Missing an opportunity to serve…
Have you ever looked back at your life (perhaps to the recent past) and realized that you missed an opportunity that God had given you to serve someone? Unfortunately, that happens to me often. Many times, I try to justify the missed opportunity, but in reality it is just that: a missed opportunity.
I thought about many of those missed opportunities when I read a post by Bobby at “Deconstructing Neverland” called “Smoking in the boys room.”
While the title of his post is also the name of one of the all-time great classic rock songs, that is not what his post is about. Instead, Bobby replays an incident from his childhood in which a church leader missed the opportunity to serve him and his family.
Here is a small part of Bobby’s post:
I had it all worked out. I had friends who were in on my secret and they would be my lookout. I had the schedule memorized and the optimal times to sneak away for a smoke all figured out. It was not a flawless plan. Once an adult caught wind of nicotine in the air, the hunt was on and eventually I was the marked target. I would now have to pay for my sins and be put away from the flock. As they say: little leaven leavens the whole lump.
I vividly remember the pastor bringing be into a private room, taking out my delicious pack of Marlboro Red’s and going completely mental as he broke every one with veins pulsing in his forehead and the look of pure disgust on his face. “I’m doing this because I love you” he tells me. Huh, I thought. Strange love.
After he took out all his emotions on my helpless pack of cancer sticks he escorted me out to the pool where all the other kids were playing. He got everyone’s attention so that I could obey his command to confess to everyone my addiction to cigarettes and let them all know that I was leaving. It is my most embarrassing memory to date and I owe it all to the Pastor who “loved” me enough to put me through it.
Whenever I return to this time in my mind the feelings come flooding back. Embarrassment, shame, fear, guilt, rejection, anger, sadness all coursed through my veins simultaneously. A sweaty little teenage boy hoping to find someone who would accept me in spite of my failures.
You know, I’ve found that there are many little teenage boys and girls – and many older men and women – who are hoping that someone will accept them in spite of their failures. Often, when these failures become apparent, we have an opportunity to accept and serve the person in the love of Jesus Christ.
This is where we often “drop the ball”…
I’m praying for opportunities to serve people, and at the same time, I’m praying that God will give me the grace and humility to love and accept them in spite of their failures, just like he loves and accepts me in spite of my failures.
Elders/Pastors and Financial Benefits: Introduction
In the church today, it seems that elders/pastors and money go hand-in-hand. I’ve written several blog posts and series related to financial benefits and church leaders, especially for those who are hired as pastors, elders, or other positions among the church. Personally, I do not believe that Scripture justifies paying someone a salary in order for them to be an elder/pastor. (For a summary of my view, see my post “Summary – Should elders/pastors be paid a salary?“)
In this series, I do not plan to rehash my argument concerning elders/pastors and salaries. (By the way, I will primarily use the term “elders” in this series. However, if your traditions uses “pastor” or “bishop” or “minister” or anything else, you can assume that I’m referring to those people also.)
Instead, I’m going to look through several passages of Scripture that connect elders and financial benefit. Interestingly, there are only a few passages of Scripture that mention elders at all. And, among those, only three discuss elders and finances together. I’m going to discuss those three passages in canonical order in four posts:
- Acts 20:33-35
- 1 Timothy 5:17
- 1 Timothy 5:18
- 1 Peter 5:2
Now, in reality, 1 Timothy 5:17 and 1 Timothy 5:18 go together. However, I will examine them separately, but bring the connection together in the post on 1 Timothy 5:18. Also, all of the passages are part of larger contexts, and, in each case, the larger context will help us understand what the author is saying.
I think that it is important that these three passages (Acts 20:33-35, 1 Timothy 5:17-18, and 1 Peter 5:2) were written by 3 different authors and were written to three different audiences. However, I think the teachings regarding elders and financing is quite consistent.
