To Know and Love God
In our Theological Foundations seminar, we have been reading To Know and Love God by David K. Clark. While I found the content interesting and balanced, I was most impressed by Clark’s conclusion.
Clark asks these questions in his conclusion:
…[W]hat are the implications of evangelical theology done well? What difference will following good method and arriving at profound Christian thinking make? And where should we focus our energies in the future?
He then gives twelve answers to these questions. I thought I would share a few here that are relevant to our discussions concerning the church.
Third, we must not turn away from culture… As flawed as our culture is, a reactionary turn inward will not lead us forward. The early church lived in a culture as full of spiritual counterfeits, sexual enticements, and materialistic allurements as our own. Those Christians learned to live in that world. Although they lived in community with each other, they did not isolate themselves from the broader society. They lived out the light of Christ at all strata of society.
I don’t have anything to add to this statement. This is an area of life where God has been challenging and changing me in the last couple of years.
Fourth, we ought to engage against evangelical polemics… [W]e must guard against focusing too much of the force of our work against our evangelical brothers. The tendency to pursue finer and finer points of theoretical clarification may be acceptable as long as such work is reintegrated into the broader concerns of God’s Kingdom. But if we use the finer and finer points of theology to debate among ourselves, we run the risk of increasingly ingrown discourse.
This is an important statement. Sometimes, as I read certain authors, I get the idea that they believe God’s word originated with them, or that God’s word came only to them (paraphrasing 1 Corinthians 14:36). Humility and graciousness should rule the day when it comes to brothers and sisters discussing God’s Word. Other brothers and sisters are not the enemy.
Sixth, we need more focus on spiritual formation – on gaining sapientia. I do not mean just an intellectual understanding of wisdom, but a spiritual character that is actually shaped by wisdom. Living well in our culture, to say nothing of affecting our culture, requires genuine, internal, spiritual strength.
Yes! Maturity is not measured by the amount of biblical facts that a person knows. Our goal must not be increased scholarship, but increased maturity in Christ – more Christ-likeness displayed in our lives. This maturity does not come through books and papers, but through humble submission to the work of the Holy Spirit in our lives.
Seventh, we ought to promote authenticity in relationships. The experience of community is the human context that cultivates sapientia. Thinking biblical thoughts and obeying biblical rules does not necessarily bring inward spiritual change. The “think and obey” approach to spiritual formation can too easily lead to outward forms of conforming religiosity that leave the human heart in a state of decay. The trusted and intimate relationships of true community bring spiritual transformation because growing in Christ is primarily about trusting God, learning honesty, cultivating virtues, and evoking noble feelings.
It takes humility and trust to live in this kind of community. We must be willing to talk about our weaknesses and struggles. We must also be willing to listen to and speak with brothers and sisters concerning their weaknesses and struggles. Love must surround everything that we do and say.
Ninth, this means that we should seek a deeper solidarity with the world church. The church around the world needs the Western church… But equally, the Western church needs the global church.
Perhaps a good place to begin would be with the Christian next door to your home, or in the next office at work, or in the next seat at school. We certainly needs to seek a deeper solidarity with the world church, but I’m not sure we can seek a deeper solidarity with the world church as long as we maintain schisms in the church near us.
Eleventh, we must reestablish balance by working for social peace and justice by eliminating the racism and injustice that are rooted in ethnic identity. I do not subscribe to secular ways of framing the questions of ethnic relationships. But those of us who are North American evangelicals have not really stepped up to be counted on the questions of opportunities for the poor, equality for non-white groups, and “liberty and justice all.” Much research shows that in our evangelical focus on the inner life of faith and in our emphasis on seeing God transform human hearts through conversion, we have lost focus on some of the greatest social issues of our day.
Again, I have very little to add. This is another area where God is challenging and stretching me. We cannot love God without demonstrating that love for others – primarily towards those who are not like us, who are “down and out”, who are in need of love.
While I appreciated much of the theological and philosophical content of this book, the conclusion helped me the most. Are any of Clark’s answers beneficial for you as well?
Unity: Based on What?
Steve from “Theological Musings” has started a conversation about unity through a post called “John 17 and Unity“. He asks for discussion of this question:
The question: What is the unity that Jesus prayed for in John 17 and is it primarily (or even solely) eschatological in nature? (In other words, is it a future promise of unity in eternity?)
