.
Paul told them to examine how they were treating one another when they dined together. Why? Because they were dining with the Lord.