The church is the people, not the building. (T/F)
Of course, this statement is true. I imagine that nearly everyone who reads this will agree. Indeed, this idea is preached from the pulpit in nearly all fundie and conservative gelly churches. I dare say that you would have to look hard to find anyone who disagrees with this statement. Well, we say this is true, but is it really practiced?
I want to propose a short and simple quiz that should be useful for some self-examination. Carefully consider the following questions.
1) If someone sat in your church service every Sunday and participated in several activities, but otherwise interacted with people only occasionally and never in any spiritually meaningful way, would they be considered an unfaithful member?
2) If someone came to a Sunday service only occasionally and participated in little/no programs, but was actively and consistently involved in the spiritual life of the people and regularly met with them outside the church services, would they be considered an integral part of the church?
3) If you answered 'no' to either question, please explain how you reconcile this with your claim that the church is the people, not the building.
I'm sorry, but if you had to answer 'no' to question 1 or 2, you failed the quiz. Number 3 is a trick question, these things can't be reconciled. What did you learn? The first step toward fixing a problem is recognizing that it exists. In practice, most churches value faithfulness to programs over faithfulness to people, even though they claim otherwise. If this describes your church, try to make others aware of the problem and attempt to fix it. If this fails, consider learning about Biblical house churches and starting one.
Showing posts with label Church Polity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Church Polity. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 13, 2014
Saturday, April 5, 2014
Book review - The House Church Book
This is a review of Wolfgang Simson's "The House Church Book". This book is the condensed version of another of Simson's books, "Houses That Change the World". I came across this book in some of my reading on house churches and thought I'd give it a shot. Simson's goal in this books is to describe house churches and give advice to those looking to start one.
I'll start on a positive note. Simson does correctly identify the unbiblical leadership of institutional churches and how it inevitably leads to a clergy-laity division, even if it's unintended by the leaders. He also presents a decent discussion of the lack of fellowship in institutional churches caused by the 'one man show' and he argues for the necessity of small house churches for real fellowship to be possible. Simson suggests that the maximum size of any individual house church should be about 20-25 in order to maintain close connections. This seems reasonable, and agrees closely with what I've heard from friends in house churches. Finally, I appreciate Simson's discussion of the 'city church' concept, where the local church really should include all likeminded Christians in the city, even if they meet with different groups. In other words, the local church really should be a network of house churches.
In short, Simson seems to understand the big picture of a Biblical model of church. However, he fails miserably when it comes to the details. I'll provide a few salient points. The most serious problems in this book stem from the author's charismatic and ecumenical perspective. Throughout, his outlook leads him to promote and speak well of false teachers such as Rick Warren, Bill Hybels, and especially David Yonggi Cho (who was recently convicted of embezzling from his church).
It should come as no surprise then that Simson is also soft on the gospel. For example, he accepts mass "conversions" of people who are run through a sinner's prayer as genuine, suggesting they would be interested in church if only churches were better. I agree that Biblical churches would tend to promote more interest and zeal in Christians...but those who show no interest in Christ, who have never repented, who have never been born again...they're not Christians at all! Shame on Simson for not recognizing this simple fact.
As if his misunderstanding the gospel wasn't bad enough, Simon's charismatic errors lead him to nearly undo his main thesis in the second half of the book. Early on, he correctly identifies key issues with the way leadership is done in institutional churches, but he makes those very same mistakes when he describes house church leadership. He describes essentially every leadership position as being outside of and separate from 'the flock'. In other words, he correctly rails against the aloof single man leading a show, but goes on to suggest that leadership should be several aloof men who lead from a distance (p.66-69). How does this make a difference?
In reality, church leaders are supposed to function within the body, leading mainly by example (1 Peter 5). For this to occur, leaders should not be considered as scouts walking a mile ahead, calling for everyone else to keep up. Rather, leaders should be more like connective tissue, woven throughout the body, connected to each part, helping the body connect with its other parts, providing structure, support, and nourishment. There are no superheroes except Christ. He should be the Head, leading the body, which operates through various roles, but follows him as one.
Simson continues to undermine his own position during his discussion of parachurch structure. Early in the book, he correctly criticizes the normal instutional model of denominations, mega-pastors, and popery. Yet, he goes on to propose that house church networks might be lead by "apostolic regional fathers" at the city, regional, and even national level (p.85). In short, Simson actually supports leadership by superstar, as long as you call them an 'apostle'! Surely the 'apostles' won't have even bigger heads than the 'pastors', right?
At first, this book seems to be a real boon to house churches, but the solutions Simson offer still carry the super-pastor leadership problems that are found in institutional church. Pardon me, I meant super-apostle. In the end, I can't recommend this book. There is some good discussion of the 'big picture' of house churches, but any benefit is drowned in a sea of errors by the time you reach the end.
