A Parable about a Divided Family
A man had several children. He loved his children and provided for them as any loving father would. And, like most children, they often disagreed and fought. But, the father would bring the children together and make them deal with their disagreements.
One by one, as the children grew up, they moved out of the father’s house. However, they all stayed close by. One son moved into a house a block away. A daughter moved into the house next door. Another son moved across town. Each child moved into his or her own house, married, and began to start their own family.
Also, one by one, the children stopped talking to one another. Their disagreement and fights became more serious and divisive. And, since they no longer lived with their father, they no longer came together to work out their differences.
Whenever they saw one another at the store, or on the sidewalk, or at the park, they would point out their differences and disagreements. Often, the arguments would become loud and heated, such that people walking by would notice. Eventually, the people in town knew the family as “the divided family.”
The name “divided family” grieved the father, so he invited his children to come together to work out their differences. They all agreed. But, one by one, the children declined the invitation when they heard that the other children were invited as well. Each one refused to get together with their father as long as the other children were invited.
The father continued to spend time with his children one-on-one, but he could not convince the children to come together. Whenever he attempted to invite more than one of his children to his house, the children would refuse and point out their disagreements and differences with the other children.
As the grandchildren grew older and moved out of their parents’ houses, they also began to disagree with one another. They would often argue with their parents as well. While each of the children and grandchildren and (eventually) great grandchildren loved to spend time with the father, they refused to get together with one another.
Whenever the father tried to bring them together, the children and grandchildren and great grandchildren would complain to the father about the others, and tell him that their family was right and the other families were wrong. They explained passionately to their father why they could not get together with those other families.
One day, in his grief, the father wrote a letter. In the letter, the father acknowledged the hurt, disagreements, and arguments that had split his children and grandchildren and great grandchildren. He acknowledged that it would take great efforts on all their parts to bring them all back together again.
“However,” he concluded, “in all of your arguments and disagreements and divisions, you have forgotten one thing: In my perspective, as long as you live as separate families, you are living a lie. You are one family – my family – and I will never see you nor treat you as multiple families.”
Facebook Stati Ecclesiae
When I update my Facebook statuses (stati?), they usually fall under one of four categories:
1. Links to my blog posts.
2. Something humorous.
3. Things that I’m doing or have done.
4. Something about the church.
Sometimes, my status updates about the church lead to good discussions. Here are some Facebook statuses that I’ve written recently about the church:
—————————————————————————————————
1. “Members expected. Visitors welcome.” (from a sign in front of a church building) huh? If you’re getting together with us only because you think its expected of you, then you may as well stay home.
—————————————————————————————————
2. (From a discussion about discipleship…) “The church is full of Ethiopian eunuchs.” What do you think that statement means? Do you agree or disagree?
—————————————————————————————————
3. Quote from SYTYCD (“So You Think You Can Dance”) that every believer should be able to say about the church: “Everyone in my family has affected who I am in one way or another.”
—————————————————————————————————
4. “Exhort one another daily”… but today is Tuesday… What if I only see them on Sunday?
—————————————————————————————————
5. “Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up.” hmmmm… which one will I demonstrate today?
—————————————————————————————————
6. Both the priest and the Levite thought they loved the injured man, but only the Samaritan truly loved him.
—————————————————————————————————
7. Wednesday night worship service and church activities = milking goats for our friends while they are out of town.
—————————————————————————————————
8. Are you a child of God? Then also consider yourself an ordained minister and missionary. Now, live accordingly.
—————————————————————————————————
9. If you can’t replace the word “ministry” with the word “service”, then you’re not using the word “ministry” in the same sense as Scripture.
—————————————————————————————————
10. Get out of “the ministry” and start ministering.
—————————————————————————————————
11. Today, the church agreed that there will be coffee shops in the new heavens and new earth. However, we quickly divided concerning the style / brand / roast of coffee that would be served.
—————————————————————————————————
12. The Lord’s Supper (intended to demonstrate our unity around a common table, among other things) is too often used to divide.
—————————————————————————————————
13. If the church in my house meets the church in your house while we’re all in the park, do we become the church in the park, or two churches in the park?
—————————————————————————————————
14. Discipleship requires sharing life. If you are preaching/teaching but not sharing your life, then you are not making disciples.
—————————————————————————————————
15. Spiritual maturity occurs primarily in community… and community can’t happen one or two days a week.
—————————————————————————————————
Well, there you have it… fifteen Facebook status updates… numbered for your convenience. Feel free to comment on any or all and to add your own thoughts.
21st Century Church Contest Entries
Energion’s blogging/essay contest is finished. All the submissions are in, and the judging has begun. I know, because I’m one of the judges. Without giving away my preferences or rankings, I thought I would share some thoughts from each essay (in the order listed by Energion):
From A. Amos Love’s submission:
This congregation of “Disciples of Christ,†“the ekklesia of God,†“ sons of God,†will;
Forsake all…
Love not the world…
Love not their own life…
Just want to know Him…
Count all things but dung…
Always take the lower place…
Make themselves of no reputation…
From Arthur Sido’s submission:
Scripture does not lay out a specific, liturgical schedule of events to govern the lives of believers nor is one desirable. All too often we have tried to push Scripture aside when it comes to the gathering of the New Covenant people as the church and replaced it with our own pragmatic solutions, rituals and traditions which may bring us comfort and a sense of being religious but bring little glory to God. Isn’t bringing glory to God what the gathering of the church is supposed to be about?
