The weekly Sunday church meeting and spiritual gifts
David Fitch at “Reclaiming the Mission” has written a thought-provoking post called “Stop Organizing the Gifts Around the Sunday Morning Gathering (and Church Programming).”
He claims that sometime in the 70’s and then more in the 80’s, church organizations began using “spiritual gift profiles” in order to “connect” their people to different roles and functions within the organization and the events and meetings associated with the church organization.
Growing up in the 70’s and 80’s, I remember this. But, like most of our traditions, I thought this was a common practice long before I came along.
According to David, several “bad habits” were formed because of this practice, including this one:
a.) people started to see gifts as a personal orientation. Subtly the gifts became all about “me,” who I am, me being fulfilled, and finding out what my role is. This, I contend, undermines the functioning of the gifts and Christ’s authority in the gifts. I continue to think the first practice of the gifts is for each individual to learn to recognize and submit to the authority of Christ in the giftings as they function in a Body. Out of submitting one finds one’s own gifting and authority. Seeking one’s own self interest always undermines Christ’s work in us.
Like I said… quite thought-provoking… and definitely something that I’ve noticed among the church today. When a “spiritual gift” becomes all about “me” and not about others, then I think we’re missing the point.
What do you think?
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places
As you probably know, the title of this post comes from Ephesians 1:3. Also, if you’ve been following this blog for a few weeks (or if you read my post from yesterday called “A typical atypical gathering with the church“), then you also know that we are getting ready to study Ephesians weekly when we gather together with our brothers and sisters in Christ.
Next Sunday, we’re planning to study Ephesians 1:1-14, which includes Paul’s address, as well as a long section that begins with the title of this post. Some people know that this long section (Ephesians 1:3-14) is actually one long sentence in Greek, although it’s usually broken up into smaller sections in our English translations to make it more readable.
Before we can begin to understand what Paul meant by this passage, we need to first understand how the words and phrases within the paragraph relate to one another grammatically and syntactically. I’m not going to attempt to analyze the grammar and syntax of each word and phrase. Instead, I’m simply laying out the main structure of the paragraph.
Paul begins by explaining that God is “blessed” (or perhaps “praised” or “praiseworthy”), and he describes God as “the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” and the one who “blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places (‘heavenlies’).” He uses that entire phrase to describe God, and he doesn’t end there.
The next phrase is parallel to the previous one, and also describes God:
…even as [just as] he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us [“has given us grace”] in the Beloved. (Ephesians 1:4-6 ESV)
Like I said, there is no sentence break between verses 4 and 5, so it could be translated as “in love having predestined us for adoption as sons…” While this translation makes the sentence harder to read (and probably explains why it is broken up in English translations), it also shows the relationship between the participle “having predestined” and the previous subject/verb/object “he chose us.”
The final parts of this long section probably follow from the word “the Beloved” and describe how God “has given us grace” in the Beloved. (I say “probably” because it is grammatically possible that each “in whom” relative clause actually refer back to God. But, more likely, the relative pronoun “whom” refers back to the noun “the Beloved.”)
… he has given us grace in the Beloved:
In him [whom] we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.
In him [whom] we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory.
In him [whom] you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory. (Ephesians 1:7-14 ESV)
So, we can see that Paul’s main points in the last part of this long paragraph is that God has given us grace in the Beloved (Jesus Christ), because of three things that we have in Christ: 1) we have redemption through his blood, 2) we have received an inheritance, and 3) we were sealed with the Holy Spirit. Why? Because God chose us to be his adopted children in Jesus Christ. And because of all this, God is blessed (by us) (i.e., he is worthy of praise).
I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Something is missing? Just add another program!
Over at “Church in a Circle,” there’s a great new post called “Doubling up at church – filling our week with extra programs because Sunday isn’t meeting our spiritual needs.”
The post examines something that I’ve noticed about the modern church. If something is missing in people’s spiritual growth, instead of changing current activities, the church organizations simply add another program. Eventually, every night of the week is filled with different programs, meetings, committees, etc.
Churches are doubling up on programs because meeting in rows isn’t meeting people’s core spiritual needs. We’re running Bible study groups on Wednesday nights (so people can engage directly with God’s Word in a group setting), social groups on Friday nights (so people can get to know each other better), and mission groups on Saturday afternoons (so people can find ways to apply God’s Word in real life) – all for the same people who attend on Sunday mornings. Why? Because the Sunday morning church service isn’t effectively connecting, engaging and empowering God people. We’re tying God’s people up in multiple meetings, taking them out of the world and using up all their free time, because the format we’re using for “church” isn’t allowing people to connect, learn or grow.