I'll start on a positive note. Simson does correctly identify the unbiblical leadership of institutional churches and how it inevitably leads to a clergy-laity division, even if it's unintended by the leaders. He also presents a decent discussion of the lack of fellowship in institutional churches caused by the 'one man show' and he argues for the necessity of small house churches for real fellowship to be possible. Simson suggests that the maximum size of any individual house church should be about 20-25 in order to maintain close connections. This seems reasonable, and agrees closely with what I've heard from friends in house churches. Finally, I appreciate Simson's discussion of the 'city church' concept, where the local church really should include all likeminded Christians in the city, even if they meet with different groups. In other words, the local church really should be a network of house churches.
In short, Simson seems to understand the big picture of a Biblical model of church. However, he fails miserably when it comes to the details. I'll provide a few salient points. The most serious problems in this book stem from the author's charismatic and ecumenical perspective. Throughout, his outlook leads him to promote and speak well of false teachers such as Rick Warren, Bill Hybels, and especially David Yonggi Cho (who was recently convicted of embezzling from his church).
It should come as no surprise then that Simson is also soft on the gospel. For example, he accepts mass "conversions" of people who are run through a sinner's prayer as genuine, suggesting they would be interested in church if only churches were better. I agree that Biblical churches would tend to promote more interest and zeal in Christians...but those who show no interest in Christ, who have never repented, who have never been born again...they're not Christians at all! Shame on Simson for not recognizing this simple fact.
As if his misunderstanding the gospel wasn't bad enough, Simon's charismatic errors lead him to nearly undo his main thesis in the second half of the book. Early on, he correctly identifies key issues with the way leadership is done in institutional churches, but he makes those very same mistakes when he describes house church leadership. He describes essentially every leadership position as being outside of and separate from 'the flock'. In other words, he correctly rails against the aloof single man leading a show, but goes on to suggest that leadership should be several aloof men who lead from a distance (p.66-69). How does this make a difference?
In reality, church leaders are supposed to function within the body, leading mainly by example (1 Peter 5). For this to occur, leaders should not be considered as scouts walking a mile ahead, calling for everyone else to keep up. Rather, leaders should be more like connective tissue, woven throughout the body, connected to each part, helping the body connect with its other parts, providing structure, support, and nourishment. There are no superheroes except Christ. He should be the Head, leading the body, which operates through various roles, but follows him as one.
Simson continues to undermine his own position during his discussion of parachurch structure. Early in the book, he correctly criticizes the normal instutional model of denominations, mega-pastors, and popery. Yet, he goes on to propose that house church networks might be lead by "apostolic regional fathers" at the city, regional, and even national level (p.85). In short, Simson actually supports leadership by superstar, as long as you call them an 'apostle'! Surely the 'apostles' won't have even bigger heads than the 'pastors', right?
At first, this book seems to be a real boon to house churches, but the solutions Simson offer still carry the super-pastor leadership problems that are found in institutional church. Pardon me, I meant super-apostle. In the end, I can't recommend this book. There is some good discussion of the 'big picture' of house churches, but any benefit is drowned in a sea of errors by the time you reach the end.
Sunday, March 16, 2014
The widow's mite: an example of sacrificial giving or modern religious abuse?
What a title! I'm sure we all know the answer, right? The widow's mite was a beautiful example of sacrificial giving, now praised in pulpits around the globe. At least, that's what I've always been told. Surely that can't be wrong, can it? As I discuss this passage here and show how the story of the widow's mite is often misused, let it also serve as a lesson that careful Bible study is absolutely necessary to avoid being confused by various teachers.
The story of the widow's mite is related in Mark 12:42-44 and Luke 21:1-4, but I'll be making the argument that really the whole chapter should be included in the story. Looking at these isolated verses, it seems like a nice simple story. The rich cast in much, but Jesus notices a poor widow who puts in only a few coins. He comments that she has given much more than anyone else because it was all she had. That's a story that will preach! The cries ring out: Give your all to Jesus! Won't you give your all to the Lord's work? This poor widow had nothing and gave to the Lord's work, surely you can give your 10% ! Of course, those in the 'prosperity gospel' camp are the biggest swindlers, but you will hear these types of things in fundamentalist and evangelical crowds too. Instead of “give me money and God will bless you”, it is phrased, “To be a good faithful Christian, you need to put God first in your finances (and that means putting your 10% in the plate)”. While the fundies and gellies tend to be more cautious about promising blessing, they will still tell stories of those who gave during hard times and how it worked out better in the end, floating the implication that tithing had something to do with it.