From Lew Ayotte’s submission:
When the Assembly of Christ is about building one another up, not dividing over leaders or denominations, focused on recognizing their own leaders, they will inherently be about fulfilling the Great Commission. In fact, I believe following Jesus’ command here may be like second nature to them. They will see the world through His eyes instead of their own. As the Assembly of Christ, reaching our neighbors will not be based on a program, chant, or weekly exercise… it will be according to Christ’s example. Each member in the assembly will recognize their responsibilities, although different, each one has an extremely important role.
From David Blanton’s submission:
Finally, a Jesus Christ ministry cannot help but look like Christ Jesus, the only mirror that is worth measuring itself against. What did the Good Samaritan look like? The parable never gave the listener a physical description because it wasn’t important. The only radical ministry is the one that has Christ Jesus as its center, who said to love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your strength, and all your mind. And love your neighbor as yourself. If a ministry does that, then it cannot help but look like a Jesus Christ ministry. Does the ministry look forward or backward or does it abstain from the obtuseness of looking anywhere but its center?
From Lionel Woods’ submission:
When the disciples met with Christ, He was modeling community before them. They asked “where are you staying†and He answered “come and seeâ€. From that day forward they lived in a community, sharing, eating, living amongst, and knowing one another. They would have looked at what we giggle at today as a cult. We think that type of life on life is appalling, idiotic, unnecessary, we believe that type of life is too radical, ridiculous, we cling on to our autonomy like it is a right, my friends it is not. We belong to a King. A King who has created us for this community a community to reflect who He is.
From James Lee’s submission:
This aptly demonstrates the need for our ministry to each other and provides a point of commonality that will equip us to be true salt and light in the world while loving each other. We cannot accomplish the tasks of discipleship and proclamation of the Gospel through political agendas, legislated morality, bully pulpits, and sectarian distinctions that scream we are right and you are wrong. We can only accomplish true ministry in this century through the power of Christ, His Holy Spirit, and a love for one another that strengthens us to face the enemy head on, and storm the gates of hell with the victory that was wrought in the spotless Lamb’s blood.
From Christopher Larson’s submission:
Such ministry will seek to avoid the two pitfalls of pragmatism on the one hand and self important hyper-spiritual perfection on the other. it will celebrate the freedom to do many things so that one thing might in the end be done, and it will celebrate all who share that calling as brothers and sisters in the ministry that takes many external forms, but in the end is one, (Pslam 119:63). Our goal will be to always ‘remember Jesus Christ’ in whatever form our work may take, and to know however difficult the path may seem He is Lord and He is not in chains, but freely working in and through us to bring forth a people for Himself, (2 Timothy 2:1-9).
I enjoyed all of the submissions. They all caused me to think about the church of Jesus Christ in the 21st century in different ways. I encourage you to read each of the essays.
Adolf Schlatter on the Church
About two and half years ago, I wrote an article called “Adolf Schlatter on the Church“. In the post, I responded to something that Schlatter wrote concerning the unity of the early church. I still wonder why we can’t live in that same unity today.
————————————–
Adolf Schlatter was an anomaly in late nineteenth and early twentieth century German theological scholarship. Though holding a teaching position at Tübingen, a university well-known for approaching the Bible through higher criticism, Schlatter maintained conservative (evangelical?) beliefs. I have wanted to buy his two volume set The History of the Christ and The Theology of the Apostles for some time. I was finally able to buy them, and I flipped through The Theology of the Apostles looking for Schlatter’s view of the church. There is certainly much more to read, but I found this paragraph very interesting:
Moreover, the public confession of Jesus’ lordship produced in them a union that oriented everyone’s conduct toward the same goal, and the Spirit’s presence invested the community with a thoroughly spiritual dimension. Baptism did not result in a multitude of autonomous congregations but the one church, because baptism called its recipients to the Christ. Likewise, the table around which the community gathered was not the table of a teacher or baptizer or bishop but Christ’s table. By receiving their share in Christ, they simultaneously entered into communion with all other believers. The concept of the church thus took on a universal dimension from the start that remained undiminished, just as the individual local Jewish congregation had always been considered to be part of the one Israel.
According to Schlatter, the universality and the unity of the church was more than an ideal. The church was universal and united because of its shared confession, conduct, goal, baptism, table, and portion in Christ, not to mention the common presence of the Spirit of God.
As I look at that list – a list of items that, according to Schlatter, once brought the church together – I recognize that many, perhaps all, are now used to divide the church instead of unite the church. While the confession (“Jesus is Lord”) was originally intended to separate believers from nonbelievers, we now use expanded confessional statements to separate one group of believers from another group of believers. While the one baptism originally represented death to self and new birth in Christ, baptism is now used to divide the body of Christ into different factions. Similarly, the Lord’s table and even conduct are often used to separate churches instead of uniting them.
Do we recognize that who we are as the church has little (if anything) to do with the things we say or even the things we do? I would suggest (along with Schlatter) that who we are as the church is instead associated with us having received a “share in Christ”. But, that also means that who other people are does not depend on the words they say or the things they do. Instead, those who have received Christ have “simultaneously entered into communion with all other believers” – not because of their actions or a prayer or a confession, but because they now belong to Christ and they now belong to the Father’s family. Certainly, there may be a need for discipleship and teaching people to live as a part of the Father’s family, but we do not have the right nor the authority to dismiss someone from the Father’s family nor to choose to disassociate with someone who Christ has claimed as His own.