Could it be that so much is missing in people’s spiritual growth and maturity because of the way churches are meeting together? If so, then adding programs and activities will not change who the people think they are and what they think it means to be the church. This kind of thinking will always hinder their spiritual growth… regardless of how busy they become doing different activities and programs.
A typical atypical gathering with the church
No, the title of this post is not a mistake. Occasionally, I like to describe one of the times that we gather together with our brothers and sisters in Christ. People usually like these posts, especially people who are interested in more simple types of gatherings, but have little or no experience with it.
But, there’s a problem. All of our weekly gatherings are different. I mean, there are some “typical” elements or activities, but every meeting is atypical is some way. Still, I thought I would describe one of our recent gatherings for those who may be interested.
Our meeting time begins at 10:30 a.m., which means that is when people start to arrive. The first ones who arrive begin arranging the chairs and hanging out, catching up with each other, talking about what has happened since the last time they’d seen each other. As more and more people arrive, there are usually little groups scattered around the room, with people moving from group to group to talk to different people.
On this particular day, a couple who I had met online met with us for the first time. They were traveling through our area and spent the day with us. They told us about their service to prisoners in their area and their plans to start a halfway house in another state.
After they talked about their service to prisoners, we began sharing prayer requests and praying for each other. It’s always encouraging and challenging to hear what’s going on in everyone’s lives, and to see people truly caring for one another, both by praying and by making plans to help each other later. At one point, a brother shared a passage from Psalms that God had used to convict him about his attitude during the last week. Again, we prayed for him and for one another.
We had previously decided to begin studying Paul’s letter to the Ephesians this week. So, we were going to read through the entire book for our first week studying Ephesians. A couple of people would read each chapter, then between chapters someone would request a song that we would sing together.
After 10-12 people had taken turns reading through Ephesians, and after we sang 6-7 songs, a few people shared their thoughts from the reading. They each focused on different passages, and others joined the discussion, encouraging each other from the Scriptures. As we wound down, we decided together that we would continue studying through the book of Ephesians one or two paragraphs per week, beginning with Ephesians 1:1-14 the next time we get together.
But, even then, we were not finished gathering together. We continued to hang out and talk with one another for a long time. At this time, we also usually set up tables for lunch. But, because of a few things that were going on, we decided to eat lunch with several of our friends at our home. So, after talking for another hour or so, we went to our house to share beef and vegetable soup.
Unfortunately, I can’t share everything that happened that day. The more important things that were said and done are too personal to share in public (both for me and for others involved). But, hopefully, this will give you an idea of what happens during a typical atypical weekly gathering with our brothers and sisters in Christ.
Accepting Jesus and everyone else at his table
A few months ago (maybe longer?) I “met” Jeph and Craig online through a mutual online friend. Recently, they rebooted their blog, now called “Throwing Bricks.” Craig recently published an excellent article called “Accepting a seat at the table.”
After talking briefly about the exclusivity of table fellowship in the first century (and today?), Craig reminds us that Jesus ate with both the Pharisees and other elites in society as well as with the sinners. He then carries this idea of a more open fellowship into the early church.
Finally, Craig ends the post with a challenge for the church today:
It’s strange but I often find Christians who are hesitant to fellowship with other followers of Christ who don’t share their particular set of doctrinal beliefs, political affiliations, worship preferences, social / economic status, race, age or perceived level of maturity. They are more concerned with being proved right than being with Jesus. It’s as though we are still abiding by the old rules of table fellowship. I have some old friends that border on fundamentalism and though we all believe in Jesus and strive to follow his teachings we remain distant due to certain interpretations of scripture. What gets me is that I have no problem calling them brother and sister but I’m not sure they would reciprocate that sentiment and it sucks. Jesus didn’t discriminate based on any of these factors but rather invited anyone to come. To respond to Jesus’ invitation and accept a seat at the table is to accept Jesus himself and everyone else at the table regardless of personal differences.
Of course, if we read 1 Corinthians 11 and James 2, we find that some of the early followers of Jesus had the same problem… although this problem was not accepted and perpetuated then like it is today.
The last part of that quote is key. It reminds me of something that Paul wrote: “Therefore, accept one another as Christ has accepted you, for the glory of God.” (Romans 15:7)
Are we following Jesus? If so, we will accept everyone who Jesus has accepted.
The Hard Way: Dealing with unnecessary burdens on our spiritual journey
A few years ago, my son and I joined a friend and his son on a hiking and camping trip through part of the Appalachian Trail in Pennsylvania. We planned to hike about 25 miles in 3 days, tent camping for the 2 nights that we were on the trail. At one point, during lunch on the second day, we met someone. After thinking about this encounter, I realized that it was – in some ways – a parallel to my spiritual journey. I shared the story with my friend Dan from “Some Church Stuff.” He said the story paralleled his own spiritual journey in a different way. He also said that he was going to steal my story and write a post of his own. So, before Dan took credit for my story in his post “The Wrong Way,” I thought I would publish something about this story too.