Finally, in a sixth post, I’m going to write a conclusion for this series that puts together everything that we find in those three passages. In the conclusion, I will explain my understanding of the connection between elders and financial benefits. As I said earlier and in other posts, I do not believe that a salary correctly explains this connection. But, I do believe there is a connection that explains what is consistently taught in Scripture (both in these passages and in others that are not directly related to elders).
Obviously, many Christians throughout history – including today – disagree with my conclusions. I understand that. However, I have found that many commentaries and studies agree with my analysis of the various passages, even if they do not synthesize the results in the same way that I do. I think some of these conclusions actually contradict the analysis of the various passages. I’m seeking consistency, even if it means that my conclusions disagree with what has been accepted practice in the church.
So, I welcome discussion, and I welcome disagreement. I ask, though, that in this series we keep our discussion to the passages at hand. It is only by studying (analyze) the individual passages and understanding what they can and/or cannot mean that we can begin to put together (synthesize) the passages into a consistent conclusion.
—————————————-
Elders/Pastors and Financial Benefits Series
Scripture… As We Live It #197
This is the 197th passage in “Scripture… As We Live It.”
But all things should be done decently and in order according to the scheduled liturgy or what your leaders have set up in the bulletin. (1 Corinthians 14:40 re-mix)
(Please read the first post for an explanation of this series.)
This is NOT what I signed up for…
Most of you know that I’m currently in a PhD program. Actually, I’m in the last stage of that program: writing my dissertation. My PhD mentor is Dave Black.
For those who are considering entering a PhD program, I must caution you to consider who you choose as your PhD mentor very carefully. That person will (probably) have a great influence on your life. Hopefully, your mentor will influence you academically and spiritually.
So, how is my PhD mentor influencing me? Check out his blog post (at the link above) from Thursday, February 23, 2012 at 9:26 p.m.:
Personally, I’m not all that eager to raise up a new generation of leaders. I want to raise up a new generation of butlers and scullery maids. A generation of nobodies who are content to be obedient to the simple teachings of Jesus. A generation of Christ-followers who die to family, fame, fortune, success, patriotism, and the American Dream. A generation of Dietrich Bonhoeffers who realize that “when Jesus calls a man, He bids him come and die.” I want to raise up a generation of men and women who give without counting the cost, who deny themselves, who willingly take the cross as the path of union with Christ, in whom there is no trace of triumphalism, who put their lives at Christ’s disposal with unconditional surrender, who place Christian allegiance over their national allegiance, who act as though they were part of an upside-down kingdom, who die to all claims of the self-indulgent life, who refuse to lionize success or repudiate pain, who “share in suffering as good soldiers of Jesus Christ” (2 Tim. 2:3), who stand high and lift their drooping heads because the Son of God inhabits their lives in the power of His resurrection.
When I first came to seminary, this is not the path that I signed up for. But, it is definitely the path that I’m on now.
I’m not bragging. I have nothing to brag about. But, this is where Jesus Christ has led me. And, I thank God that he has brought me into contact with Dave Black, his wife BeckyLynn Black, and many, many other people who not only exhort me toward service in the name of Jesus Christ, but, more importantly, they model it.
Replay: Contending for the faith with Jude
Three years ago, I wrote a post called “Are you contending for the faith?” I was preparing to guest lecture on the Book of Jude for a friend who teaches in a local community college. As I read through the book and studied what Jude was saying to his readers, I was surprised. I was not surprised at Jude’s concern about false teachers. I was surprised at how Jude told his readers to RESPOND to the false teachers.
——————————-
“Are you contending for the faith?”
In his short letter, Jude tells his readers that he was planning to write about their common salvation. Instead, he says that he decided to appeal to them “to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints”. (Jude 3)
But, what did Jude intend for his readers to do? How were they supposed to “contend for the faith”?
In the next sentence, Jude warns his readers that some divisive and disruptive and ungodly people had sneaked in among them. For the next twelve verses (Jude 5-16), Jude tells his readers that ungodly people will be punished by God. He gives them several examples of how God judges and punishes the ungodly.