In all this, everyone seems to miss the fact that Jesus does not point out this woman as an example of righteousness, but as a victim of a wicked religious system. Jesus' observation of this widow is not a random, standalone happenstance, but occurs as his final blow in a dispute with the scribes, elders, and chief priests that started in Luke 20:1. This dispute starts when Jesus is teaching in the temple and the priests came looking for trouble. They wanted to catch Jesus in his words and make him look stupid, but instead they are the ones who end up looking foolish. After some time and a barrage of questions, they realize they are fighting a losing battle and so they stop talking (Luke 20:40). But Jesus isn't done yet. He goes on the attack, challenging their understanding and showing that the Messiah must be God's son according to the Scriptures. He then turns to the audience and says:
Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts; Which devour widows' houses, and for a show make long prayers: the same shall receive greater damnation. (v.46-47)
Immediately after Jesus says this, he looks up to see people giving their offerings and points out the widow who put in everything that she had (Luke 21:1-4). In other words, Jesus is delivering a scathing rebuke about the scribes, only to look up and behold a perfect example of his warning. It's like he's saying, “Look, even now, do you see that poor woman over there? She just gave everything that she had. That's exactly how they are devouring widows' homes!” So, from the context it is obvious that Jesus is not praising this woman for giving her all, but he is pointing her out as a victim of the abusive religious system that he is condemning. Interestingly enough, despite his other errors, John MacArthur is one of the few to get this one right, as seen in this video. However, he merely applies this to the prosperity preachers, missing the fact that evangelicals can be almost as guilty.
Just to be clear, sacrificial giving is not the problem. The problem is when bad leaders make Christians feel like they are in some way obligated to give, but this is especially bad when done to the poor. There is a time and place to dig deep and give, as mentioned of the Macedonians in 2 Corinthians 8, but Paul only accepted their giving after 'much intreaty' (v.4). He also goes out of his way to make it clear to the Corinthians that any giving is to be done voluntarily and without any feelings of compulsion or necessity (9:7). It would be wrong for pastors to compel giving/tithing for even good causes, but observe, where does the money go after it's put in the offering plate? Paying for the church building, insurance policies, new sound systems, etc. A super-pastor building a church in his own image is bad enough, but to build it on the backs of the poor is downright evil!
How much this applies to modern churches! Not all, but many pastors are either 'rock stars' or authoritarian 'men of God'. They love the dress-up, the show, the way people treat them, the position of authority and importance. They'll do what it takes to keep up their spiritual image, and they have no problem taking money from the widows and the poor to support all this! As we've seen with the widow's mite, they'll even take the very passage where Jesus taught against this kind of abuse and twist it to support their doctrine! It would seem that Satan has an appreciation for irony.
There's a few things to learn and apply from this. First and foremost, if this describes your church, run away and take as many people with you as you can! In addition, this passage is a great example of how easily Scripture can be twisted right under your nose. How many times have Christians read over this passage, yet still most wrongly teach that it's about sacrificial giving. I admit that even I didn't see this until recently when a friend shared a helpful article. It just goes to show that if you want to really 'get' Scripture, you have to be very discerning about teachers. If you aren't paying close attention, it's very easy to get duped. Let this motivate you to further concentrate your study of the Scriptures.
The story of the widow's mite is related in Mark 12:42-44 and Luke 21:1-4, but I'll be making the argument that really the whole chapter should be included in the story. Looking at these isolated verses, it seems like a nice simple story. The rich cast in much, but Jesus notices a poor widow who puts in only a few coins. He comments that she has given much more than anyone else because it was all she had. That's a story that will preach! The cries ring out: Give your all to Jesus! Won't you give your all to the Lord's work? This poor widow had nothing and gave to the Lord's work, surely you can give your 10% ! Of course, those in the 'prosperity gospel' camp are the biggest swindlers, but you will hear these types of things in fundamentalist and evangelical crowds too. Instead of “give me money and God will bless you”, it is phrased, “To be a good faithful Christian, you need to put God first in your finances (and that means putting your 10% in the plate)”. While the fundies and gellies tend to be more cautious about promising blessing, they will still tell stories of those who gave during hard times and how it worked out better in the end, floating the implication that tithing had something to do with it.
In all this, everyone seems to miss the fact that Jesus does not point out this woman as an example of righteousness, but as a victim of a wicked religious system. Jesus' observation of this widow is not a random, standalone happenstance, but occurs as his final blow in a dispute with the scribes, elders, and chief priests that started in Luke 20:1. This dispute starts when Jesus is teaching in the temple and the priests came looking for trouble. They wanted to catch Jesus in his words and make him look stupid, but instead they are the ones who end up looking foolish. After some time and a barrage of questions, they realize they are fighting a losing battle and so they stop talking (Luke 20:40). But Jesus isn't done yet. He goes on the attack, challenging their understanding and showing that the Messiah must be God's son according to the Scriptures. He then turns to the audience and says:
Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts; Which devour widows' houses, and for a show make long prayers: the same shall receive greater damnation. (v.46-47)
Immediately after Jesus says this, he looks up to see people giving their offerings and points out the widow who put in everything that she had (Luke 21:1-4). In other words, Jesus is delivering a scathing rebuke about the scribes, only to look up and behold a perfect example of his warning. It's like he's saying, “Look, even now, do you see that poor woman over there? She just gave everything that she had. That's exactly how they are devouring widows' homes!” So, from the context it is obvious that Jesus is not praising this woman for giving her all, but he is pointing her out as a victim of the abusive religious system that he is condemning. Interestingly enough, despite his other errors, John MacArthur is one of the few to get this one right, as seen in this video. However, he merely applies this to the prosperity preachers, missing the fact that evangelicals can be almost as guilty.