I hope you take the time to visit Steve’s blog and join the discussion.
I think conversations about unity are very important. Steve’s question about the reality of unity and the time context of unity are very important. I’d also add that we need to consider the source and foundation of unity.
So, continuing the discussion of unity, I ask you the following questions: What are some historical sources of unity (not necessarily Christian unity)? Are these good or poor sources of unity? What is the source (sources) of Christian unity? How is this source (sources) the same as or different than other sources of unity?
Church exactly the way you want it…
In my previous post called “A Weekend with Friends“, I mentioned two very special friends of ours: Eric and Alice. Eric has written an exceptional blog post called “If I had church exactly the way I wanted it“. In this post, Eric lists his convictions about many aspects of doctrine and practice. He lists exactly how he would like to see a church operate. Then, he makes this very wise and thoughtful observation:
The problem with this particular church, which is exactly the way I would want it, is that it doesn’t exist. In fact, if I tried to plant a church like this, I would probably end up the only member (I do hope my family would join, so I guess that would make five of us).
Because people make up the church, we will have differences of opinion, different comfort levels, and different preferences. If you even put ten people together, you will get hundreds of different combinations of desires about the issues raised above.
So what are we to do? What did Christ want for His church? In John 17:20-21, Jesus prayed, “I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me.”
How do we do this? How can we all be “one” when we have different desires about how things should go in the church?
The only conclusion I can come to is that we be dogmatic about the heart of the gospel. In all other issues, let’s be humble about what we teach, let’s strive for unity whenever possible, and let’s be willing to sacrifice our own desires for the good of the body.
This kind of thinking is a breath of fresh air for me. Eric recognizes that the church will never be exactly the way that we want it. However, as long as we are connected to brothers and sisters in Christ through the Holy Spirit – and none of us are living in unrepentant sin – then we should give up our own preferences and opinions in deference to those we love.
I have many convictions when it comes to the church. And, when I gather with brothers and sisters in Christ on Sunday morning or at other times, things are not always that way that I would prefer. But, those “things” are not what draws me to gather with these people. Instead, my focus should be on loving God through loving and serving those people who he has placed around me.
This is difficult. In fact, it is completely impossible for me, on my own, to give up my preferences and yield to another. I thank God that he does not leave me to do the impossible by myself. Instead, he indwells me, convicts me, empowers me to do the impossible – even giving up my preferences and opinions in the interest of prefering others above myself – even when the church is not exactly the way I want it.
Separating over loaves…
David Rogers at “Love Each Stone” has written a thought-provoking post called “The Illustration of the Hypothetical ‘Common Loaf Denomination’“. David briefly explains the standard baptistic understanding of baptism. Baptists, as one example, often separate from other believers who understand baptism differntly. David then explains that someone could use the same reason and logic to come to a conclusion that using one loaf of bread is the only proper method of partaking of the Lord’s Supper. He then asks (hypothetically) if we should form a separate denomination for those who choose to be biblical and use one loaf. This leads to his powerful conclusion:
What is the solution to this dilemma? Should those of us who are convinced of the biblical truth concerning “common loaf” celebration of the Lord’s Supper separate from those who still insist on celebrating the Lord’s Supper with individual wafers or their equivalent? Should we form our own denomination that ensures that the missionaries we send out will only teach the churches they plant to practice “common loaf” communion? Or, should we take it to the extreme of refusing to even cooperate on the mission field with those in other groups who are mistaken in their interpretation of this “clear biblical truth”?
I hope, by now, the absurdity of what I am suggesting is obvious. Even though I am totally convinced of the accuracy of my biblical interpretation regarding “common loaf communion,” it would be “nit-picking” for me to separate with other authentic disciples of the Lord Jesus, who are sincerely doing their best to submit to his commands in their own life, over something as secondary as this. Much more important than our differences on this point is our essential unity as joint members of the Body of Christ, who have been given a joint task to fulfill, and should work hand in hand, as brothers and sisters in Christ, to obey together the commands of Christ, to the degree each one of us is able to understand them.
For the most part, we pick and choose which “doctrines” to use as litmus tests in order to fellowship with or separate from other believers. But, do we get this idea from Scripture? Does Scripture tell us to separate from other brothers and sisters who do not practice baptism the same way we do? Does Scripture tell us to separate from other brother and sisters who understand gifts of the Spirit differently than we do?