While we were getting ready for our hike, we loaded our backpacks with tents, sleeping bags, food, clothes, cooking utensils, more food, rain gear, camp stoves, even more food, and snacks, among other things. Altogether, between the four of us, we carried about 150 lbs on our backs as we stepped onto the Appalachian Trail. We would hike for several hours each day, then camp at night. During the second day, while we were stopped for a lunch break, a man ran up and asked if he could eat lunch with us. He was only carrying a water bladder on his back, and a small belt pouch for light food. As we talked to him, we realized that he was planning to run (yes, run) the exact same route that we were hiking. The difference: we were walking the route in 3 days while he was running that route in less than 1 day.
Now, granted, during this hiking and camping trip, my friend and I planned to spend time with our sons. It turns out that we packed way too much stuff even for this plan. And, that extra stuff weighed us down and negatively impacted our trip.
But, as I thought about the encounter with the guy who was running the trail, I started wondering… What if our plan was simply to make our way along the path? If that was our plan, then all of that stuff severely limited our ability to progress along the trail.
The other man was able to progress along the same trail faster and easier than the four of us.
As I look back on my spiritual journey, I see that I was also carrying along a lot of baggage, stuff that was hindering my progression as I desired to grow in maturity in Jesus Christ. I was told that some of this stuff was necessary. Other stuff I picked up along the way. But, in the end, I was in hindered by stuff that I thought I needed. In fact, the opposite was true – I did not need any of it.
Over the last few years, I’ve found it’s possible to make it along the trail without all of that stuff. Now, it’s true, all metaphors break down at some point. But, I’ve learned alot about myself and how God has changed my view about discipleship and following Jesus by thinking about this man that I met on the Appalachian Trail.
(Once you read my post, and understanding that this story is completely my own, jump over to Dan’s post and see what he has to say…)
Scripture… As We Live It #226
This is the 226th passage in “Scripture… As We Live It.”
Food will not commend us to God. We are no worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do. But take care that this right of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak. However, for any other convictions besides this trivial one of eating meat sacrificed to idols, make sure that you demand that other people conform to your beliefs. (1 Corinthians 8:8-9 re-mix)
(Please read the first post for an explanation of this series.)
Replay: And they devoted themselves
Three years ago, I wrote a post called “And they devoted themselves.” The post is an examination of that phrase (the title of the post) in Acts 2:42. What did Luke mean when he wrote, “They devoted themselves…” and specifically what did it mean for those early Christians to devote themselves to “the apostles’ teaching”? By studying this important passage (Acts 2:42-47), I think we can learn alot about the life of the church immediately after Pentecost.
——————————
And they devoted themselves
Acts 2:42 is often called a summary verse concerning the early followers of Jesus Christ. Luke records:
And they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. (Acts 2:42 ESV)
I think the ESV missed something in the translation here. The phrase “they devoted themselves” is a translation of the Greek verb phrase “ἠσαν προσκαρτεροῦντες” (esan proskarterountes). For those who are familiar with Greek grammar, this is a periphrastic participial construction – a verb of being along with a participle. According to several Greek grammars, the periphrastic participle is the most marked verb form when it comes to verbal aspect. Thus, this verb phrase focuses on the continuous aspect of the verb. The NASB translation tries to bring out this continuous aspect by translating the phrase as “They were continually devoting themselves…”
Lexically, the verb προσκαρτερέω (proskartereo) can mean “devoted to” which we see in both the ESV and NASB translations. According to BDAG (the standard Greek lexicon), in Acts 2:42 it carries a meaning of “hold fast to, continue or persevere in”. The context should help us understand what Luke is communicating to us about these early followers of Jesus Christ.
Luke says that the believers were devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching, fellowship, breaking of bread, and prayers. This does not mean that they were “devoted” to listening to what the apostles were teaching. Instead, it means that these early Christians were continually persevering in living according to the message that the apostles taught, as well as continuing to fellowship (share life) break bread (eat together), and pray.
Think about it this way: If the phrase “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching” conjures up an image of people sitting around listening to the apostles teach, then the translation is NOT communicating the image to you properly.
On the other hand, if you read that phrase and picture the early believers attempting to live their lives in accordance with the message that the apostles taught, then you’re understanding what Luke wrote.
