Determining the will of God and Newtonian Physics

I was walking on SWBTS campus the other day thinking about what God is doing in our lives. For years now, Cindy and I have decided to wait and stay put, or to keep on going in the same direction, until we are sure that God is changing things. Then, it occurred to me that there is a parallel there with Newtonian physics (I am currently teaching Dynamics and Vibrations at TCU, so physics is on my mind). You see, according to Newton's first law of motion, an object at rest will remain at rest and an object in motion will remain in motion (with a given trajectory, etc.) unless acted upon by an external force.

We do not know what God has in store for us after SWBTS, but I know that I am supposed to be here, so we will wait here and continue on our trajectory, until He applies a force on us and moves us somewhere else. How about you? Are you rushing ahead of God, or are you waiting on Him?

Wayland. Notes on the Principles and Practices of Baptist Churches - A Book Review

Wayland, Francis. Notes on the Principles and Practices of Baptist Churches. New York: Sheldon, 1857. 336 pp. Free PDF on books.google.com or $20.00 used.

Wayland Academy in Beaver Dam, Wisconsin, and the town of Wayland, Massachusetts have one thing in common: they are both named after Francis Wayland. Wayland, born in 1796 to a Baptist preacher and his wife, after studying medicine for three years and receiving his license to practice, abandoned the study of medicine in 1816 to attend Andover Theological Seminary. His studies having been interrupted by financial hardship, he accepted a position as a tutor at Union College for four years. He then was called to be the pastor of First Baptist Church, Boston. After receiving an honorary D. D. from Brown (1822) and getting married (1825), he eventually resigned his pastorate and accepted a professorship at Union College, teaching mathematics and philosophy (1826). In 1827 he was elected as president of Brown University, where he stayed over twenty-eight years. Upon his retirement from Brown, he served as the pastor of First Baptist, Providence for two years.[1]

Summary

While Wayland is mostly known for his writings in moral philosophy, intellectual philosophy, and political economy, he did publish several volumes in theology and Christian studies. One of these is this collection of fifty-two papers that originally appeared, probably during his tenure at First Baptist, Providence, in The Examiner under the name of Roger Williams (preface). In the first essay, Wayland presents a case for the unity among Baptists due to a lack of creeds and a focus on God's Word. He then states that the following essays are "the simple record of the observation of an individual" concerning the "principles and practice . . . of Baptists in the northern States" (16). The remaining essays are the record of his conversations with his readership: Wayland writing on a regular basis and, not only opining, but also answering the requests of his readers (on several occasions Wayland noted that a topic or the expansion of a topic is due to the request of a reader).

The topics evolve as follows: Wayland first begins talking about the doctrinal beliefs of Baptists (II-III). This makes him start lamenting how Baptist practices have changed in the last 50 years (III-IX). Here he is led to defend the typically uneducated Baptist preacher of 50 years ago, pointing out the benefits of such a man to reach the uneducated masses and the reliance that such a man had to have on the Spirit of God. This starts a new series of articles on the Ministry (X-XIII). He is led to lament how seminaries are not being effective in the production of ministers and uses as evidence the 4,000 ministers that were currently needed. In turn, this leads him to discuss how to improve the Ministry (XIV-XV). The highlight of this series of articles, which he revisits later in the volume, is the push for local Baptists to be active in their churches, and for their churches and their pastors to train people in their own congregation. After having concluded, temporarily, his remarks on the Baptist Ministry, Wayland returns to a discussion of doctrine, specifically the doctrine of Baptism (XVI - XVII). As any writing of his time, Wayland discussed the mode and the subjects of baptism, and criticized infant baptism. He then realizes that he had not offered any "suggestions on the subject of licensure and ordination of ministries" (99), and therefore dedicates the next three essays to the topic (XVIII-XX). Here he focuses on the call of God, as recognized by the individual and the community, on an individual's life.