So, according to Scripture, when are we allowed to separate from other brothers and sisters? Does it bother you that Scripture speaks negatively about division?
(By the way, it looks like Ben Witherington has published (is publishing?) a little book about the Lord’s Supper that may be interesting.)
The depths of community…
Today, it is fashionable to talk about community. Everyone wants community. Followers of Jesus Christ want community. People who do not follow Jesus Christ want community. In discussing the desire of “the younger generation” for community, Dallas Willard said:
That’s an expression of their loneliness. But most of them don’t know what community means because community means assuming responsibility for other people and that means paying attention and not following your own will but submitting your will and giving up the world of intimacy and power you have in the little consumer world that you have created. They are lonely and they hurt. They don’t know why that they think community might solve that, but when they look community in the face and realize that it means raw, skin to skin contact with other people for whom you have become responsible…that’s when they back away. (HT: Provocative Church)
If Willard is correct, and I tend to think he is correct at this point, then I must qualify my earlier statements. Everyone wants community, as long as the community is comfortable for them and of immediate benefit for them. People are willing to pay the price for a certain kind of community, as long as there is a tangible return on their investment. However, once the cost becomes too high, or the return becomes too small, then we naturally return to self-sufficiency and self-reliance and leave the community to fend for itself.
What is the cause of “backing away”, as Willard calls it? What causes the cost of community to become too prohibitive or the return from the community to become too small? There can be only one answer: sin. And, not the sin in the community, although sin will always be present within the community – we should never be surprised about that. No, it is the sin of the individual that causes him or her to “back away”.
Whether this sin manifests itself in self-centeredness, selfishness, anger, impatience, etc., the root of the sin is almost always pride. It is pride that causes the individual to consider himself and his desires and his opinions above and more important than the others within the community.
There is a depth to community that can only be plumbed through the empowerment and submission to the person of the Holy Spirit. The scriptural exhortations to consider others as better than yourselves, to confess your sins to one another, to accept and welcome one another, to bear with and forgive one another, to care for and give to one another, and – as Jesus put it – to deny yourself, take up your cross, and follow Him can only be understood and realized via the work of the Holy Spirit in and through the life of a child of God.
There is a misconception that community is built around uniformity: people who believe alike, act alike, respond alike, desire alike, etc. However, uniformity will not create the type of community in which God calls us to live. This is evident in the constant exhortation for believers to bear with one another, forgive one another, have patience with one another, and consider others as more important than themselves. Thus, the authors of Scripture recognize that there would be relational frictions between believers. This relational frictions Willard describes above by the phrase “raw, skin to skin contact”. The way that someone responds to relational frictions demonstrates whether or not they are living in a Spirit-enabled, Spirit-empowered community, or if they desire to live in a uniform community.
People normally and naturally respond to relational friction with anger, impatience, divisiveness, selfishness, defensiveness, pride, etc. These responses are manifestations of sin. This type of response may reduce relational friction, but it will not maintain community.
However, through the indwelling and enabling of the Holy Spirit, it is (super)-naturally possible to respond to relational friction with understanding, acceptance, patience, humility, forbearance, perseverance, and even joy. This type of response will not immediately reduce the relational friction, but it will maintain community. In fact, true community is only possible in the presence of relational friction and a Spirit-controlled response to that relational friction.
Let me say that again: true community is only possible when those within the community – or at least a majority of those within the community – respond to relational friction through the presence and power of the Holy Spirit. Also, if there is no relational friction, then there is no community. There are either surface acquaintances, with the real friction hidden beneath, or a cult-like uniformity where those who disagree are excluded from the “community”. Neither of these is a community.
If we want to determine whether or not we are living in a Spirit-led, Spirit-enabled community with other believers, we can begin by examining how we respond to relational friction, that is to “raw, skin to skin contact”. If we respond by demanding our rights, privileges, wants, expectations, etc. then we are not living in community, but we are allowing sin to hinder our relationship with other believers, which demonstrates that sin is also hindering or relationship with God. If, on the other hand, we respond to relational friction in Spirit-created humility, joyfully allowing others to usurp our rights, privileges, wants, expectations, etc. then we are demonstrating that we are maintaining the community of the Spirit.