Just to be clear, sacrificial giving is not the problem. The problem is when bad leaders make Christians feel like they are in some way obligated to give, but this is especially bad when done to the poor. There is a time and place to dig deep and give, as mentioned of the Macedonians in 2 Corinthians 8, but Paul only accepted their giving after 'much intreaty' (v.4). He also goes out of his way to make it clear to the Corinthians that any giving is to be done voluntarily and without any feelings of compulsion or necessity (9:7). It would be wrong for pastors to compel giving/tithing for even good causes, but observe, where does the money go after it's put in the offering plate? Paying for the church building, insurance policies, new sound systems, etc. A super-pastor building a church in his own image is bad enough, but to build it on the backs of the poor is downright evil!
How much this applies to modern churches! Not all, but many pastors are either 'rock stars' or authoritarian 'men of God'. They love the dress-up, the show, the way people treat them, the position of authority and importance. They'll do what it takes to keep up their spiritual image, and they have no problem taking money from the widows and the poor to support all this! As we've seen with the widow's mite, they'll even take the very passage where Jesus taught against this kind of abuse and twist it to support their doctrine! It would seem that Satan has an appreciation for irony.
There's a few things to learn and apply from this. First and foremost, if this describes your church, run away and take as many people with you as you can! In addition, this passage is a great example of how easily Scripture can be twisted right under your nose. How many times have Christians read over this passage, yet still most wrongly teach that it's about sacrificial giving. I admit that even I didn't see this until recently when a friend shared a helpful article. It just goes to show that if you want to really 'get' Scripture, you have to be very discerning about teachers. If you aren't paying close attention, it's very easy to get duped. Let this motivate you to further concentrate your study of the Scriptures.
Monday, February 3, 2014
Christians need wisdom!
In this post I plan to tackle a subtle, but important point relevant to Christian living. Specifically, what role does wisdom have in our lives? How do we make decisions? Should we be worried about the “wisdom of the world”? As with many of my posts, my motivation for writing here comes from personal experience. I have run into too many Christians who act and speak foolishly and who refuse to learn, who are so afraid of “the wisdom of man” that they dive into folly. Even worse, I've observed “shepherds” who seem to encourage this fear of wisdom to keep the sheep in line. It's hard to describe in detail all the ways in which this thinking has weakened Christians. Let me start by using a fictional (but all too familiar) story to illustrate my point.
Hank is a bright high school senior. With graduation coming up, he's trying to decide what to do with his life. Hank was saved about a year ago and genuinely wants to please the Lord in everything. Hank has always loved working on cars, and there aren't any good mechanics in his town, so he's looking to become a mechanic. One day Hank discusses his future with his pastor, who warns him that although according to the wisdom of the world, becoming a mechanic would make sense, he should pray a lot about it, “lean not on your own understanding...and who knows, you might even be called to preach”. Hank agrees to do some serious prayer, but doesn't initially think that he'd ever be a pastor. Sure, he has grown spiritually by leaps and bounds since his salvation, but he has never considered being a pastor himself.
Over the next few weeks, Hanks prays much about his career choice. With consistent nudging and whispering from people around him, Hank starts to believe that these things are an answer to his prayer, that God is telling him to go into ministry. Hank has heard that you need a 'calling' to be a pastor, so this must be it. He doesn't know why, he just feels it emotionally (it's not hard to get those feelings when several men you respect are nudging you along with your ego). Hank goes on to seminary (which is, ironically, modeled after the world's education system.) and graduates with no job in ministry, despite a lot of looking. Hank is sure this must be a trial from the Lord. He struggles financially for years, working whatever job he can to make ends meet. Finally, he finds a job as an assistant pastor, then graduates to a full pastorate where he teaches other young men to make decisions in the same way that he did so many years ago.
Making decisions with wisdom
I've written already on the problems with the seminary system and modern church polity, so in this story I'd like to focus on the way decisions are made, and again, this question of wisdom. This story illustrates how, in most churches, the decision-making process has been hyper-spiritualized and feelings/nudges/promptings are held as the authority above common reasoning. I'm not saying that the Lord doesn't direct us, but that he directs us unequivocally. Most of the time this direction takes the form of wisdom. As James says, “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him” (James 1:5). This doesn't mean that the Holy Spirit will immediately make you smart, but in my experience, this typically occurs by the Holy Spirit bringing passages to mind.
And how are we to make decisions? Not looking for nudges, promptings and feelings, but with wisdom that is informed by Scripture! “The wisdom of the prudent is to understand his way: but the folly of fools is deceit” (Prov. 14:8) and again, “Thy word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path” (Ps. 119:105) We are supposed to understand our path and scripture is intended to be a guide for us. If your path is darkened, it may be because you have neglected your lamp. “But what about decisions related to your job, relationships, etc. You know, stuff the Bible doesn't talk about?” Are you kidding? The Bible addresses every area of life! Of course, it doesn't cover everything in complete detail, but provides enough direction that you can use a little wisdom and apply the instructions to any situation. Herein lies the problem: many Christians lack the wisdom to apply Biblical admonitions to real-world situations.
