The thin connections of social media
My son is currently taking an English course at a local community college. He is working on his first paper, which is a response to several essays that he had to read on the topic of technology and its effect on communication, relationships, etc. I’ve enjoyed talking with him about this, and I’m excited about the direction that he wants to take this paper.
Then, last night, I read a post from Dave Black on a similar topic. (I cannot link directly to Dave’s post, but you can read it on his blog dated Wednesday, September 5, 2012 at 7:18 p.m.)
In his post, he responds to another blogger who refers to the difference between “thin connections” and “thick connections.” This is what Dave writes:
Personally, I have benefited tremendously from the internet, and not merely because of the outlet it provides for my saunterings. I’ve enjoyed the “thin connections” it offers. You go online, visit your favorite blogs, and read an interest post or two. No hardship, and the results are often gratifying and edifying. But my greatest satisfaction comes from those “thick conversations” one simply cannot find on the internet, try though one might… I have examined many thousands of tweets and blog posts but I do not really expect to get to “know” their authors online, congenial as they may appear to be. I have no illusions as to the value of my own blog as a serious conversation partner either. But taking all such limitations into account, the fact remains that social media are conversations of a sort, and I for one am very grateful for every conversation partner God brings my way.
In many ways, this blog and my use of social media (Facebook and Twitter especially) have paralleled this course. These various outlets not only allow for “thin connections” online, but they also provide an avenue for developing or strengthening “thick connections” with people who I know “in real life.”
I know there are many discussions going on now about the benefits and detriments of online relationships and communications. For some people, “thin connections” are all that is available for now. I think they should grow in those relationships as much as possible while also looking for opportunities to build face-to-face “thick connections” that happen when we share our “real life” with one another.
Are struggles a sign from God to stop or an opportunity to persevere?
When I run long distances, I often get to a point where I do not want to continue. Some people call it “hitting the wall.” Of course, if you break through that wall, common wisdom says that running gets easier.
There are other times, however, when I struggle while I’m running because of pains that indicate I should stop running. Recently, I began to feel a tightness in my leg and decided to slow down and eventually stop. In other words, I did not try to “push through the wall” in that case.
So, when I’m running, I have to pay very close attention to my body to understand when I should push through the pain and struggle and when I should stop.
Something similar happens in our lives. Sometimes, when we struggle, we are supposed to push through and persevere in spite of the struggles, trusting that God is going to give us the strength and grace to continue. At other times, struggles are an indication that God is telling us that we are headed in the wrong direction and that we should stop or turn in a different direction.
But, how do we tell the difference?
If you’ve read this blog for any length of time, you know how important Scripture is to me. But, in this case, we cannot find the answer to this question in Scripture. In fact, we find BOTH answers in Scripture.
For example, at times when Paul faced difficulties in a city, he would leave that city and go in a different direction:
But when the Jews from Thessalonica learned that the word of God was proclaimed by Paul at Berea also, they came there too, agitating and stirring up the crowds. Then the brothers immediately sent Paul off on his way to the sea, but Silas and Timothy remained there. (Acts 17:13-14 ESV)
At other times, when Paul faced difficulties in a city, he remained in that city:
But when some became stubborn and continued in unbelief, speaking evil of the Way before the congregation, he withdrew from them and took the disciples with him, reasoning daily in the hall of Tyrannus. This continued for two years, so that all the residents of Asia heard the word of the Lord, both Jews and Greeks. (Acts 19:9-10 ESV)
(By the way, if you read though Acts 19, you’ll find that Paul faced many struggles while in Ephesus.)
So, when you face struggles, how do you know if God is telling you that you are going in the wrong direction or if God is telling you that it’s time to persevere through the struggles?
More thoughts on itinerant (traveling) servants of the gospel
My post this morning (“How many mission journeys did Paul take?“) was about Paul’s travels as an itinerant servant of the gospel.
At least two more bloggers have also been writing about itinerant (traveling) servants in the last few days.
First, Miguel at “God’s Directed Deviations” wrote a post called “Retracing Gospel Footsteps and Going Where Christ is Already Named.” Based on Paul’s statement in Romans 15:20, Miguel asks some very good questions:
Should mission minded folks be staking claims over territory?
Is it wrong to retrace someone else’s gospel steps?
What criteria should we use to determine when to build “ON” another’s foundation?
Of course, when Paul made that statement (Romans 15:20), he was planning to travel to Rome where (according to that very letter) there were already several thriving groups of believers.
Also, Eric from “A Pilgrim’s Progress” wrote a post called “We Ought to Support People Like These” based on John’s statement in 3 John 5-8.