One thing before I finish this post: It is not the goal of the believer or a group of believers to create or maintain community. Instead, it is the goal of believers to demonstrate their love for God by loving others. As believers demonstrate their love for God by loving other believers in the presence and power of the Holy Spirit, then Spirit-created community will ensue. Also, as believers demonstrate their love for God by loving non-believers in the presence and power of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit-enabled mission will ensue. Either way, the goal is to love God by loving others.
Local or Universal?
I rarely talk about the “local church” as opposed to the “universal church”. I do not think these are valid distinctions, because I do not believe that Scripture makes such a distinction (more about that later). So, how do I distinguish between the “local church” and the “universal church”? I don’t. There is simply the church. This topic came up recently during break in one of my seminars. I was excited to hear another student (you know who you are) voicing my concerns and beliefs about the local/universal distinction.
The “local church” is usually defined as that group of believers that are somehow connected to one another. Perhaps this connection is made through joint membership (i.e. their name on a role), or a covenant (i.e. everyone agrees with a certain statement), or regular attendance at a certain location at a certain time.
The “universal church” is usually defined as all believers of all time. This is sometimes viewed as an “eschatological” (that is, end times) reality, but not a current reality.
Sometimes, these distinctions (“local” and “universal”) are combined with the distinctions of “visible” and “invisible”. Sometimes these two groups of distinctions are separate.
When we read Scripture with this understanding of “local church” and “universal church” in our “hermeneutical lens” (that is, the presuppositions through which we read Scripture), we often have to do textual gymnastics to understand what the author is trying to say.
For example, many who hold to a “local church” also understand baptism as the ordinance of entrance into the local church – whether believer’s baptism or infant baptism. Thus, when they read a passage such as 1 Corinthians 12:13 (“For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body – Jews or Greeks, slaves or free – and all were made to drink of one Spirit.”), they must see this as entrance into the “universal church” not the “local church”. Why? Because this verse is talking about Spirit baptism, not water baptism. So, it cannot be talking about the “local church”.
However, throughout 1 Corinthians, Paul is talking to and about a “local” group of believers. It is a group of believers in Corinth who are “not lacking in any spiritual gift” (1 Cor 1:7) and should have “no divisions” (1 Cor 1:10). It is this same local group that must deal with an immoral person among them (1 Cor 5:4-5). This same group of believers in Corinth needs to learn how to deal with brothers or sisters who disagree with others about meat sacrificed to idols (1 Cor 8-10). This is the same “local” group who is having problems with the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20-22). Finally, it is to this same group in Corinth that Paul begins teaching about spiritual gifts (1 Cor 12).
Each member of this “local church” has been given a gift by the Holy Spirit for the benefit of others (1 Cor 12:4-11). This is the group of believers who are members of one another and members of Christ (1 Cor 12:12). This group obviously knows one another in order to recognize one another as members of the body and recognize each one’s function (i.e. “ear”, “eye”, “foot”, “hand” – 1 Cor 12:14-21). God has placed each of them together according to his will and his purposes (1 Cor 12:18).
Therefore, in order to make 1 Corinthians 12:13 fit into a “local church” and “universal church” distinction, we have to take it out of its context.
But, what happens if we recognize that Scripture does not make a distinction between the “local church” and the “universal church”? What happens if we recognize that at the moment that we are indwelled by the Holy Spirit we immediately become “members” with all believers with whom God brings us into contact? What happens if we accept responsibility for all of our brothers and sisters that God brings into our lives? Suddenly, we do not have to take this Scripture out of context. In fact, it makes perfect sense within its context. (This is not the only example, just one from a passage that I’ve read recently.)
Does this mean that we should not meet regularly with certain believers? Certainly not. It seems that believers did meet together in different venues and perhaps even in different groups. However, it does mean that we should recognize our relationship with one another not based upon man-made regulations, but upon God’s choosing – For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body…
Does this mean that I am responsible for the believer on the other side of the world whom I have never met? Certainly not. But, it does mean that I am responsible for the way that I relate to the believer across the street, or across the hall, since God has brought me into contact with that person. If God desires for me or you to interact with this person, then God will bring us together – God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose…
It seems to me that the “local church” and “universal church” distinctions adds very little to our biblical understanding of God or of the church. Instead, it seems to divide the church into little groups that feel that they are maintaining unity in the body of Christ as long as they are united withing their “local church”. Meanwhile, it also allows believers to ignore the “one-anothers” of Scripture if the “one-another” does not “belong” to their “local church”.