Can we know with certainty that someone belongs to Christ? No. But, then again, no one can know with certainty about us either. With the “confession of Jesus’ lordship” (“Jesus is Lord”) someone claims acceptance into the family of God and the presence of the Spirit. As a family, we are then required (yes, I do mean required) to accept that person, to disciple that person, to bear with that person, to love that person, to serve that person, to teach that person, to forgive that person even if (especially if!) that person disagrees with us. We come together in community, but that community is not based on us and our beliefs and our confessions. That community is based solely on our individual and mutual relationships with God through Jesus Christ enabled by the Holy Spirit.
When we separate from someone that we consider a brother or sister in Christ, we are usurping the authority of God. And, when we refuse to hold brothers and sisters accountable to their confession “Jesus is Lord”, then we are ignoring our mutual responsibilities as part of God’s family.
NT Theology Lecture: The Assembled Church in Corinth
Yesterday, I had an opportunity to present a lecture in New Testament Theology. Dave Black asked me to speak in his class on the topic of the assembling of the church in 1 Corinthians 12-14.
I presented the lecture titled “The Assembled Church in Corinth” as an exercise in New Testament Theology, hopefully to not only encourage the students in their understanding of the church, but also in their understanding and practice of New Testament and Biblical Theology.
I’ve added the mp3 file to my Resources page. You can either download the recording, or stream it online. Also, I’ve included a pdf file of my outline on that same page.
This is the outline that I used for my presentation:
——————————————-
The Assembled Church
I. Introduction and Background
Andrew Chester – “The Pauline Communities†– A Vision for the Church: Studies in Early Christian Ecclesiology (ed. Markus Bockmuehl and Michael B. Thompson; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1997):
Paul’s vision for the communities that he wrote to can be summed up quite succinctly. He sees them as being a new creation in Christ, filled with the Spirit, possessing gifts of the Spirit and overflowing with the fruit of the Spirit, controlled above all by love; they are communities that should be pure and holy, mutually supportive and interdependent, completely united, transcending the oppositions and tensions between different groups within the community, and with every kind of barrier that would divide them in normal society broken down.
This brief summary may seem over-idealized; it may indeed seem somewhat grandiose and abstract, especially in the light of the occasional letter that Paul wrote to quite different communities, often on very specific and mundane issues… It is also to be said that theory and practice in any case often fail to coincide, and the way that a particular community lives can be very far removed from Paul’s vision of what it should be. Paul himself is made painfully aware of this. Indeed, it is probably true to say that we have a semblance of Paul’s vision for his communities, to a large extent, because of the problems that have arisen in a number of those communities and that Paul feels the need to counter. That is, Paul finds himself faced with what he considers false practice, or even a complete negation of his ideal of the Christian community, and hence has to urge those in these communities that he has founded to become what they know they should be, and not remain as they are. (105)
As Chester points out, we have Paul’s vision for the church because the churches that Paul wrote to were not living according to that vision.
The church in Corinth is a good example of a church that failed to live according to that vision.
Margaret Mitchell (Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation) suggests that Paul’s purpose in writing to the church in Corinth was to reconcile the many factions that had formed. Why? Because division and factions were contrary to what he taught in all the churches.
A. Division from one another
- In Chapters 1-3, they were dividing around certain leaders / apostles.
- In Chapters 6-8, they were dividing around certain doctrines (strong/weak)
- In Chapter 11, they were dividing on economics
- In Chapters 12-14, they were dividing around spiritual gifts
B. Division from other churches
Paul consistently reminds them that all churches practice the same things. This begins in the greeting while Paul reminds the Corinthians that they are not independent but, “to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours.†(1 Corinthians 1:2)
- (1 Corinthians 4:17) That is why I sent you Timothy, my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, to remind you of my ways in Christ, as I teach them everywhere in every church.
- (1 Corinthians 7:17) Only let each person lead the life that the Lord has assigned to him, and to which God has called him. This is my rule in all the churches.
- (1 Corinthians 11:16) If anyone is inclined to be contentious, we have no such practice, nor do the churches of God.
- (1 Corinthian 14:33-34) For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.
Paul expected consistent behavior and practices in all the churches.
II. Paul’s Corrections
Paul corrects the divisive attitudes and actions of the Corinthians believers.
A. Identity
In spite of their problems, Paul continually recognizes them as the church, as separated from the world (i.e. holy) by God, as called by God, as brothers and sisters.
- (1 Corinthians 1:2) To the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints
- (1 Corinthians 1:4) I give thanks to my God always for you because of the grace of God that was given you in Christ Jesus
- (1 Corinthians 1:9) God is faithful, by whom you were called into the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.
- (1 Corinthians 1:30) He is the source of your life in Christ Jesus, whom God made our wisdom and our righteousness and sanctification and redemption.
Notice that this is all in the first chapter! Paul does not say that the Corinthians WILL BE the church if they do certain things right. They ARE the church. This becomes very important when we begin discussing the church meeting.
B. Character and Practices
Paul expects children of God to display a certain character and do certain things, not in order to become God’s children, but because they ARE ALREADY God’s children.