This wisdom does not come by osmosis or a half-hearted search. “Through desire a man, having separated himself, seeketh and intermeddleth with all wisdom.” In other words, don't expect to be wise if you're just doing your 'daily bread' devotionals. If you want wisdom, you must separate yourself from distractions and intentionally seek it as a pattern of life. The first step is to really desire wisdom, to value it above any money or treasure. This is easy once you realize how important it is. A foolish servant is of no use to his master, but can actually be a burden. How can a man without understanding please the Lord? Also notice that the call to wisdom in Proverbs is intended for all men, not just some special class (Prov. 1:20-24). In other words, if you're a Christian, you should be doing this, not relying on your 'clergy' to carry you. There are 2 books of the Bible specifically devoted to the topic and it is discussed in many other books as well, so I can guarantee it's important!
How do I avoid 'the wisdom of man'?
What about this matter of man's wisdom? We see in the first three chapters of 1 Corinth. That we are not to rest in the wisdom of the world. So, what exactly is 'good' wisdom and what is 'bad'? There are only a handful of passages that make a distinction about wisdom – either God's or man's, but from what I can tell, it seems that when the distinction is made, the Bible is talking about wisdom informed by a particular worldview. For example, in Prov. 23:4 laboring to get rich is identified as man's wisdom. Well, if you had a naturalist/materialist worldview...then laboring to get rich would make sense for maximizing your enjoyment in this life, it'd be wise. With a Christian worldview, we realize that trying to get rich is a bad goal, that we should lay up treasure in heaven and use our wealth to further the gospel, not to spend on our lusts. Not only does Scripture tell us this, but it just makes sense once you have the Christian worldview. Taking this perspective, the first few chapters of 1 Corinth. are easy to reconcile with the rest of Scripture. The “wisdom of man” is not a boogeyman that will bite the Christian who studies too hard, but it is the result of trying to obtain wisdom by starting from a worldview that rejects God.
Let's drive the point home by looking at some other passages. In 1 Corinth. 1:17-31 Paul blasts the wisdom of the world and says that God has chosen to work through foolishness, but is careful to point out that these things aren't actually foolish, but only seem so to the world (ie a person with a worldview that rejects God). We see this in v.34-35.
What about Proverbs 3:5-7? This verse is often used to support the idea that we should not use our own wisdom when making a decision. However, that idea contradicts the rest of the book. Instead, this passage is better understood as an admonition for the student of wisdom to have a Bibilical worldview. Of course I'm paraphrasing here, but read the passage both ways and you'll see what I mean.
Conclusion
In conclusion, I have shown that wisdom is critically important for Christians. A lack or misunderstanding of wisdom is most dangerously shown in the hyper-spiritualization of otherwise obvious decisions. This corruption of the decision making process leaves Christians vulnerable to poor life choices and false doctrines that are emotionally satisfying. I've also explained the difference between the wisdom of man and the wisdom of God, showing that a Christian grounded in a Biblical worldview can give themselves to a search for understanding and wisdom without fear of somehow mysteriously being infected with the 'wisdom of man'. Therefore, I strongly encourage everyone to diligently pursue wisdom. “Get wisdom, get understanding...wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding.” (Prov. 4:5-7)
Hank is a bright high school senior. With graduation coming up, he's trying to decide what to do with his life. Hank was saved about a year ago and genuinely wants to please the Lord in everything. Hank has always loved working on cars, and there aren't any good mechanics in his town, so he's looking to become a mechanic. One day Hank discusses his future with his pastor, who warns him that although according to the wisdom of the world, becoming a mechanic would make sense, he should pray a lot about it, “lean not on your own understanding...and who knows, you might even be called to preach”. Hank agrees to do some serious prayer, but doesn't initially think that he'd ever be a pastor. Sure, he has grown spiritually by leaps and bounds since his salvation, but he has never considered being a pastor himself.
Over the next few weeks, Hanks prays much about his career choice. With consistent nudging and whispering from people around him, Hank starts to believe that these things are an answer to his prayer, that God is telling him to go into ministry. Hank has heard that you need a 'calling' to be a pastor, so this must be it. He doesn't know why, he just feels it emotionally (it's not hard to get those feelings when several men you respect are nudging you along with your ego). Hank goes on to seminary (which is, ironically, modeled after the world's education system.) and graduates with no job in ministry, despite a lot of looking. Hank is sure this must be a trial from the Lord. He struggles financially for years, working whatever job he can to make ends meet. Finally, he finds a job as an assistant pastor, then graduates to a full pastorate where he teaches other young men to make decisions in the same way that he did so many years ago.