This does not mean that I am “against” covenants or “against” a group of believers organizing together with a membership. I think that both of these things can be good. However, I also recognize that both covenants and organizations with membership can lead to exclusivism and isolationism, neither of which are characteristic of the church in Scripture.
Can I be wrong about this? Yep. Does it concern me that many believers do not agree with me? Yes, it does. Am I open to hearing different opinions? Yes. Do I welcome disagreements here on this blog? Yes, feel free to disagree, as long as you don’t mind your opinion being questioned as well.
The unhypocritical church
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?
How does God view the church in your city?
Paul writes to the church in Corinth, the church in Philippi, the church in Thessalonica, the church in Colossae, and the church in Ephesus. Luke writes about the church in Jerusalem and the church in Antioch as well as the church in several cities scattered around the Roman Empire.
Today, is there still a church in your city, or are there multiple churches in your city? How do you view the church in your city? How does God view the church in your city? Do you think their should be unity among the church in your city? Does God? Are you working to maintain the unity that you have in Christ with others in the church in your city? Or should you not work to maintain the unity of the church in your city because God doesn’t expect that kind of unity?
Well, Jon has written a post that comes very close to describing what I see in the New Testament. The post is called “Being the church in ……” The post is related specifically to being the church in Stevenage in the UK, but I think it applies to every city. I’m not sure when Jon wrote this post. I came across it recently because of the prayer synchroblog in which we both took part.
The entire post is very good. Jon explains the implications of recognizing that all believers in a particular location are part of the same body. For example, consider this paragraph:
Although there are weaknesses in this picture it does illustrate a remarkable truth. The unity of the church is in Jesus. Unity is not about all being in one place and being able to enjoy in a common style of corporate worship expression. Rather, unity can only come from the fact that we are in Jesus. When [we] try and find unity through corporate worship styles or common theology we may find some agreement but we never find unity, in fact in focusing on these things we merely take the focus away from the one who is our unity.
This is an important concept that is often lost to us. Our unity is in Jesus Christ. We do not find unity in our theologies, or our covenants, or our denominations, or our leadership. Unity is only found in Jesus Christ through the power and presence of the Holy Spirit who indwells each of God’s children. It is only through this shared bond (fellowship) of the Holy Spirit that we can find unity. We might find agreement with those who are like us, but this is not the unity in which God has called us to walk. In fact, this type of agreement (that is, agreement with those who are like us) only emphasizes the fact that we are not walking in unity with other brothers and sisters in Christ. This is not the kind of unity that we can build. Instead, it is a unity that is already created in Christ Jesus. Instead of trying to build unity, we are to walk in the unity that God has already provided through his son, Jesus Christ. We can only walk in that unity through the power and presence of the Holy Spirit.
By the way, when Scripture talks about believers being united with one another, I do not think this is a nebulous, spiritual, eternal unity only. It must be a present reality in the lives of each believers. Why? Because John wrote that the world would see this unity, and because of this unity they would recognize that God sent Jesus into the world (John 17:20-23). Thus, our unity must be something that can be seen, especially by those outside the church.
So, once again, how do you view the church in your city? How does God view the church in your city?
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.
Growing the church and the kingdom…
Do we attempt to grow the church or the kingdom? Which is most important? Is there a difference? Is that our responsibility at all?
There is an entire theological discipline related to “Church Growth”. In this discipline there are various methods given to increasing the size of congregations, adding to the kingdom, and making additional disciples.
However, is it our responsibility to grow either the church or the kingdom? I don’t think so. Instead, I think that as long as we focus on the “size” of either the church or the kingdom, we will miss out on our true responsibility as members of the church and citizens of the kingdom.
There are college and seminary courses, degree programs, departements, and entire institutes which have been set up for the purpose of teaching church growth methods. But, is this our purpose as believers? Are we to “grow the church” through various methods and programs?