Having often alluded to the loss suffered by Baptists "by following the examples of other denominations," Wayland then proceeds to list and discuss points of difference and commonality between Baptists and other denominations (XXI-XXIV), including a section specifically comparing Baptists and Pedobaptists with regards to doctrines other than baptism, per the request of a reader. He follows this set of essays with a discussion of places where Baptists have erred in imitating others (XXV-XXVII), noting issues in music, architecture, and details in the weekly service and in marriage and funeral services. This leads into a discussion on church and congregation, societies, denominations, conventions, missionary unions, and other related topics (XXVIII-XXXII). Due to a reader's request, Wayland then returns to the concept of Christian ministry in Baptist denominations (XXXIII). This leads him to a discussion on the public worship of God and the problem of maintaining it in the West, which brings him back to the issue of the great need for Ministers of the Gospel (XXXIV). Believing that the furtherance of the gospel is the duty of all believers, Wayland begins to advise his brethren in the West: they should not forsake public worship and weekly gathering, but cultivate their own walk with God and pray for God to raise a leader from among them (XXXV-XXXIX). This brings him to opine on the responsibilities of the churches in the cities (XL), before writing an essay on seminaries, colleges, and academies and how they should be structured to facilitate the formation of ministers of all ages and abilities (XLI). Ultimately, Wayland returns to the theory that the minister should labor to train other ministers (XLII-XLIII). Being convicted by his own arguments, he dedicates his last essays (XLIV-LII) to offering advice to the aspiring minister. His topics range from how to expand one's mental abilities to the preparation and delivery of sermons, from the importance of visitation to the importance of week-day and Lord's day services.

Critical Evaluation

From the point of view of structure, this volume, due to its nature, is not inherently structured. There is a semblance of a flow as one would have in a free-flowing conversation, for this is a conversation between Wayland and his audience, but there does not seem to be a clear path and a clear target, with the exception of the target at large which is the recording and discussion of principles and practices of the Baptists. At times topics are revisited, as in a conversation, and most essays start with a reference to the essay that preceded it. Therefore, while full of great historical information and insight, this non-indexed text is not user friendly as a quick research tool, unless one downloads the text version and uses some software's search feature. Yet, the author is not to blame, for this was not his original intended purpose for this volume.

As for the content, it might be surprising that someone as educated as Wayland, college and seminary student and the professor and president of a university, would downplay the formal education of ministers as much as he does in this volume. A careful reading of his essays, though, reveals that Wayland is not opposed to formal education, for in numerous occasions he supports it. What he is opposed to is the requirement of a formal education. He justifies this historically, experientially, scripturally, and practically. Pointing to the uneducated preachers of the early 1800s, he suggests they were able to deliver sermons in such a manner that everybody understood them, for they were using the language of the masses to deliver to the masses. Religious character, which is more important than education or intelligence to Wayland, does not require an education. Ultimately, speaking of the one called to minister, Wayland states that: "if he be apt to teach, he will be neither an imbecile nor a pedant" (52).

An integral part of his argument is based on the recurring theme of dependence on the Holy Spirit (for a few examples see: 20, 47, 80, 108, 115, 120, 123, 132, 207, 219, 243, 304) and on the New Testament (for a few examples see: 47, 86, 138). In this volume, Baptist doctrine is considered to have been taught by the Spirit to, "for the most part, plain, unlearned men" who "looked up in humility to the Holy Spirit to teach them the meaning of the word of God" (123). In the same vein, Wayland exclaims twice: "Is there any Holy Ghost?" (47, 108) as an answer to objections raised by his readers. Therefore, the God who does not make mistakes will call and sustain his people, with or without the use of educational institutions.

Another integral part of his argument is the Christian responsibilities of believers, of local churches, and of ministers themselves. For Wayland, "the gospel requires, that a Christian should be not only a receiver, but a dispenser of spiritual benefits" (381). So, when advising the believers in the West, he tells them that "there are gifts for edification among you, if you will only look after them and employ them. Christ does not plant barren vines in his vineyard" (233-34). He, therefore, critiques the church's reliance "on voluntary associations to do what each one should do himself" (270). Finding and training people among the local church is presented as not only more practical, as shown by many examples and many situations presented by Wayland, but it has as one of its advantages the fact that, unlike seminaries, local pastors can impart practical knowledge to their would be ministers. In addition:

What could be more delightful than for a minister to have three or four brethren uniting with him in carrying forward the work of God, all animated by the same spirit, all aiming at the same object, and filling the whole district in which they live with the preaching of the word (268).

Vocational, bi-vocational, and non-vocational ministries are all advocated depending on the local situation and the working of God. Both his emphasis on the Spirit and the emphasis on in-house training and church participation are as applicable now as they were back then, and are very appreciated in today's Christian culture.