In fact, Paul dedicates much of his letter to demonstrating that their character and practices are not aligned to their identity.
C. Who is responsible for correcting these problems?
Paul addresses his letter to the church. He describes the problems to the church. He calls on the church to take action to correct the issues involved. While leaders (elders/pastors) can help the church understand their identity and their responsibilities as children of God, leaders cannot correct the church or obey for the church.
Once again, this becomes very important as we begin to think about the church meeting.
III. The Question about Spiritual Gifts (Analysis)
Paul talks about the church gathering in 1 Corinthians 14. But, we must not separate these passages from their context. 1 Corinthians 14 is part of a longer section concerning spiritual gifts. This section begins in 1 Corinthians 12 with the phrase “Now concerning spiritual gifts…â€, and ends at 1 Corinthians 14:40, after which there is a change of subject. There are other linguistic connections throughout this section and especially between the beginnings of chapter 12 and the end of chapter 14.
So, Paul’s primary teaching about the church meeting falls in a section of Scripture where he is answering questions or dealing with issues concerning spiritual gifts.
A. Corinthians 1-11
Before we begin analyzing 1 Corinthians 12-14, we should realize that this letter is a whole discourse. We should place the section within the letter, and also look for information within 1 Corinthians 1-11 that may lead up to this section:
- (1 Corinthians 1:4-8) Paul is grateful that the grace of God has enriched the believers in Corinth such that they do not lack any spiritual gift.
- (1 Corinthians 8:1) All of us possess knowledge. This knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. (Key concepts that bridge the entire letter – also found in 1 Cor 12-14)
- (1 Corinthians 11:1-16) Men and women prophesying. Since we learn later that prophesy is for the purpose of edifying the church, the setting seems to be a church meeting.
- (1 Corinthians 11:17-34) Problems when the Corinthians are sharing the common meal (Lord’s Supper) together. In this passage in particular we see that carrying out certain activities is not the point of meeting together.
B. Corinthians 12-14
Meaning is found primarily is paragraphs. Paragraphs are made up of sentences which offer propositions, illustrations, arguments, etc. But, the author’s meaning is found at the paragraph level. Thus, we should analyze our passage paragraph by paragraph.
There are 14 paragraphs in 1 Corinthians 12-14:
Paragraph 1: (12:1-3) (3 sentences)
Introduction: Although once they were guided by idols that could not speak, now they are guided by the Holy Spirit who leads them to proclaim “Jesus is Lord.â€
Paragraph 2: (12:4-11) (17 sentences)
Despite the many different ways that God gifts, serves, and empowers, all of the gifts are given for the same reason: for the mutual benefit of the church.
Paragraph 3: (12:12-26) (21 sentences)
Though our gifts are different, we are all part of the same body, and we need one another, especially those whose gifts seem less significant.
Paragraph 4: (12:27-30) (9 sentences)
We are not part of just any group. We are part of God’s group – Christ’s body – and God decides how to place us in his group.
Paragraph 5: (12:31-13:3) (5 sentences)
Exercising our spiritual gifts is not as important as demonstrating love to one another.
Paragraph 6: (13:4-8a) (16 sentences)
Love causes us to give preference to others, always.
Paragraph 7: (13:8b-10) (6 sentences)
Spiritual gifts will one day cease to be necessary.
Paragraph 8: (13:11-12) (8 sentences)
Today we are like immature children, but we are growing toward a mature state.
Paragraph 9: (13:13) (2 sentences)
Even in that mature state – when faith and hope are not necessary – we will still love one another.
Paragraph 10: (14:1-5) (11 sentences)
We demonstrate love in the use of our spiritual gifts when we use them primarily to build up others, especially when the church is assembled together.
Paragraph 11: (14:6-14) (13 sentences)
If I exercise a spiritual gift (such as tongues) in way that you do not understand, then I am not building up the church.
Paragraph 12: (14:15-19) (9 sentences)
When the church is meeting together, it is more important that the church is built up than for someone to exercise their spiritual gifts, even someone who is very spiritual.
Paragraph 13: (14:20-25) (11 sentences)
While there is a purpose for those gifts that do not build up the church, that purpose is not carried out when the church is assembled.
Paragraph 14: (14:26-40) (27 sentences)
So, whenever the church is gathered together, everything that we do together should be done for the purpose of building up the church.
Once we understand Paul’s argument and progression, we also need to determine why he wrote this passage. Obviously, he was answering a question or dealing with an issue concerning spiritual gifts, but could there have been another reason for 1 Corinthians 12-14?
The linguistic concept of prominence can help us to determine Paul’s focus. By examining grammatical and syntactical structures, rhetoric, repetition, and other linguistic devices, we can attempt to discern what was most important to Paul.
Two paragraphs stand out as prominent in this passage:
- Paragraph 9 stands out because of the rhetorical devices that Paul used. Thus, Paul was emphasizing the importance of love in the exercise of spiritual gifts.
- Paragraph 14 stands out because of the grammatical and syntactical structures. Thus, Paul was also emphasizing the use of spiritual gifts whenever the church assembled.
Since Paragraph 14 is prominent, let’s consider it in more detail:
Whenever the church comes together… whatever is done should be done for edification.
I. 2-3 people speak in tongues if there is interpretation, otherwise they should be silent.
II. 2-3 people prophesy, while others weight what they say.
- Prophecy
- If one person is prophesying and another stands to speak, the first is to be silent.