But, this still doesn’t answer the question. How are Jude’s readers supposed to “contend for the faith”? Read the next 7 verses:
But you must remember, beloved, the predictions of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ. They said to you, “In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions.” It is these who cause divisions, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit. But you, beloved, build yourselves up in your most holy faith; pray in the Holy Spirit; keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ that leads to eternal life. And have mercy on those who doubt; save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh. (Jude 17-23 ESV)
Did you see the commands? There are only five commands (instructions) in the Jude’s short letter, and they’re all contained in these verses. How would Jude’s readers (and us by extension) “contend for the faith”?
- Remember the predictions of the apostles. The apostles told them that people with ungodly passions would come in. They should not be surprised nor fearful of them.
- Remain in the love of God, by a) building each other up in faith (that is, helping one another trust God), b) praying in the Holy Spirit, and c) waiting for the mercy that comes from Jesus Christ.
- Have mercy on those who doubt.
- Rescue (save) those who are trapped in sinful behavior.
- Have mercy (cautiously – with fear) on those whose lives are covered with sin.
(By the way, the last few verses have quite different attestations in different manuscripts. But, most agree Jude instructs his readers to have mercy on others.)
I think it is very interesting that Jude tells his readers to “contend for the faith” (and thereby thwart the work of divisive, deceptive, and ungodly people) by encouraging one another to remain in God’s love and by having mercy on those who are doubting or sinning.
I’m not sure that this is the way the church is attempting to “contend for the faith” today. It seems that we tend to tear down those who disagree with us and ridicule or label or dismiss those who are doubting or sinning. Could it be that its not “the faith” we are contending for?
What if showing love and mercy contends for the faith more than apologetic arguments? What if helping and strengthening one another (other believers) preserves the faith more than creeds and confessions? What if “the faith” is more about living in God’s love and trusting him than it is about a set of systematic doctrines?
What if the church focused on love and mercy and allowed God to continue to deal with the divisive, the deceptive, and the ungodly as Jude shows that he always has in the past?
It’s not Monopoly. It’s not Life. It’s Worse!
My friend Dan at “Some Church Stuff” (formerly “The Ekklesia in Southern Maine”) is revamping his website. He’s changed the name to broaden his topics. He’s also using a simple, clean design.
Yesterday, we talked about why he was writing for this site again. He said that all of these things were running through his mind, and he wanted to write about them. We wants to put them out there and see how they fly in the “real world.”
Now, Dan might eventually write some kind of exegesis or expositional post, but I’m thinking those will be few and far between. Instead, Dan is more of a cultural critic… but not just any culture. Nope. He’s a “church culture critic.”
His posts are sarcastic – and you know that I love sarcasm. But, some of you do not like sarcasm. So, it would probably be better for you to stay away from his blog. However, if you can stand a little (or a lot of) sarcasm, and can use it to examine your own life and motives, then I think Dan’s writings can be very helpful.
His first post was called “Just Ignore Me.”
But, his second post is even better. It’s called “Playing Games.” You should really read that post. In this post, Dan describes a “game” that sounds all too familiar.
By the way, Dan tells me that he welcomes feedback… even if you disagree with him.
But some men joined him and believed
Biblical scholars, theologians, missionaries, church planters, and plenty of other people who don’t have any kind of title study Acts 17:16-34 to learn about proclaiming the gospel to different contexts. Of course, in the Book of Acts, we read about Paul and others proclaiming the gospel in many different contexts, and this is only one of those. However, this is one of the only examples in Scripture of someone proclaiming the gospel in a non-Jewish or a Jewish majority context.
I do love the way that Paul begins at a point that the people around the Areopagus would understand. Then, he works toward a simple statement about repentance, judgment, righteousness, and resurrection. Well, it’s simple in the fact that it was a very short statement. In fact, his entire “speech” was probably very short. At the point that Paul mentioned the resurrection, the crowd reacted strongly.
And, this is the point that I’d like to consider in this post. You see, while this passage can help us understand something about proclaiming the gospel in different cultural contexts, it can also help us understand an important point about helping people follow Jesus as his disciples – what could be called “discipleship.”