At one point, Eric writes:
Why did the traveling Christian workers, who we might call missionaries, need financial assistance? Since they traveled from place to place, they would have been unable to hold down a regular job. This would have made earning a regular income a difficult task.
Eric also points out that itinerant servants did work when they could in order to support themselves and others – at least, according to Paul, that was the pattern practiced by him and those who traveled with him.
So, here are two more posts on the topic of itinerant (traveling) servants of the gospel. I’m glad to read and hear that more and more people are considering what Scripture tells us about these people (apostles). So much of what I’ve read and heard does not begin with Scripture, but begins with modern practice and forces Scripture to match that pattern.
How many mission journeys did Paul take?
Usually, when someone asks the question that I’ve asked in the title of this post, the answer revolves around whether or not someone believe Paul actually traveled to Spain. The answer is usually given as three journeys if the person does not believe that Paul went to Spain, or four journeys if the person does believe that Paul went to Spain.
But, that’s not what this post is about. Scripture does not tell us whether or not Paul traveled to Spain, but in the Book of Acts and in Paul’s letters, we can tell that Paul went on many more than four journeys.
Now, the standard three journeys taken by Paul are taken from Acts 13-14 (Cyprus and southern Asia Minor), Acts 16-18 (southern Asia Minor and Macedonia, primarily Corinth), and Acts 19-20 (Asia Minor and Macedonia again, primarily Ephesus).
But, according to Paul, once he left Macedonia in Acts 20, he was on another journey assigned to him by the Holy Spirit to go to Rome via Jerusalem (Acts 20:16,22). Since Paul sees himself as being sent by the Spirit to Rome, this is another missionary journey (remember, “missionary” comes from the Latin translation of the Greek term meaning “sent”).
But, believe it or not, these are not all of Paul’s missionary journeys. For some reason, people tend to begin viewing Paul as an apostle beginning in Acts 13. While Acts 13:1-4 is an amazing passage of the Spirit and the church in Antioch sending Barnabas and Paul, that particular journey ended in Acts 14. Luke specifically states in Acts 14:25-26 that when Paul and Barnabas return to Antioch, they have completed the task they had been sent to do in Acts 13.
Paul’s journeys began very early after his conversion near Damascus. After being visited by Agabus, Paul immediately began proclaiming the good news of Jesus Christ in the synagogues in Damascus (Acts 9:20). When he was run out of town, Paul went to Jerusalem (Acts 9:26). After staying in Jerusalem for a while, he then went to Caeserea in order to sail to Tarsus, his home town (Acts 9:30).
This still is not the end of Paul’s journeys. He was still in Tarsus when God began to save Gentiles around Antioch. When Barnabas went to Antioch to help the young church there, he went to Tarsus to ask Paul for his help. Once again, Paul found himself traveling, this time going from Tarsus to Antioch (Acts 11:25-26).
(By the way, according to Paul in Galatians 1:17, he also traveled to Arabia for three years at some point during his other journeys.)
In other words, Paul’s life from the time of his conversion was one of almost constant travels punctuated with a few periods of staying in one location for a time. This is exactly what I would expect from someone gifted by God as an apostle. Remember that the term “apostle” is from the Greek term that means “one who is sent.” Paul lived as one who was sent by God from place to place.
Finally, there is even indication in Scripture that Paul’s traveling nature was built into him by God. (Perhaps Paul has this in mind partially in Galatians 1:15.) We know that Paul was originally from Tarsus. But, we first meet him in Jerusalem (Acts 7:58). And, we later see Paul traveling on behalf of the Jewish leaders (Acts 9:1-2).
So, how many mission journeys did Paul take? It’s almost impossible to count them all, but it’s definitely more than four, even if he never made it to Spain.
(I want to thank my good friend Art from churchtaskforce.org and waginglove.com for helping me think through itinerant [traveling] service in Scripture.)
Measuring the Success of a Church
Scot at “Jesus Creed” wrote a post last week called “5 Myths about Successful Churches.” In the post, he summarized the findings from another article.
I have not read the original article, only Scot’s summary and some of the comments on Scot’s post.
However, even the summary that Scot gives us is very telling:
MYTH #1: The Size of the Church Shows Success.
MYTH #2: The Amount of the Budget Shows Success.
MYTH #3: The Celebrity Status of the Leader Shows Success.
MYTH #4: The Title of the Leader Shows Success.
MYTH #5: The Affluent Lifestyle of the Leader Shows Success.
At best, these “myths” may demonstrate the success of an organization and organizational leaders. They do not – and cannot – demonstrate whether or not a group of Jesus’ followers are “successfully” following him.
Instead, we can only point to people who are seeking to be obedient to Jesus Christ and help others follow him, who are growing in maturity, who are sharing their lives with others, who are serving and caring and providing for those in need, who are proclaiming the good news of Jesus Christ with people in their lives.