- Everyone is able to prophesy in a manner that allows everyone to grow.
- The prophets are in control of their gift, because God does not cause confusion.
- Weighing Prophecy
- Women should not weigh prophesy, but should remain silent during that time of the meeting.
- God does not speak only to the prophets.
- True prophets should recognize the truth of what Paul writes here.
Whether prophecy or speaking in tongues (with interpretation) (or the exercise of any other spiritual gift) everything should be done decently and in order (as described above).
Why would Paul only focus on tongues and prophecy in this section?
It is a paradigm:
1.   “Tongues†represents any gift that is not immediately understandable and thus is not edifying to the church.
2.   “Prophecy†represents any gift that is immediately understandable and thus is edifying to the church.
How do you think Paul would treat interpreted tongues?
Where would “teaching†fall in this paradigm? So, which instructions should we follow for teaching?
These are the types of questions that we need to consider as we “synthesize†the information into a New Testament theology.
IV. The Church Assembled (Synthesis)
In this section, I’m going to make some general remarks concerning the assembling of the church according to Paul’s letter to the Corinthians. Much of this will come from the passage that we just analyzed (1 Corinthians 12-14), but in order to determine a theology of the book, we must consider the entire book. To do a complete study, we would need to analyze each section – paragraph by paragraph – and consider the purpose of each section and paragraph and how each one relates to the entire letter.
1. When the church in Corinth came together, they ate together. Eating was not considered a separate part of their meeting; instead, they considered it “The Lord’s Supper.†Paul encouraged this thinking as long as there were no factions. Paul exhorted them to treat one another as equals in the way that they ate together.
(1 Corinthians 11:17-33)
2. Men and women both took part in the church meeting. Paul encouraged men and women to pray and prophesy. He also recognized the importance of the spiritual gifts of all believers. Certainly, there were limitations, as with all aspects of the church meeting. (1 Corinthians 11:2-16; 1 Corinthians 12)
3. There was no distinction between different kinds of church meetings. Paul gives his instructions in the context of “whenever you come together.†This does not mean that the church in Corinth did not meet at different times for specific activities (service, prayer, etc.), but Paul would expect the same principles to guide each type of meeting. (1 Corinthians 14:26)
4. The purpose for the church assembling is mutual edification. Whenever the church in Corinth came together, he expected them to work together in order to build up one another. When the church is meeting, the spiritual giftedness of an individual is not as important as the edification of the church. (1 Corinthians 14:1-26)
5. The precise nature of the spiritual gift is not as important as the manner in which it is exercised and the intended result. Paul does not define the various spiritual gifts, and he never gives us the same list twice. We do not decide if our speech is encouraging or instructing or both. (1 Corinthians 12)
6. Several people should speak during the church meeting, and everyone is responsible for discerning what is said. This makes more sense when we understand that the main form of teaching during this time was discussion, not lecture. But, Paul’s vision included multiple people speaking in order to build up the church, while other have the opportunity to consider and question what is said, again in order to build up the church. (1 Corinthians 14:26-40)
7. Love is more important than anything else. We must never forget this. If we are not demonstrating love for one another (especially for those who seem less significant or less gifted or less anything), then we are not meeting as the church as Paul envisioned. (1 Corinthians 13)
When placing this passage within the context of the whole letter, it may be beneficial to consider how we as the church can demonstrate certain key ideas while the church is meeting. For example:
1. I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. (1 Corinthians 1:10)
2. I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people… but now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of … not even to eat with such a one. (1 Corinthians 5:9-11)
3. I try to please everyone in everything I do, not seeking my own advantage, but that of many, that they may be served. (1 Corinthians 10:33)
“To the church in…” suggests unity as opposed to exclusion
I love that line. “‘To the church in…’ suggests unity as opposed to exclusion.” I stole that line from my friend Eric (from “A Pilgrim’s Progress“) in his post “To the Church in…” In part of the article, Eric says:
As I have read Paul’s letters over the years, I have pictured him writing to a local body. In particular, I have pictured those who are in the church (of some city) to the exclusion of those who aren’t in the church. I suppose I was inadvertently taking the modern view of church membership and placing it upon those churches. For example, I was picturing Paul writing to the members of the church in Rome, while not writing to those who were not members.
As I read Paul’s letters today, I think the apostle was emphasizing something else when he wrote, “To the church in…” Paul was making it clear that he was writing to ALL the saved people/followers of Jesus/Christians who happened to reside in a particular city. Paul had no aim of excluding any Christian from hearing the letter, but was simply addressing it to those who were in the church body in a particular geographic region…
This ought to make us think about how we view the church. If Paul wrote to all the Christians in an area, it is clear that he considered them ALL to be part of the church. Paul did not make the universal/local distinction that we tend to make in the modern church. If Paul saw, for example, all the Christians in a city as part of the church of that city, that should inform us as we think about issues of unity and membership.
I agree, Eric. When “membership” becomes exclusionary, it is also divisive and it also becomes unscriptural. Great post!
The unhypocritcal church
A couple of years ago, I published three posts called “The unhypocritical church” (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3). The posts were based on a study of, meditation on, and comparison to Romans 12 (especially verses 9-21). Here are the three posts together:
—————————————————-
Most theologians comment about how “theological” the book of Romans is. This simply means that Paul speaks in terms that most closely resemble how modern theologians speak. Of course, Romans is far from a “systematic theology”. But Romans does include a good deal of theology – that is, Paul tells us what he things about God and people and salvation.