Making decisions with wisdom
I've written already on the problems with the seminary system and modern church polity, so in this story I'd like to focus on the way decisions are made, and again, this question of wisdom. This story illustrates how, in most churches, the decision-making process has been hyper-spiritualized and feelings/nudges/promptings are held as the authority above common reasoning. I'm not saying that the Lord doesn't direct us, but that he directs us unequivocally. Most of the time this direction takes the form of wisdom. As James says, “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him” (James 1:5). This doesn't mean that the Holy Spirit will immediately make you smart, but in my experience, this typically occurs by the Holy Spirit bringing passages to mind.
And how are we to make decisions? Not looking for nudges, promptings and feelings, but with wisdom that is informed by Scripture! “The wisdom of the prudent is to understand his way: but the folly of fools is deceit” (Prov. 14:8) and again, “Thy word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path” (Ps. 119:105) We are supposed to understand our path and scripture is intended to be a guide for us. If your path is darkened, it may be because you have neglected your lamp. “But what about decisions related to your job, relationships, etc. You know, stuff the Bible doesn't talk about?” Are you kidding? The Bible addresses every area of life! Of course, it doesn't cover everything in complete detail, but provides enough direction that you can use a little wisdom and apply the instructions to any situation. Herein lies the problem: many Christians lack the wisdom to apply Biblical admonitions to real-world situations.
This wisdom does not come by osmosis or a half-hearted search. “Through desire a man, having separated himself, seeketh and intermeddleth with all wisdom.” In other words, don't expect to be wise if you're just doing your 'daily bread' devotionals. If you want wisdom, you must separate yourself from distractions and intentionally seek it as a pattern of life. The first step is to really desire wisdom, to value it above any money or treasure. This is easy once you realize how important it is. A foolish servant is of no use to his master, but can actually be a burden. How can a man without understanding please the Lord? Also notice that the call to wisdom in Proverbs is intended for all men, not just some special class (Prov. 1:20-24). In other words, if you're a Christian, you should be doing this, not relying on your 'clergy' to carry you. There are 2 books of the Bible specifically devoted to the topic and it is discussed in many other books as well, so I can guarantee it's important!
How do I avoid 'the wisdom of man'?
What about this matter of man's wisdom? We see in the first three chapters of 1 Corinth. That we are not to rest in the wisdom of the world. So, what exactly is 'good' wisdom and what is 'bad'? There are only a handful of passages that make a distinction about wisdom – either God's or man's, but from what I can tell, it seems that when the distinction is made, the Bible is talking about wisdom informed by a particular worldview. For example, in Prov. 23:4 laboring to get rich is identified as man's wisdom. Well, if you had a naturalist/materialist worldview...then laboring to get rich would make sense for maximizing your enjoyment in this life, it'd be wise. With a Christian worldview, we realize that trying to get rich is a bad goal, that we should lay up treasure in heaven and use our wealth to further the gospel, not to spend on our lusts. Not only does Scripture tell us this, but it just makes sense once you have the Christian worldview. Taking this perspective, the first few chapters of 1 Corinth. are easy to reconcile with the rest of Scripture. The “wisdom of man” is not a boogeyman that will bite the Christian who studies too hard, but it is the result of trying to obtain wisdom by starting from a worldview that rejects God.
Let's drive the point home by looking at some other passages. In 1 Corinth. 1:17-31 Paul blasts the wisdom of the world and says that God has chosen to work through foolishness, but is careful to point out that these things aren't actually foolish, but only seem so to the world (ie a person with a worldview that rejects God). We see this in v.34-35.
What about Proverbs 3:5-7? This verse is often used to support the idea that we should not use our own wisdom when making a decision. However, that idea contradicts the rest of the book. Instead, this passage is better understood as an admonition for the student of wisdom to have a Bibilical worldview. Of course I'm paraphrasing here, but read the passage both ways and you'll see what I mean.
Conclusion
In conclusion, I have shown that wisdom is critically important for Christians. A lack or misunderstanding of wisdom is most dangerously shown in the hyper-spiritualization of otherwise obvious decisions. This corruption of the decision making process leaves Christians vulnerable to poor life choices and false doctrines that are emotionally satisfying. I've also explained the difference between the wisdom of man and the wisdom of God, showing that a Christian grounded in a Biblical worldview can give themselves to a search for understanding and wisdom without fear of somehow mysteriously being infected with the 'wisdom of man'. Therefore, I strongly encourage everyone to diligently pursue wisdom. “Get wisdom, get understanding...wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding.” (Prov. 4:5-7)
Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Warning to American churches from Colossians 2
Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind...which things have indeed a show of wisdom in will-worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh. (Col. 2:18,23)
As I was reading this the other day, I couldn't help but notice the modern application. One of the main themes of Colossians, especially in chapter 2, is a warning about false teachers: spiritual leaders who will lead you astray. There are some specific characteristics given. I'll point out a few in v.18-23. First, they deal in voluntary (put-on, false) humility and superficial/arbitrary worship (v.18, 23). They work in rituals, ordinances, and give commands not given by God (v. 20-22). They do not hold forth Christ as the Head of the church, and therefore prevent the body from being knit together with each other and with Christ (v.19). Let's break down these 3 characteristics and give examples that are commonplace in American churches.