Given the emphasis just discussed, an area of confusion in the understanding of Wayland's theology, as seen in this volume, is his understanding of ministry. At one point he is very clear on his dislike for the clergy / laity division. He states:

The fact is, if we must speak the truth, almost all our denominations are sinking down into the belief that all the direct work for the conversion of the world is to be done by the ministry; thus making a broad distinction between the clergy and the laity (I use these terms, not because I approve of them, but because they are so much in vogue). We are coming to think the minister is to do the work of the Lord, and the business of the private brother is simply to pay him for it (80-81).

Throughout the volume, though, he continually uses the term 'the ministry' and differentiates the ones who are not in the ministry with the ones who are in the ministry, inadvertently creating this same clergy laity distinction that he despises. Overall, though, Wayland's writing on the topic of ministry captures in many ways the essence of the critique of the modern, simple church movement, while still being in a very structured environment. This is not the only place where this book engages contemporary topics.

In his critique of the change in church music due to the influence of other denominations (XXV), Wayland laments the decline of spontaneity and true worship he found in "congregational singing." Wayland argues that true worship should be planned, led, and sung, by the regenerate believers for the sole purpose of the worship of God. While he points out that instruments cannot worship God, and therefore seems to discount their appropriateness in worship, he does not dwell on this issue, but looks at what he saw as a bigger issue. The issue is the pattern he sees his contemporary Baptist churches adopting from the Congregationalists, who themselves adopted it from the Episcopalians: the pattern of the professionalization of the music, necessitating an organ and a choir. Here, he laments that true worship is replaced by the search for excellence which often results in "the congregation [listening] in silence to a mere musical performance, precisely as the audience at a concert or an opera" (151). This struggle is as current today as it was back then, causing the spilling of much ink and the splitting of many churches. May Baptists learn from history and be willing to say, like Wayland, that "artistic excellence" in not essential to blend "the whole audience in one consciousness of solemn worship" (150) and that "it is wicked to substitute a mere musical diversion for the solemn worship of God" (152).

Conclusion

Written one hundred and fifty years ago, this volume still speaks volumes to the issues our churches are faced with, while, at the same time, encouraging its readers that God, through His Spirit, is able. As Solomon so aptly said, "there is nothing new under the sun." Whether one wants to understand Baptist historic principles, get a glimpse of historic Baptist life and issues, be encouraged to preach without notes, or follow a series of personal training lessons, Notes on the Principles and Practices of Baptist Churches is a very pleasant, interesting, stimulating, and thought provoking read.

[1] See: Martha Mitchell, Encyclopedia Brunoniana (Providence: Brown University Library, 1993), s.v. "Wayland, Francis" [on-line]; accessed 23 October 2010; available from http://www.brown.edu/Administration/News_Bureau/Databases/Encyclopedia/search.php?serial=W0110; Internet; Edited Appletons Encyclopedia (Virtualology, 2001), s.v. "Francis Wayland" [on-line]; accessed 23 October 2010; available from http://www.famousamericans.net/franciswayland/; Internet; and Answer Corp., Biographies (Farmington Hills, MI: The Gale Group, Inc. 2006), s.v. "Francis Wayland" [on-line]; accessed 23 October 2010; available from http://www.answers.com/topic/wayland-francis; Internet.

Pastor as examples, even in shepherding

I have often argued that one of the main roles of a pastor is to be an example.

... As I was reading Ecclesiology by Dargan (book review forthcoming), I got to thinking about the fact that most "shepherd" terminology in Scripture refers to Christ, not pastors (see for example John 10:11, Heb 13:20, 1 Pet 2:25). And then it hit me ... as an example, pastors need to imitate Christ and be Christlike. If He is a shepherd, then, obviously, they need to be shepherds, not only because that is part of their gifting, but also to set an example of shepherding, so that all believers can be shepherds at some level or other. Like any other gift, here also there seems to be the general mandate and focused mandate (i.e. - we are all called to evangelize, but some are gifted as evangelists; we are all called to teach, but some are gifted as teachers; etc.). In this case, if you think about it, we are all called to shepherd (really most of the "one another" sayings in Scripture), even if some are specially gifted as shepherds.

So, to my pastor friends out there, don't forget to model shepherding to the people that God has put in your life. And along those lines, don't forget to model all that God has called you to do as a pastor. It's not enough to just live our "Christian life" in front of people, we have to be actively imitating Christ so that we can tell people to imitate us, as we imitate Him.