In fact, Chapters 1 through 11 are filled with theology. We learn that all people are sinful – all people are separated from God – all people deserve eternal separation from God. We also learn that the remedy is found in the person of Jesus Christ – his death, burial, and resurrection – and that the remedy is administered through the person and presence and power of the Holy Spirit. But, Paul doesn’t stop there.
In Chapter 12, Paul begins to show how his “theology” should work itself out in the lives of all followers of Jesus Christ. He begins by showing that a life sacrificed to God will lead to a life that is tranformed – changed – into a life that is acceptable to God. This life will demonstrate the gifts of the Spirit because it will be controlled by the Spirit. The Spirit will manifest himself differently in different people, but the manifestation of the Spirit’s gifts will always be for the same purpose. But, Paul doesn’t stop there.
In Romans 12:9-21, Paul lays down specific characteristics of the life that is led by the Spirit. This is what he says:
Let love be genuine (unhypocritical). Abhor what is evil; hold fast to what is good. Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honor. Do not be slothful in zeal, be fervent in spirit, serve the Lord. Rejoice in hope, be patient in tribulation, be constant in prayer. Contribute to the needs of the saints and seek to show hospitality. Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them. Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. Live in harmony with one another. Do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly. Never be conceited. Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.” Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. (Romans 12:9-21 ESV)
Notice how the genuine (unhypocritical) love of Spirit-indwelled, Spirit-led believers is described:
- holding fast to good
- loving one another
- honoring one another
- serving the Lord fervently
- rejoicing
- patient
- praying
- giving to needy believers
- being hospitable (loving strangers)
- blessing
- living in harmony
- humble
- doing what is honorable
- living in peace with all
This is how the church of God should live. This is how the church of God should be described. In fact, the “theology” of the previous 11 chapters means little if the lives of believers are not being transformed by the indwelled Spirit.
So, where do you stop? Do you stop at discussing theology? Or, do you see the power of the Spirit at work in your life? How does a description of your life match up to Paul’s description of the Spirit-led, transformed life?
—————————————————-
“The unhypocritcal church – Part 2”
When I wrote the post “The unhypocritical church“, I did not plan for it to continue into a second part. However, as I have been meditating on Romans 12 for the last few days, there are a few more thoughts that I want to share.
Sunday morning, we gathered with the church like we do every week. After the formal part of our meeting concluded, people hung around talking for about an hour. At one point, my daughter and another girl her age stood by the door and, like good stewardesses, greeted those who left by saying, “Buh-bye. See you next week.” This was funny at first. Then I realized exactly what they were saying. They recognized that we would not see many of these people for seven days.
Sunday afternoon, as I published the post called “The unhypocritical church” and thought about the episode with my daughter and her friend, I realized that it would be impossible to carry out the teachings of Romans 12:9-21 if we only see one another once a week in a formal setting. Look at this list again:
- holding fast to good
- loving one another
- honoring one another
- serving the Lord fervently
- rejoicing
- patient
- praying
- giving to needy
- believers
- being hospitable (loving strangers)
- blessing
- living in harmony
- humble
- doing what is honorable
- living in peace with all
Sure, some of these we could probably do once a week, and pretend to have carried out Paul’s intention. But, can we have patience with one another if we only see each other once every seven days? Can we live in harmony with one another if we only see each other once every seven days? Similarly, we are to help one another live according to these descriptions. Can we help one another be hospitable toward strangers if we only see one another on Sunday?
This passage (Romans 12:9-21) is about community. Paul does not state, “Live as a community with your brothers and sisters in Christ”. However, he describes believers living together in such a way that they must recognize themselves as a Spirit-indwelled, Spirit-led community in order to see these descriptions carried out in their lives. There is no way to understand “church” as a once or twice a week event and have these characteristics. No, Paul is not describing an event, or a location, or an organization. Paul is describing a way-of-life for people who are following their Master together.
Among the church where God has placed me, I recognize these characteristics in many of my brothers and sisters. On Sunday, I heard that several people are spending their Labor Day Monday helping some friends work on their houses. I heard about other friends who are donating furniture and delivering it to someone that they do not know, but who is in need of furniture. Other friends are spending their day off by working on cars for their brothers and sisters. In activities such as these (and probably many others that I do not know about), the love of Christ is manifest and proclaimed both to believers and to unbelievers alike.
A community… a kingdom community, ruled by the King, looking out for one another, serving one another and the world, proclaiming the good news of Jesus Christ, and warmly welcoming those who accept his grace and mercy. This is the kind of church that Paul is describing. This is the church of unypocritical love. This is how I want to live my life.
—————————————————-
“The unhypocritical church – Part 3”
I think this will be my last post on Romans 12:9-21 for now. As a reminder, this is what Paul writes:
Let love be genuine (unhypocritical). Abhor what is evil; hold fast to what is good. Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honor. Do not be slothful in zeal, be fervent in spirit, serve the Lord. Rejoice in hope, be patient in tribulation, be constant in prayer. Contribute to the needs of the saints and seek to show hospitality. Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them. Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. Live in harmony with one another. Do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly. Never be conceited. Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.” Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. (Romans 12:9-21 ESV)
Once again, notice how the genuine (unhypocritical) love of Spirit-indwelled, Spirit-led believers is described:
- holding fast to good
- loving one another
- honoring one another
- serving the Lord fervently
- rejoicing
- patient
- praying
- giving to needy believers
- being hospitable (loving strangers)
- blessing
- living in harmony
- humble
- doing what is honorable
- living in peace with all
This is how the church of God should live. This description should characterize each believer and each group of beleivers.