When we focus on organizational issues to determine growth, our focus will automatically shift away from Jesus Christ and how he is leading his church.
What about Paul’s authority?
In doing research for my previous series on the terms that Paul used to refer to other Christians (and whether or not those terms indicate a superior/subordinate relationship), I ran across a passage in 2 Corinthians in which Paul mentions his authority. I’ve come across this passage before, but I had not stopped to consider it in detail.
The statement itself is fairly short: “For this reason I write these things while I am away from you, that when I come I may not have to be severe in my use of the authority that the Lord has given me for building up and not for tearing down.” (2 Corinthians 13:10 ESV)
What is this “authority” that Paul is talking about? Apparently, he does believe that he has authority, and that this authority was given to him by the Lord for Paul to use to build up other brothers and sisters in Christ.
But, the question is, why does Paul have this authority? Is it special to Paul as an individual? Is it special to Paul as an apostle?
To begin with, notice that there is a particular reason that is causing Paul to use this authority. What is “this reason” that Paul plans to come and be severe in his authority? Well, apparently, there is some sin among the brothers and sisters in Corinth. Paul began talking about this sin earlier in chapter 13, and it is this sin (“this reason”) that is causing him to plan to use authority.
But, it is not only the existence of sin among the Corinthians that is causing him to plan to use authority. The main problem is that the Corinthians have not dealt with this sin on their own.
That’s right, the only reason that Paul is planning to “use authority” in this situation is that the Corinthians have not used the same authority themselves. In fact, Paul is almost incredulous that the Corinthians have not realized that they have the authority to deal with this sin because Jesus Christ dwells in them in power – just as he dwells in Paul in power.
Paul’s desire is that when he comes to Corinth for the third time, he finds that the Corinthians have found that Jesus Christ truly does dwell among them and that they have dealt with the issues of sin among them in the same authority that Paul himself would use otherwise.
So, the authority is not something that Paul has because he is Paul, and it’s not an authority that Paul has because he is an apostle. The authority is something Paul has because Jesus Christ dwells in him through the Holy Spirit.
But, guess what?!? All followers of Jesus Christ have the same authority because Jesus Christ also dwells in them through the Holy Spirit.
The Corinthians are not speaking and living according to the authority because they are not living in the power of Jesus Christ who dwells in them. But, the same authority that Paul plans to use is available to the Corinthians – and, in fact, to all believers.
What kind of authority does Paul plan to use (if necessary) when he comes to Corinth again? The same authority that every believer has – the authority of Jesus Christ who dwells in those who follow him.
Do you want to run with me?
Just over a year ago, I went to the doctor, and the news was not good. I wrote about this in a post called “A change in diet and exercise for me… and for the church.” (Yes, of course I had to relate my experience back to the church…) I wasn’t dying (at that moment), but I was headed toward a very unhealthy lifestyle unless I changed the way that I was eating and began exercising.
In the last year, I’ve lost about 35 lbs, and my exercise has increased to the point that I’ve been able to run in a couple of half marathons (13.1 miles) and a 12 mile trail race plus several training runs of even longer distances up to 17 miles.
As you can imagine, people who knew me (or who saw my pictures change on Facebook) recognized that I was losing weight. Also, many people who knew me also knew that I was running, either because they heard me talk about running or they saw me panting down the side of the street or around a local park.
Over the last year – especially the last 6 months or so – many people have asked me about how I lost so much weight or how I have been able to work up to running long distances (when I could barely walk a mile when I started). I’ve explained the changes in eating habits, and I’ve explained how I slowly and consistently increased the amount that I was walking and/or running.
Then, I would often hear something like this: “I wish I could run like that.”
To which, this is almost always my answer: “Do you want to run with me?”
Now, often people do not want to run with me for various reasons, but the one most often given is this: “I don’t want to slow you down.” To which I reply: “I’d rather walk or run slower with you than run faster alone.”
Over the months, I’ve seen several people begin exercising, and sometimes they actually begin by walking or running with me. I’m serious when I tell them that I’d prefer to exercise with them at a lower intensity than to exercise alone at a higher intensity. (Yes, I still need to run faster or longer, but I can do that at another time.)
Since I have more experience running than these particular people, I’m often the one helping them learn to run. However, I still find that I’m learning from them as well, especially as they grow and advance in their exercising.
Recently, I was thinking about this in the context of discipleship – that is, helping people follow Jesus. In discipleship, we’re actually asking people if they’d like to follow Jesus along with us. I haven’t always thought about discipleship like this, and, unfortunately, I thought of following Jesus as a more individualistic pursuit.