Voluntary humility is often displayed in churches by a 'humble' leader who publicly declares that God should get all the glory, but they secretly love the attention they get and cling to over-reaching authority. Here's a few common signs of this false humility: 1) A name is not sufficient. It's socially awkward to address them without a title. 2) They have the authoritative opinion when it comes to doctrine. They may declare that Scripture is the ultimate authority, but in practice, different positions are dismissed without consideration, even if argued from a sound Biblical position. 3) They run the whole show all the time, even teaching on unfamiliar subjects when other members of the body are more qualified and experienced.
Rituals and commandments of men can also be plainly found even in conservative baptist/Bible churches. This is seen most clearly when it comes to church polity. It merely takes a cursory reading of the New Testament to see that church was intended to be very different than it is now. For example, the NT church had multiple elders, met mostly in houses, and meetings were for prayer, fellowship and teaching (not evangelistic preaching). I once asked a friend who is now in full-time church leadership why the church continues to run as it does, in clear contrast to the Biblical example. He acknowledged the difference and only said that the Biblical example was OK for the early church, but we've decided to do things differently now. In other words, “Who cares what the Bible says about how to run church when we can make up our own rules!” It's hard to imagine a more clear example of 'commandments of men'.
Lack of focus on Christ is also a major symptom of the typical church. Imagine that you take someone off the street and show them a few typical meetings at your church. After they carefully watch 10 hours worth of footage, you ask them, “who is the head of this church?” You repeat this experiment 500 times. Invariably, they all point to the guy at the front that did all the talking. This is another situation where doctrinal statements do not match practice, but actions speak louder than words. How about the rest of the body? Is each member being knit together with each other in real and practical ways? In my experience, this certainly can happen in church, but only apart from or in spite of what goes on during the meeting – very rarely does this happen during a church service. The false head takes all the focus, preventing the knitting together of the body.
Isn't it sad? The description of false teachers in Col. 2 is being played out weekly in conservative churches across America. Our churches look more like the false teachers described in Col. 2 than they do the churches described in Acts! Most of this is being done by well-meaning pastors who aren't trying to deceive. Shouldn't this tell us that the system is set up wrong?
“Well,” you say, “can it really be so bad? Sure, most of this is true about my church, but I feel really good when I'm there. I enjoy the preaching. I laugh, cry, and learn something about God. The music speaks to my heart.” In other words, you're satisfied with the superficial religion? You will have “a show of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body”, but what does it satisfy? Is there any tangible fruit, or merely an emotional response?
So what's the remedy? Get away from the shows and rituals and embrace the basics of Christianity – preaching the gospel to the lost and discipling Christians. Dr. Dave recently wrote a good article on this topic which can be found on his blog.
As I was reading this the other day, I couldn't help but notice the modern application. One of the main themes of Colossians, especially in chapter 2, is a warning about false teachers: spiritual leaders who will lead you astray. There are some specific characteristics given. I'll point out a few in v.18-23. First, they deal in voluntary (put-on, false) humility and superficial/arbitrary worship (v.18, 23). They work in rituals, ordinances, and give commands not given by God (v. 20-22). They do not hold forth Christ as the Head of the church, and therefore prevent the body from being knit together with each other and with Christ (v.19). Let's break down these 3 characteristics and give examples that are commonplace in American churches.
Voluntary humility is often displayed in churches by a 'humble' leader who publicly declares that God should get all the glory, but they secretly love the attention they get and cling to over-reaching authority. Here's a few common signs of this false humility: 1) A name is not sufficient. It's socially awkward to address them without a title. 2) They have the authoritative opinion when it comes to doctrine. They may declare that Scripture is the ultimate authority, but in practice, different positions are dismissed without consideration, even if argued from a sound Biblical position. 3) They run the whole show all the time, even teaching on unfamiliar subjects when other members of the body are more qualified and experienced.
Rituals and commandments of men can also be plainly found even in conservative baptist/Bible churches. This is seen most clearly when it comes to church polity. It merely takes a cursory reading of the New Testament to see that church was intended to be very different than it is now. For example, the NT church had multiple elders, met mostly in houses, and meetings were for prayer, fellowship and teaching (not evangelistic preaching). I once asked a friend who is now in full-time church leadership why the church continues to run as it does, in clear contrast to the Biblical example. He acknowledged the difference and only said that the Biblical example was OK for the early church, but we've decided to do things differently now. In other words, “Who cares what the Bible says about how to run church when we can make up our own rules!” It's hard to imagine a more clear example of 'commandments of men'.