When Paul mentions “resurrection,” Luke tells us what happened next:
Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked. But others said, “We will hear you again about this.” So Paul went out from their midst. But some men joined him and believed, among whom also were Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris and others with them. (Acts 17:32-34 ESV)
Paul did not tell the crowd at the Areopagus everything there was to know about God, Jesus, the gospel, etc. He made a simple proclamation. Some were interested in hearing more, so he told them more. However, even all of those were not disciples. Only some join Paul in following Jesus, of whom Luke mentions one man and one woman.
It’s clear that Paul told the “some” more than he told the crowds at the Areopagus. In order to do that, he had to have spent more time with the “some” than he did with the crowd. Of course, this sounds very similar to what Jesus did with the crowds and the people who followed him. There are other examples in Scripture as well.
What do we see in this example of Paul at the Areopagus in Athens?
1) Short, to the point – but limited – proclamation that is understandable by the crowds listening.
2) More information given to those who are interested.
3) Most time spent with those who actually go beyond “interest.”
Now, remember that Paul is considered a “missionary.” A missionary. An apostle. An evangelist. Yet, it seems like only a small amount of his time and energy is spent in actually proclaiming the gospel to unbelievers. More of his time is spent with believers – the church.
What do you think? Am I reading too much into this passage and similar accounts in Scripture? Or, is this a good pattern for us to consider? How do we see this pattern followed or not followed today?
The Church without the Holy Spirit?
Dan at “Cerulean Sanctum” has been writing some very good posts lately. His latest is no exception: “The Spirit-Led Church Is the Only Real Church.”
It seems like Dan makes two points in this post. First, he’s saying that it’s possible to do certain activities without the involvement of the Holy Spirit. Second, he’s saying that a “real church” (as demonstrated in Scriptures) cannot operate without the Holy Spirit.
For the first point, Dan says:
We can sing songs without the Holy Spirit.
We can recite lines of liturgy without the Holy Spirit.
We can talk with others about life without the Holy Spirit.
We can prepare sermons without the Holy Spirit.
We can listen to those Spirit-less sermons without the Holy Spirit.
We can offer prayers without the Holy Spirit.
We can partake of a thimble of grape juice and a tiny cracker without the Holy Spirit.
We can run through our optimized order of service without the Holy Spirit.
As to the second point, Dan says:
The church assembly of the Bible was led by the Spirit from beginning to end. It depended in the Spirit for everything. Without the Holy Spirit, the charismatic gifts would cease to function. There would be no prophetic words possible. No words of knowledge or wisdom. No healing. None of the functions of a normal assembly of Christian people filled by the Spirit coming together to share their individual giftings in a public setting.
The order of the church would vanish without the Holy Spirit. What would those assembled do next? No one would have a psalm or spiritual song to bring because the Holy Spirit would not be there to inspire its singing or bringing. What inspired-in-the-moment message would be possible? Who would lead?
The people in the church assembly, those equipped by the Spirit to use their gifts, would have nothing to do, their reliance on the Spirit shattered by His absence. They would sit passively, lost.
A real church without the presence of the Holy Spirit to guide, equip, use, and mobilize would cease completely to be what it is supposed to be as depicted in the Bible.
Interestingly, the Holy Spirit often leads us to do certain activities that can be done without him or apart from him. So, how can we tell the difference between doing certain activities WITHOUT the Holy Spirit and doing them WITH the Holy Spirit?
Being one of them – not just pretending to be or trying to be
A friend of ours lives in Milan, Italy. She moved there a few years ago with a missions organization. They paid for her to stay in Milan for two years. When her “term” was completed, she could not continue in the same city with the same missions organization. But, instead of returning to the United States or moving to another place with the missions organization, she decided to get a job and stay in Milan.
Recently, she was interviewed about her experiences. She shared the interview with us via email, and she allowed me to post parts of the interview here.