We see that Luke helps us understand what he means in the following verses:
And awe came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were being done through the apostles. And all who believed were together and had all things in common. And they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need. And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they received their food with glad and generous hearts, praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved. (Acts 2:43-47 ESV)
This passage demonstrates how those early believers lived according to the gospel (the apostles’ teaching), and how they shared their lives and their meals with one another. On the day of Pentecost, God did not create individuals who loved to sit and listen to teaching. Instead, God created a new community who now lived new lives – lives that were not lived for themselves any longer. Instead, they lived their lives for God by sharing their lives with one another and with the world around them.
The world noticed… and the world found favor on this new community and new way of life. (2:47)
The source of the church’s view of leadership and hierarchy
Jon at “Jon’s Journey” has written a very thought-provoking post called “Church Hierarchical Leadership.”
In the post, Jon shares several graphs of organizational and hierarchical leadership, although I don’t think I’ve ever seen a church publish that first one… maybe so?
Anyway, after the graphs, he begins asking questions about how hierarchy entered the church. (Of course, some believe that Jesus, Paul, and the other apostles and NT authors taught a form of hierarchical leadership for the church. But, that’s for another discussion, I guess.)
At one point, Jon suggests that Platonic philosophy is the source of leadership hierarchies in the church:
For example people like Clement of Alexandria and Origen had also been students of Platonism which saw the whole of society separated into classes or levels, and that people were actually predestined to their level in society. They also thought in terms of dualism, where there was a need for priests and clergy to be mediators between regular laymen and God. The concept of priesthood of all believers was soon largely overlooked.
There is a lot more to it than this.
That’s an interesting theory. Of course, Ignatius claimed direct spiritual revelation for his understanding of the three-part hierarchy (bishop – presbyters – deacons), and he said that he was not taught this by any man. Interesting…
Anyway, I don’t know the answer to this question, but I think it’s a great question to raise.
Because Paul did not consult with others about his own service, right?
Over the next few days, I’m going to examine a few statements made by Paul that I think are taken out of context in the way the statements are often applied today. This is not really a series, because the posts won’t really build on one another. Each post will cover a different statement.
For example, in this post I’d like to consider another statement made by Paul that I think is often misunderstood and/or misapplied today. The statement is, “I did not receive it [the gospel] from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ” (Galatians 1:12 ESV), and the related statement that follows soon afterwards, “I did not immediately consult with anyone” (Galatians 1:16b ESV).
Again, I don’t intend to interpret these statements. Instead, I hope to show how these statements are often exaggerated and misinterpreted. Here are the statements in context:
For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man’s gospel. For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ. For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it. And I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely zealous was I for the traditions of my fathers. But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone; nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus. (Galatians 1:11-17 ESV)
I’ve heard these statements taken to two different extremes: 1) That Paul never consulted with anyone else and was never taught by anyone else, only Jesus, or 2) that these statements demonstrate a rift between Paul and the other apostles. Unfortunately, both of these extremes lead to the justification of “lone ranger” type Christians who do not feel others have the right to examine or question what they are teaching.
Again, reading further in Paul’s letters or in Acts demonstrate that neither of these extremes is true.
For the first extreme, Paul could not have meant that he never consulted anyone else about the gospel or that he was never taught by anyone else (only Jesus). In the very next passage (in Galatians 2:1-2), we find that Paul DID compare the gospel that he was proclaiming with the gospel proclaimed by others to make sure they were all proclaiming the same gospel. Plus, most of the “one another” statements in Scripture come from Paul. It would be difficult to believe that he would think “teach one another,” “admonish one another,” etc. applies to everyone except him. Also, he told the Romans (in Romans 1:11-12) that he not only expected to serve them through the spiritual gifts that God gave him, he also recognized that he needed the service of their spiritual gifts as well. (And, as he would tell them later, that would include the spiritual gift of teaching.) Finally, we must consider Paul’s decision to consult with the apostles, elders, and others in Jerusalem concerning those who claimed that their teaching about salvation through keeping the law was coming from the Jerusalem church (Acts 15).
For the second extreme, Paul could not have meant that there was a rift between himself and the other apostles, especially Peter. These statements are often combined the Paul’s confrontation of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 to indicate this schism. But, we also see in this same passage that Paul speaks positively of Peter and others (and in a comparative sense with himself) in Galatians 2:7-10. In other passages we see Paul speaking positively of Peter and the apostles and caring for other believers in Jerusalem.
Paul could not have meant either of these extremes when he said, “I did not receive it [the gospel] from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ,” and “I did not immediately consult with anyone.” Therefore, these statements are not justifications for “lone ranger” type Christians who refuse to allow others to question what they are teaching. Nor are these statements justifications for those who believe that they cannot (or should not) be taught by others. Nor are the statements justification for living with schisms between different groups of believers.