Over the last few days, I have been asking myself which of these characteristics are evident in my life and which characteristics are absent. I can look back over the last few years and see where God has grown me and changed me. But, I can also see where I am not living as God intends. Specifically, God is still teaching me how to show hospitality (that is, love for strangers as opposed to love for those who I already know and love) and how to give to those who are in need. Perhaps, most of all, this is showing me areas in my life where I am not submitting to the presence of God.
As Joel pointed out in a recent post, we must begin with a proper understanind of who we are in Christ. I would also add that we should also recognize the awesome power and presence of the Holy Spirit who indwells us and changes us from the inside out.
Beginning with this understanding, I am going to ask you the same question that I have been asking myself: Meditating on the description of the unhypocritical (genuine) love of Romans 12:9-21, where is God still working in your life? In what ways are you not submitting to God’s presence in your life?
Look also to the interests of others
Two years ago, I wrote a post called “Look also to the interests of others.” This post considers the modern-day practical implications of the Paul’s instructions to the church at Philippi.
——————————————–
Look also to the interests of others
In his letter to the church at Philippi, Paul wrote:
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, which is yours in Christ Jesus… (Philippians 2:1-5 ESV)
Many of us know what follows this passage. We’ve memorized it and studied it because of its Christological implications (pertaining to Christ and his divinity). Christology is very important. We should study Scripture to help us understand who Christ is – in our limited, human ability to understand Christ.
But, what do we do with these first five verses of the second chapter of Philippians? What does it mean to be “of the same mind”, to have “the same love”, or to be “in full accord and of one mind”? What kind of things should we not do out of “rivalry or conceit”? To what extent do we consider others as “more significant than” ourselves? How do we look out for “the interests of others” as we also look out for our own interests?
At first glance, these questions deal with the concepts of fellowship, community, and unity – very important concepts, but not as important as Christology. Right? Actually, I suggest that these concepts are directly related to our understanding of who Christ is, what Christ has done for us, what Christ is doing for us, and how Christ empowers us to interact with one another. In fact, I would suggest that when we get these things wrong – when we fail to live a life that demonstrates our love for one another – then all the facts that we know about Christ mean very little. Our Christology must be built on Philippians 2:1-5 as much as it is built on the verses that follow.
But, how do we apply Philippians 2:1-5 today?
Without trying to unwrap everything that Paul means in these sentences, we can begin with one thing that should be very obvious, but that we often overlook: we will not always agree with one another. If we always agreed, there would be no reason to consider the interests of others. If we always had the same opinions about things, then Paul would not have exhorted us to consider the other person’s opinion as more significant than our own. If we all had the same priorities and the same desires and the same attitudes, then Paul would not have to warn us about rivalries and conceit. If we always treated one another as Christ treated us, then Paul would not exhort us toward love and like-mindedness.
Yet, Paul expects us to act like Christ in spite of our differences with one another. In fact, the way the we deal with our differences toward one another demonstrates whether or not we are walking in the Spirit or not.
If we deal with believers who differ with us in attitudes of anger, jealousy, stubbornness, conceit, or pride, then this is an indicator that we are not living the abundant life of Christ. If we force people to agree with us, or if we refuse to fellowship with those who disagree with us, then again we are demonstrating that we are walking in our own understanding instead of walking in the Spirit.
If, however, we can give up our rights and give in to the opinion of others and welcome differences with love and acceptance, then we demonstrate that we are living in the unity and love that only the Spirit of God can produce within us.
When the Spirit controls our life, then the Spirit demonstrates himself by producing love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control in our lives – especially toward those who are different from us and who disagree with us.
Is unity important?
In light of my post yesterday called “Convictions without Separation,” I thought I would re-publish this post that I wrote about two and a half years ago called “Is unity important?” There is a very important discussion going on among the church right now considering unity. I’m hoping that this idea of unity moves out of the discussion phase and into the living phase soon.
———————————————–
A few days ago, I posted a blog called “Unity in Christ…” For hundreds of years – perhaps over a thousand years – the church was (more or less) united through hierarchy and doctrine. During the reformation, something incredible happened. Though believers sought to return to Scripture, they also began dividing. Today, the institutional church looks like a jigsaw puzzle with very few matching pieces. Why?
According to Scripture, there are various reasons that believers should separate from one another. (When I say “separate”, I mean refusing to fellowship, teach, and gather together.) However, in each of those instances, one group of believers is separate from an individual believer. This separation only happens after attempts to reconcile have failed. Also, there are only a few reasons given for dividing. More importantly, though, it seems that in Scripture, when a group of believers separates from someone, they begin to treat that person as if he or she is an unbeliever. We never see an example of believers separating from one another, while continuing to treat each other as believers.