Those "one another"s

As followers of Christ and brothers and sisters in Christ we are called to help one another grow toward Christian maturity by:

• bearing one another's burdens (Gal 6:2)
• encouraging one another (1 Th 4:18; Heb 10:25)
• exhorting one another (Heb 3:13)
• praying for one another
• confessing our sins to one another (Jm 5:16)
• speaking the truth in love to one another (Eph 4:15)
• admonishing one another (Col 3:16)
• building up one another (1 Th 5:11)
• teaching one another (Col 3:16)
• comforting one another (1 Cor 13:11)
• submitting to one another (Eph 5:21)
• serving one another (Mt 20:27-8)
• patiently bearing one another (Eph 4:2)
• regarding one another as more important than ourselves (Rom 12:10)
• caring for one another (1 Pt 4:10)
• exercising our spiritual gifts to serve one another (1 Pt 4:10)
• being kind and tenderhearted to one another (Eph 4:32)
• forgiving one another (Eph 4:32)
• loving one another (Jn 13:34-5)

So, the question is: are doing these "one another"s?

The NT Concept of Ministry - a small excursus

We now need to take a small excursus from our topic of ordination so that you can understand where I am coming from in the next post in our ordination series. This excursus on the concept of ministry, as I see it in the New Testament, is by not way exhaustive. It's just a short intro to a larger and longer conversation.

Like many Biblical terms, the term ministry is often misunderstood due to inappropriate use of language. Terminology like “the call into the ministry” and “the minister of ______” often unintentionally create a clergy/laity division: the clergy are the ministers in the congregation and need to be set aside by means of ordination, while, even if some members of the laity might receive the appellation of lay ministers, the laity often see themselves as something less than ministers. But what does Scripture teach about ministry?

A quick lexical search in the New King James translation of the New Testament reveals that, as in the case of ‘ordain’, the ‘minister’ family of terms actually translates ten Greek terms which represent five families of terms. Unlike ‘ordain’ though, there is much more cohesion, since approximately 80% of the time the ‘minister’ family of terms is translated by the diakonos family of terms.[1] Eduard Schweizer, in Church Order in the New Testament, while discussing the concept of ‘office’, looks at all the terms used in Koine Greek which convey the idea of office or ruler: archē, “office in the sense of precedence, being at the head, ruling;” archôn, “ruler;” timē, “office in the sense of a position of dignity;” telos, used outside the NT to define “the complete power of office;” leitourgia, “service undertaken by the citizens for the community, and by the worshippers for the gods, and in the Septuagint (about 100 times) the ceremonial service performed by the priest;” and leitourgos, one performing leitourgia. He concludes that outside of their use for Judaism, pagan religions, and the political system of the time, these terms are primarily used (with the exception of Paul’s being called leitourgos in Romans 15:16) to refer solely to Christ Himself.[2] To be complete, there are three more exceptions to this pattern not mentioned by Schweizer: in Philippians 2:25 Epaphroditus is described as one who ministered (leitourgos) to the needs of Paul; in Acts 13:2 the verb leitourgeô is used of the ministering to the Lord going on in Antioch; and in Romans 15:27 the same verb is used of the churches in Macedonia and Achaia ministering to the church in Jerusalem in material things. Considering the limited number of exceptions, Schweizer then proceeds to point out the overwhelming use of diakons and opines on the appropriateness of its use. He concludes that:

In view of the large number of terms available, the evidence of the choice of words is unmistakable. … all the New Testament witnesses are sure of one decisive fact: official priesthood, which exists to conciliate and mediate between God and community, is found in Judaism and paganism; but since Jesus Christ there has been only one such office - that of Jesus himself. It is shared by the whole Church, and never by one church member as distinct from others. Here therefore there is without exception the common priesthood, with no laity.[3]

Lexically, an understanding of the concept of ministry must come from an understanding of the diakons family of terms and how they are used in the New Testament. This family of terms includes the noun diakonos, the adjective diakonia, and the verb diakoneô and in a variety of different ways embodies the idea of service. Since a study of the understanding of diakonos could constitute an entire paper in itself, we will here only look at a few selected illustrative examples of its usage in the New Testament. In Ephesians 4:11-12 we are told that Christ “Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry (diakonia), for the edifying of the body of Christ.” Christ, therefore, has given certain gifts[4] to His body for the purpose of equipping the body to be able to serve Him.[5] Obviously then, the work of the ministry of the church is the work of the entire body, not of a select few. In 1 Peter 4:10, Peter encourages believers by exhorting them: “as each one has received a gift, minister (diakoneô) it to one another, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God.” Here we see that every member of the body of Christ possesses at least one gift and is exhorted to use it in service to others.[6] Again, the work of the ministry of the church is the work of the entire body, not of a select few. So, one can conclude that the ministry of the church is a ministry grounded in service and is required of all believers personally, not by proxy.