Lack of focus on Christ is also a major symptom of the typical church. Imagine that you take someone off the street and show them a few typical meetings at your church. After they carefully watch 10 hours worth of footage, you ask them, “who is the head of this church?” You repeat this experiment 500 times. Invariably, they all point to the guy at the front that did all the talking. This is another situation where doctrinal statements do not match practice, but actions speak louder than words. How about the rest of the body? Is each member being knit together with each other in real and practical ways? In my experience, this certainly can happen in church, but only apart from or in spite of what goes on during the meeting – very rarely does this happen during a church service. The false head takes all the focus, preventing the knitting together of the body.
Isn't it sad? The description of false teachers in Col. 2 is being played out weekly in conservative churches across America. Our churches look more like the false teachers described in Col. 2 than they do the churches described in Acts! Most of this is being done by well-meaning pastors who aren't trying to deceive. Shouldn't this tell us that the system is set up wrong?
“Well,” you say, “can it really be so bad? Sure, most of this is true about my church, but I feel really good when I'm there. I enjoy the preaching. I laugh, cry, and learn something about God. The music speaks to my heart.” In other words, you're satisfied with the superficial religion? You will have “a show of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body”, but what does it satisfy? Is there any tangible fruit, or merely an emotional response?
So what's the remedy? Get away from the shows and rituals and embrace the basics of Christianity – preaching the gospel to the lost and discipling Christians. Dr. Dave recently wrote a good article on this topic which can be found on his blog.
Sunday, October 6, 2013
A goal worth living and dying for
Many Christians and churches today have rightly identified the plague of apathy that is presently gripping churchgoers across the nation. Any denomination, conservative or squishy, every church seems to have the same problem. It's almost impossible to get anyone excited about Christian ministry these days. In response, admonitions to action ring out from pounded pulpits in every corner of the country. Churches redouble their efforts to disciple their people (not a bad idea in general, but often done poorly) thinking that it must be a lack of discipleship. Church growth 'experts' conduct surveys and decide to add flashing lights and cool music to the old church programs. Yet, the state of things remains largely unchanged. Why? Why are people so cold? Why don't any of these proposed solutions work? What is the root problem? I suggest that there's one underlying cause that nobody is talking about.
Before I get into my main point, it's worthwhile to say that much of the coldness is due to many church member simply being unconverted. Lost people aren't going to get excited about the Lord's work, nor will they be willing to give up much of their life to be involved. This is a huge problem and one that must be addressed with urgency. People need to repent and live for Christ, and churches need to demand repentance from their members and boot those that live in sin and apathy. It is an easy fix, if only people would follow the Lord's directions. I'd like to move on though, not because this is unimportant, but because I want to focus on the more subtle problem facing real Christians.
So, for the real Christians, the truly born-again, why is it generally hard to get excited about Christian ministry? I suggest that it's because most churches are operated in such a way that they replace Christ's objectives with poor substitutes. Jesus outlined his big picture for his disciples: a self-sacrificing life in service to the gospel (Mark 8:34-35). How exciting! We get to be a part of God's master plan! We get to join him in the work of saving souls! We get to form relationships more dear than family as we disciple people and teach them to follow Christ! These things are all truly grand and noble goals, worth living and dying for.
Yet, on any given Sunday, these are not the goals generally laid before the people. While churches in theory hold to the above goals, the goals in practice are much different: We want you to be a greeter. Can you serve in AWANA? Billy has a cold and needs someone to watch him. We need you to work nursery so parents can sit down and....listen...without their children. Invite your friends to outreach day! Come grill hot dogs for our outing. If you're one of the really spiritual ones, spend 6 years in seminary to learn public speaking and never preach to a single lost soul while you're there. We really need a new organ/piano/sound system, so give sacrificially! I could go on. In this system 95% of the money and human activity revolves around keeping a show or program running. Wait, what are we supposed to be doing again?
Is the picture becoming clear? If an American worked for a month to make 10 dollars, convinced he had a great job, we'd call him a fool. Yet, we have done the same thing on a much bigger scale. Christian ministry and service has been redefined in such a way that it is largely useless, self-replicating busy work. In practice, the grand goals that Christ set for the life of every individual has been replaced by a hamster wheel. When you define service, sacrifice, and taking up the cross as 'running on the hamster wheel', why should you be shocked to find that people are not excited? Yet, when Christian goals and service are properly defined (preaching the gospel to the lost and discipleship), a man will gladly sacrifice much of his life, knowing that the cause is worthy. Likewise, a woman who babysits six kids so her husband and his friend can go hand out tracts has much joy in her act of service.
I've done time on the hamster wheel before, so I know that it's endless and tiring. However, I can also tell you that real Christian service done for Jesus involves hard work and sacrifice, but it is also full of joy, contentment, and fulfillment. If you find yourself weary with service and on the verge of burning out, there's a good chance that you're running on a hamster wheel. Take a step back and re-evaluate what you're doing. Men will give you activities and tell you that you're serving Christ when you're actually just serving their program. Instead, spend some time in Scripture and in prayer, see what the Lord wants for your life (hint: I talked about it in the third paragraph). Life is short and there's a grand battle to be fought. Don't waste another second.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)