But, like I’ve learned in exercising and helping others exercise, we should be inviting people to follow Jesus along with us – and then be willing to walk with them, even if that means “walking” a little slower than we think we could do alone.
Again, when we invite people to follow Jesus with us, we may find that we doing most of the “helping” and they are doing most of the learning at first. But, more and more, we’ll find that Jesus will also use them to help us follow him.
So, do you want to run with me? Do you want to follow Jesus with me?
Scripture… As We Live It #224
This is the 224th passage in “Scripture… As We Live It.”
He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice to attend your local church, and to love kindness to give to support your church, and to walk humbly with your God and to volunteer for ministries that are part of your pastor’s vision? (Micah 6:8 re-mix)
(Please read the first post for an explanation of this series.)
Replay: The trans-congregational church
Three and a half years ago, I wrote a post called “The trans-congregational church.” I wrote the post in a response to an article in which the author used the term “trans-congregational church.” In some ways, I think the author was onto something. But, in other ways, the term and the article point to problems among groups of Christians today that prohibit (or at list hinder) the kind of “trans-congregational” relationships that we read about in Scripture. What do you think?
——————————-
The trans-congregational church
In a recent study concern community development in the New Testament, I came across an article called “The Trans-Congregational Church in the New Testament” by Jefrey Kloha (Concordia Journal 34 no 3, July 2008, 172-190).
In this article, Kloha suggests that the term “ekklesia” was used for local congregations that generally met in houses, and more generally for the church-at-large – the heavenly assembly – the “universal church” – the una sancta. But, Kloha says there is a third usage of the term “ekklesia” in the New Testament, which he calls “the trans-congregational church”. He says this “trans-congregational church” consisted of “several (or many) local congregations conceived of corporately”. (173)
Kloha suggests several examples of “the trans-congregational church” in the New Testament. For example, he says that the “church in Jerusalem” could not have met in one place – even the temple courts – so, they must have met in many locations. However, they were considered a single “church”. Also, Kloha says the singular use of “ekklesia” in Acts 9:31 indicates that the individual congregations of Judea, Galilee, and Samaria were considered one church. (Yes, he does discuss the plural variant in this passage, albeit briefly.)
Also, Kloha suggests that the trans-congregational church is demonstrated in the relationships between churches. For example, there is a close connection between the church of Jerusalem and the church of Antioch. Kloha recalls that Paul told the church in Collosae to read his letter to the Laodiceans, and vice versa, indicating a relational connection between the congregations – or multiple congregations – in each city. Paul recognizes the relationships between the various churches in Rome as well (Romans 16).
I think that Kloha has pointed out something that may be missing among the church today. The church has become so exclusive and independent that we often miss the fact that we are united with other brothers and sisters in Christ as well – not only with the ones that meet with us from day-to-day or week-to-week. Kloha offers this concern at the end of his article as well:
By ignoring the NT understanding of the trans-congregational nature of the church we have weakened the bonds of fellowship, mutual concern and support, and unity in doctrine and practice which should inform and indeed define our life together as church. By turning again to the New Testament we might sharpen our understanding of church and apply that understanding to our structure. (191)
I think Kloha has inadvertently (or perhaps intentionally) pointed to one of the problem – structure. Many churches have structured themselves in a way that precludes trans-congregational relationships.
In the life of our community, we have seen this in action. We often encourage our brothers and sisters to meet with other churches. In fact, our elders have met with other churches. Of course, we have to explain that we are not unhappy with our church, nor are we interested in “joining” their church. We simply want to build relationships with other brothers and sisters in Christ.
When we talk about the possibility of other “church members” or leadership meeting with us to further build relationships, this seems strange and odd to them – like they would be unfaithful to their church or their pastor.
Our view of church has become so exclusive and structured that we have a hard time recognizing our relationship to those in “other churches”. So, I agree with Kloha that we have (for the most part) lost this idea of “the trans-congregational church”.
What do you think? Is it important for believers to have “trans-congregational” relationships? Why or why not?
The Gift that (God) Keeps on Giving
In the last few days, I’ve read several very good posts on the topic of spiritual gifts.
Donald at “The Unapologetic Poet” wrote a post called “One Body, Many Parts, Indeed: Embrace Your Calling.”
Jim at “Crossroad Junction” wrote “Gifts, Calling and Validation.” (I just realized that this is an older post, but it showed up in my Google Reader. I read it, and I’m sharing it with you now.)
Dan at “Cerulean Sanctum” wrote “No Room for Prophets: When Your Church Rejects Your Spiritual Gift.”
Believe it or not, I’m glad that Scripture silent about many aspects related to spiritual gifts. Seriously.
So, I thought I would ask you a question that I often consider for myself: If you could understand better one thing about spiritual gifts, what would it be?