What do you think about this understanding of ministry and how it impacts the concept of ordination?

[1] The next closest is the λειτουργός family of terms with approximately 15%. The other three terms are ὑπηρέτης, “helper, assistant,” used by Jesus to describe to Paul the works that Jesus had for him to do in Acts 26:16; ἐργάζομαι, “practice, perform, officiate at,” the temple by the pagan ministers in 1 Cor 9:13; ἱερουργέω, “to act in some cultic or sacred capacity,” used of Paul ministering the Gospel to the gentiles in Rom 15:16. Definitions from BDAG.

[2] Eduard Schweizer, Church Order in the New Testament, trans. Frank Clarke (Naperville, IL: Alec R. Allenson, 1961), 171-176. Definitions from Schweizer.

[3] Ibid., 176.

[4] For a discussion of the understanding of this passage as a list of gifts, see my article: “Ephesians 4:11 - Spiritual gifts or positions?”

[5] For this understanding see F.F. Bruce, The Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), 349; and Harold W. Hoehner, Ephesians – An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002), 550-51.

[6] See Paige Patterson, A Pilgrim Priesthood – An Exposition of First Peter (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1982), 159.

A surge of interest in Bible study and private devotion - Craig Blaising

"The Brethren Movement ... rejected the special role of an ordained clergy, which perpetuated such ecclesiastical divisions, and stressed instead the spiritual giftedness of ordinary believers and their freedom, under the Spirit's guidance, to teach and admonish each other from the Scripture.

By enhancing the integrity and responsibility of the laity, Brethrenism witnessed a surge of interest in Bible study and private devotion."

found in Craig A. Blaising, and Darrell L. Bock. Progressive Dispensationalism: An up-to-Date Handbook of Contemporary Dispensational Thought (Wheaton: BridgePoint, 1993), 10.

Obviously, this is not the topic of the book. Blaising mentions the Brethren movement because he sees that "dispensationalism first took shape in the Brethren Movement in early nineteenth century Britain." Yet, it is an interesting thought ... could the concept of clergy be hindering Bible study and private devotion?

Community of Theologians - Malcom B. Yarnell III

In Clear and Useful Instruction, [Pilgram Marpeck] promoted the idea that all Christians receive spiritual gifts and are empowered by Christ to fulfill the Great Commission. Their belief that the Spirit spoke to the entire community as it read the Scripture together encouraged the Anabaptists to seek conversation with other Christians. Theology, for them, was always done best in communal Bible study. This helps explain one of the most poignant facts of the Continental Reformation. The Anabaptists seemed more than willing to enter debates with the state church theologians, even when it led to persecution. What surprised their opponents repeatedly was the intricate knowledge of Scripture that even illiterate Anabaptists expressed, a knowledge learned in church.

found in Malcom B. Yarnell III, The Formation of Christian Doctrine (Nashville: B&H, 2007), 102.

I keep on thinking about that last sentence and am reminded of the account found in Acts 4:13 (NKJV):

Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were uneducated and untrained men, they marveled. And they realized that they had been with Jesus.

Could it be that the Anabaptists' ecclesiology really impacted their Christian walk as Yarnell seems to imply in his book? Could it be that during their communal Bible studies, they too had been with Jesus instead of only hearing about Jesus?

community of believers - R. T. France

While commenting on Matt. 18, R. T. France states that:

The portrait of the church which thus emerges is an attractive one. Status-consciousness and formally constituted authority have no place. The focus is on the relationship and mutual responsibility of all members of the community, each of whom matters, and yet all of whom must regard themselves only as 'little ones.' The resultant pastoral concern and action is not the preserve of a select few, but is the responsibility of each individual disciple, and, where necessary, of the whole group together. The structure is informal, but the sense of community is intense. And overarching it all is the consciousness of the presence of Jesus and of the forgiveness and pastoral concern of 'your Father in heaven.

found in R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 674-5.