In the Book of Acts, we see several instances where Luke records that either the church or the word of God spread or was increased. In Acts 2:47, Luke says, “And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved.” (ESV) I have been taught that this means that the people were involved in evangelism, usually some type of personal or mass explaining about the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. But, Luke does not actually say anything about this in Acts 2. Instead, he says that the believers were continuing to live according to the teachings of the apostles, continuing to live in fellowship with one another, continuing to break bread with one another, and continuing to pray. They shared their resources and possessions with others who were in need. They met together in the temple and in their homes. They were grateful to God for what he was doing. They were united in mind and purpose. What was the result? God added to their number. They did not add to their number; God did.
In Acts 5:14, Luke records, “And more than ever believers were added to the Lord, multitudes of both men and women…” (ESV) What prompted the others to “join” this believing community? Was it an evangelism or church growth program? No, it was prompted by the sudden death of two believers who had lied to the Holy Spirit: Ananias and Sapphira. These death caused the church in Jerusalem and others who heard about them to fear God greatly. God continued to work miracles through the apostles. The church remained united. And God added more believers.
In Acts 6:7, Luke says, “And the word of God continued to increase, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests became obedient to the faith.” (ESV) What prompted this increase? What prompted priests to become obedient to the faith? Was it an outreach program? No. There was a problem among believers. The Hellenistic widows were not receiving their share of the food that was being distributed. The apostles told the church to choose men to take of this. The believers chose seven men to take care of this problem that was causing dissent among the church. It is following this account that Luke says, “The number of disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem.”
In Acts 9:31, Luke recalls, “So the church throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria had peace and was being built up. And walking in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, it multiplied.” (ESV) This seems to be a true account of church growth activity leading to an increase in the size of the church or the kingdom. Previously, Luke told us, “And he [Paul] spoke and disputed against the Hellenists. But they were seeking to kill him.” (Acts 9:29 ESV) Surely, it was the conviction caused by Paul’s preaching that led to an increase in believers. However, Luke makes it clear that Paul had to leave Jerusalem in fear of his life. Notice again what Acts 9:31 (above) says. The church was being built up and was walking in the fear and comfort of the Spirit. Because of this, God multiplied the church.
In Acts 11:24, Luke recounts, “And a great many people were added to the Lord.” (ESV) What caused this increase in Antioch? Surely, this new church was engaged in a new and exciting evangelistic program to reach the people in their cultural context, right? No, instead we are told that this increase came about after Barnabas travelled from Jerusalem to Antioch in order to build up the church. This is what Luke says about Barnabas: “When he came and saw the grace of God, he was glad, and he exhorted them all to remain faithful to the Lord with steadfast purpose, for he was a good man, full of the Holy Spirit and of faith.” Apparently, as the church remained faithful to the Lord, the Lord added believers to the church.
In Acts 12:24, Luke says, “But the word of the Lord continued to grow and to be multiplied.” (ESV) This account follows the death of James, the imprisonment of Peter, and the death of Herod. Throughout these times of trials and persecution, “the Lord” grew and multiplied the church. What did the believers do during this time? They remained faithful to the Lord in spite of the difficulties that they were facing.
In each of these passages, we see that God grew the church and increased his kingdom during times when the believers were obediently following him and in unity with one another. Primarily, these were times when the believers were take care of one another, sharing with one another, serving one another. This reminds me of Jesus’ prayer in John 17:23: “I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me.” (ESV) How will the world know that God sent Jesus and that God loves them? Will they know because of our preaching and words and programs? No. The world will know that God sent Jesus and that God loves them when the church becomes one and lives in that unity in God through Jesus Christ.
These passages in Acts about the increase of the church and the growth of the kingdom and the spread of the word of God also remind me about Paul’s instructions in Ephesians 4:15-16: “[S]peaking 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.” (ESV) According to Paul, the body (the church) does not grow because of the way we reach out to other people, but instead the church grows when each part of the church serves others in the body with the abilities and power that God provides.
As the church serves, and builds up, and listens to, and learns from, and understands, and helps, and teaches, and works with, and shares with, and loves one another, God will take care of growing his kingdom and his body. Perhaps, at times, we are guilty of trying to do God’s work, while failing to carry out those responsibilities that God has given us. What are those responsibilities? Look around you. Do you see those brothers and sisters around you? They are your responsibilities and my responsibilities.