What are some reasons for separating from someone who calls himself or herself a believer? I’ve found these reasons:
- Unrepentant Sin (Matt 18:15-20; 1 Cor 5:1-5)
- Disorderliness (2 Thess 3:6)
- Refusal to Work (2 Thess 3:7-10)
- False Teaching (contrary to the Gospel) (2 Thess 3:14-15; 1 Tim 1:20; 2 John 10-11)
In the last case, this always seems to be false teaching related to the gospel. In other words, believers should separate from someone who is teaching salvation through someone or something other than Jesus Christ. This kind of “false teaching” does not mean that someone teaches a different brand of eschatology from someone else. Teaching ideas contrary to the gospel of Jesus Christ was considered “false teaching” – not teaching differently.
Scripture gives us one more reason for separating from another person who calls himself or herself a believer: divisiveness. Consider these passages of Scripture:
I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive. (Romans 16:17-18 ESV)
As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned. (Titus 3:10-11 ESV)
In both of these passages, believers are urged to separate from someone who is attempting to divide the church. And, thinking about the other passages on discipline (i.e. Matt 18:15-20), this means that believers are to treat a divisive person as an unbeliever. This only works if there is true community/fellowship between believers. Only then will discipline affect the person being divisive. If the church has little community or fellowship, then the divisive person will not care if he or she is being disciplined. He will not care if other people are separating themselves from him, because he will not be missing anything.
When I put these thoughts together, something occurs to me. Unity is necessary if discipline is going to be a deterrent from divisiveness (or any other unrepentant sin). Think about that for a moment. In order for discipline to be effective, there must be unity. Perhaps this is one of the reasons that we rarely see discipline today: discipline doesn’t work because there is no unity to begin with. Of course, this is just one reason that the church should live in unity. There are many, many more reasons.
May we begin to live in unity with brothers and sisters in Christ, even if we disagree with them.
Convictions without Separation
I greatly enjoyed reading and appreciated several blog posts written recently by Eric from “A Pilgrim’s Progress.” Here are those posts:
- A Question Desiring Answers: Should Christians Reconcile Infant Baptism and Believer’s Baptism
- Struggling with Unity and Baptism
- The Problem of “Second Order” Doctrines
- Unity and Baptism: A Possible Solution
- The Sacraments: What Should Bring Unity So Often Divides
In his posts, Eric considers the popular notion of three order of doctrines. The first “order” would be those doctrines that separate Christians from all others religions and beliefs. The third “order” would be those doctrines about which Christians disagree but do not (or should not) separate believers from one another.
The difficulty comes in what is usually referred to as “second order doctrines.” Christians disagree about these doctrines, and usually allow their disagreements to become reasons for separation. Eric discusses baptism as one of this so-called “second order” doctrines.
In Eric’s questions and study, he found the same thing that I’ve found: their are no second order doctrines in Scripture. There is a never a time in Scripture where one group of believers is told to separate from another group of believers because they hold to different understandings about the things of God.
Instead, we find just the opposite. Repeatedly we find the authors of Scripture instructing believers to come together, to reconcile, to consider others as more important. Yes, they are told, hold to your convictions (about sacrificed meat, or meeting days, etc.) but do not allow your convictions to become stumbling blocks for other brothers and sisters in Christ. Instead, yield to (submit to) others.
This is not a popular notion today. Today, many within the church choose to be right (and to prove their “rightness”) over and against yielding to others. We argue over nuances of doctrine that have been argued about for hundreds and perhaps thousands of years. We allow these differences to separate us.
When Paul was dealing with people who refused to eat meat sacrificed to idols, he started by admitting that idols were nothing. The idols were not gods, but were pieces of wood or stone. There was absolutely nothing wrong with eating meat that had been offered to these idols.
However, Paul recognized that some people in the church considered it wrong to eat meat that had been sacrificed to those idols. Because of their convictions, and because of his desire not to cause offense with his brothers and sisters in Christ, Paul said that he would not eat meat around these people. In fact, he said that if it caused problems for his fellow believers, he would never eat meat again.
Note, according to Paul, these people were wrong. They were wrong theologically. They misunderstood God and gods. They misunderstood the nature of idols. They misunderstood what it means to worship God. In spite of their being wrong, Paul changed his own practices to accommodate them and their wrong beliefs because he cared more about his brothers and sisters in Christ.
We need this attitude. We need to recognize that it is possible to hold convictions (about baptism, the Lord’s Supper, the nature of salvation, etc.) without separating from other brothers and sisters in Christ because of those convictions.
In other words, we do not deal with people and interact with them and fellowship with them based on their opinions or statements about various doctrines. Instead, we deal with, interact with, and fellowship with people based on their identity in Christ! If they are children of God then they are our brothers and sisters, regardless of how wrong they (or we) might be.
Yes, there are times when we should separate from others who call themselves believers. But, in those cases, we do not separate from one another but continue to call ourselves brothers and sisters. Instead, when we separate from another believer for various biblical reasons, we are to treat that person as if that person is NOT a brother or sister in Christ.
Our disunity is cause for alarm. Eric stresses the urgency and the importance in his posts. Jesus prayed that we would be one even as he and the Father are one. Why did Jesus pray for our unity? Because the world knows that Jesus came from God because of our unity. As it is, the world does not know. In fact, in many cases, the world is convinced that Jesus was just a good man and did not come from God – if he existed at all.
We must face the fact that our disunity (our failure to hold to our convictions without separating from one another) is one of the reasons that the world refuses to believe that Jesus is from God. We are working against our purpose by our disunity and separation.