France, in his footnotes, also directs the reader's attention to the formulation of a similar idea by E. Schweizer, who in G. N. Stanton (ed.), Interpretation, 161, states that Matt. 18 shows "a community which seems to know neither elders nor bishops nor deacons," in which "everyone is involved on a par with everyone else."

How does this view of the church compare with your body of believers?

Living out my doctrine - some thoughts on Thiselton's The Hermeneutics of Doctrine

I recently had to read the first two parts of Thiselton's The Hermeneutics of Doctrine. In it, Thiselton attempts to rescue "doctrine from its marginalized function and abstraction from life, and deliver it from its supposed status as mere theory" (xvi) by using hermeneutical theory. One way he does this is by continuously directing the reader to the practicality of doctrine and to the essential intertwining of intellectual belief and the believer's action. Looking at historical confessions of faith, Thiselton points out that they were "practical, participatory, [and of a] first person nature" (9). Thiselton states that these confessions not only "declare a content, but they [also] serve to nail the speaker's colors to the mast as an act of first-person testimony and commitment" (13). Therefore doctrine was not and should not be just theoretical, but practical. "The test of a 'real' belief, in contrast to what we may merely claim to believe, lies not in whether such a belief lies consciously in the mind, but in the course of action, or in the habituated actions, which proceed from the belief" (28). As Käsemann states: "In the bodily obedience of the Christian, carried out as the service of God in the world of everyday, the lordship of Christ finds visible expression, and only when this visible expression takes personal shape in our lives does the whole thing become credible as Gospel message" (47). This is why, according to Thiselton, Paul, in 1 Corinthians, focuses on God having lordship over our bodies; bodies which "give currency to what our beliefs, attitudes, values, and doctrines actually amount to" (50). Think of what would happen if all Christians actually lived out their doctrine. Lord, help me to live out my doctrine!

Construction in community

On March the 28th, several of our brothers and sisters in Christ gathered at our home to help us work on it. People started to come by at 8:00 AM and the last ones left sometime after 7:00 or 8:00 PM. Throughout the day, the main focus was putting on siding (you can see before, during, and after pictures below), but Cindy had some people help her accomplish other tasks. We are very thankful for all who came, and for the ladies who provided lunch and supper for all of us. This was a great encouragement to us.

Have you encouraged your brothers and sisters in Christ lately?

While we were working, our neighbors' real estate agent came by. He talked to Paul, Cindy, and Alan. While talking to Alan, he asked if all the people working were part of one church. When Alan answered yes, the man made the comment that you don't see people getting together to help each other much anymore. So, while people served God by serving us, they glorified Him and proclaimed His transforming work in their lives to our community at large. 

Have your actions proclaimed God's transforming power in your life lately?

Deciding in community ... update

Almost two years ago, I can't believe it has been that long, I wrote a post entitled Deciding in Community. In it, I shared a letter that I wrote to our local body of believers asking for prayers and wisdom in discerning God's will. I was not just soliciting prayer for us; I was asking for people to pray that God would reveal to them also what His will was for our lives. While I was very much so convinced that I needed to follow that approach (read the letter for my rationale), I have never seen this done in my lifetime as a believer and was not sure what to expect, and as a matter of fact, that was precisely my answer when people asked me what I expected.

So how did it all work out, you might ask? Well, interestingly enough, God did precisely what I was praying He would do. As He worked in my heart to communicate to me that the job opportunity for which I had asked wisdom about accepting or declining was not what He had in store for us, He did the same in the hearts of my brothers and sisters in Christ. As I talked to several of them individually, one by one they told me that they just did not see us in Louisiana at that job. It was neat to see God work in that way.

Do I believe that He always works in that way? No, I never want to put God in a box. Do I think that we underestimate how God can communicate to the whole body about our lives? Yes. We have bought into a very individualistic society and individualistic Christianity and unfortunately often miss the corporate component of our faith. Ultimately, the bottom line is that as believers, our lives are not our own, our lives belong to the Father and He is in control of them. All we have to do is be obedient.

Since my post two years ago, I have seen many brothers and sisters make decisions, some with the help of the body, and some individually. In every case, my prayer has been that they would seek the will of the Father, not their own will, and that they would have the courage and boldness to do it. Personally, though, I pray that God will not just tell them, but that if it would be His will, that He would tell me also.