In this first part, she explains the struggles she originally had with “contextualization”:
For the first six months of my term, I mostly just observed and learned from them. One of my observations was the ease they had in building relationships. Even though I was on a “platform” I still found some difficulty in that I didn’t live life exactly as they did. I did not have to leave my house and get onto a crowded metro at 7:30 in the morning. I didn’t feel the same level of stress and work fatigue they felt. I wasn’t on their rhythm. As a result, even though I loved them and was all about “contextualization,” it only went so far as I did not completely and authentically live like them. I also saw that they were able to express a deeper incarnational testimony and model what a normal life “on mission” looks like.
In the next part of the interview, she explains how this all changed once she got a job and begin working to support herself:
I have loved my life as a “normal person.” It has changed everything both for me personally and in my ministry. For me personally, being legitimately and authentically on the same “rhythm” as everyone else has completely changed my view of “contextualization.” Contextualization is no longer something that I have to be intentional in doing — I AM part of the context. I feel their pain and joy. I am one of them — not just pretending to be or trying to be.
I feel like it has been an answer to prayer for me spiritually as well. Though I do see a place for vocational ministry and know that God calls us to different things, I noticed in my personal walk with Christ as a missionary that the gospel became my job. It tragically became something I “sold.” If I were a banana salesmen who focused all day on selling bananas, the last thing I would want to do at night would be to sit down and eat a plate of bananas. Though I knew it should not be like this for a missionary — and with many I know it is not — I found that the lines between my categories of work and the truth that changed everything in me often got blurred. Now I live in Milan, Italy as a person who has been radically changed and transformed by the gospel of Christ, placed in community with others, and has the privilege of being part of God’s mission to glorify himself on the earth. I cannot help but testify, NOT because it is my job, but because it is my life. People don’t distrust me when I do because I am a normal person and this is what I believe. They don’t see me as someone with a “hidden agenda” to convert them. Of course knowing they do not see me that way makes me even more bold in my testifying!
I love that one part: “Contextualization is no longer something that I have to be intentional in doing — I AM part of the context. I feel their pain and joy. I am one of them — not just pretending to be or trying to be.”
Do you know that for many church leaders, the same problem exists. They are not really part of the context. They are not “one of them.” They know it, and the people know it.
I wonder if all church leaders would find the same freedom and acceptance that my friend has found if they stepped away from “vocational ministry,” began working for their own support, and continued ministering to the people that God brings into their life… as one of them.
Sermons sound like a great idea, but what are people getting from them?
When it comes to sermons, people (especially preachers) tend to apply alot of “God-language” to them. But, in reality, all of the language about the centrality of Scripture or the work of the Holy Spirit through both preparation and delivery are not specific to sermons or lectures. The same is true of other types of speaking/teaching.
But, there is one thing that surveys and tests have consistently shown: people learn and understand less from lecture (sermon) than from other forms of teaching.
For example, Scot McKnight at “Jesus Creed” published excerpts from one such report in his post “Professors: What about lectures?” Here is the final paragraph (but make sure you read all of the excerpts):
When Mazur speaks to audiences on pedagogy, he asks his listeners to think about something they are really good at—perhaps some skill they are proud of, especially one that advanced their career. “Now, think of how you became good at it,” he says next. Audience members, supplied with wireless clickers, can choose from several alternatives: trial and error, apprenticeship, lectures, family and friends, practicing. Data from thousands of subjects make “two things stand out,” Mazur says. “The first is that there is a huge spike at practicing—around 60 percent of the people select ‘practicing.’” The other thing is that for many audiences, which often number in the hundreds, “there is absolutely zero percent for lectures. Nobody cites lectures.”
If our goal is to help people follow Jesus as his disciples, that means helping them do the things that Jesus commanded… not just know what he commanded, but do what he commanded. (Matthew 28:19-20)
If this research is true and if people rarely learn to do through lecture, why do we continue to put so much focus on lecture in the church (the sermon)? (By the way, before you answer, “Because Scripture says, ‘Preach the word…’,” make sure to look into what the authors of Scripture meant by the term “preach.”)