I find myself at another crosspoint in our lives: would you pray that the Father would let you know what it is I need to do? Looking forward to hearing from you ...

Building the Church - Charles H. Spurgeon's

I want you to notice this, that they were breaking bread from house to house, and ate their food with gladness and singleness of heart. They did not think that religion was meant only for Sundays, and for what men now-a-days call the House of God. Their own houses were houses of God, and their own meals were so mixed and mingled with the Lord's Supper that to this day the most cautious student of the Bible cannot tell when they stopped eating their common meals, and when they began eating the Supper of the Lord. They elevated their meals into diets for worship: they so consecrated everything with prayer and praise that all around them was holiness to the Lord. I wish our houses were, in this way, dedicated to the Lord, so that we worshipped God all day long, and made our homes temples for the living God...

Does God need a house? He who made the heavens and the earth, does he dwell in temples made with hands? What crass ignorance this is! No house beneath the sky is more holy than the place where a Christian lives, and eats, and drinks, and sleeps, and praises the Lord in all that he does, and there is no worship more heavenly than that which is presented by holy families, devoted to the fear of the Lord.

To sacrifice home worship to public worship is a most evil course of action. Morning and evening devotion in a little home is infinitely more pleasing in the sight of God than all the cathedral pomp which delights the carnal eye and ear. Every truly Christian household is a church, and as such it is competent for the discharge of any function of divine worship, whatever it may be. Are we not all priests? Why do we need to call in others to make devotion a performance? Let every man be a priest in his own house. Are you not all kings if you love the Lord? Then make your houses palaces of joy and temples of holiness. One reason why the early church had such a blessing was because her members had such homes. When we are like them we will have “added to the church those who were being saved.” - Charles H. Spurgeon

found on The Assembly of the Church. According to Alan's post this is from a sermon entitled "Building the Church" (or "Additions to the Church") concerning Acts 2 which Spurgeon gave on April 5, 1874.

Is this the picture of your house?

love above everything else - Bill Clinton

"The reason we have to put love above everything else is because we see through a glass darkly and know in part. Therefore, it almost doesn't matter whether the Bible is literally true, because we know in part. We see through a glass darkly. Humility is the order of the day. The reason we have to love each other is because we might all be wrong." - Former President Bill Clinton

found in J. Gerald Harris, "Jimmy Carter aglow over New Baptist Covenant Celebration," The Christian Index 187, 4 (02/14/2008): 12-3.

Well, here is the epitome of Derrida's deconstructionist thought and postmodern relativism: it does not matter whether something is true or not because we are probably going to misunderstand it anyhow. The problem is that knowing in part does not mean not knowing at all; just because we cannot comprehend 100% does not make truth useless. I wonder if the former president would want his physician to think that anatomy almost doesn't matter because, after all, we don't really understand all that is going on in the body anyhow.

Don't get me wrong; humility, unity, and love are essential in our daily Christian walk. Paul teaches us to "Let love be without hypocrisy. Abhor what is evil. Cling to what is good" (Rom 12:9). Our very faith depends on the veracity of Scripture, and that is a "good" we should cling to. It does matter that the Bible is literally true. Our unity as believers is based on "walking in the light" (1 Jon 1:7) and following Him: the one who is "the way, the truth, and the life" (John 14:6, emphasis mine).

authenticity - David F. Wells

The postmodern reaction against Enlightenment dogma will not be met successfully simply by Christian proclamation. Of that we can be sure. That proclamation must arise with a context of authenticity. It is only as the evangelical Church begins to put its own house in order, its members begin to disentangle themselves from all of those cultural habits which militate against a belief in truth, and begin to embody that truth in the way that the Church actually lives, that postmodern skepticism might begin to be overcome. Postmoderns want to see as well as hear, to find authenticity in relationship as the precursor to hearing what is said. This is a valid and biblical demand. Faith, after all, is dead without works, and few sins are dealt with as harshly by Jesus as hypocrisy. What postmoderns want to see, and are entitled to see, is believing and being, talking and doing, all joined together in a seamless whole. This is the great challenge of the moment for the evangelical Church. Can it rise to this occasion? - David F. Wells

found in David F. Wells, Above All Earthly Pow'rs (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 315.

I would add that this is not a postmodern challenge, but it is valid for all times. As DC Talk sings of in What if I Stumble?: "The greatest single cause of atheism in the world today is Christians, who acknowledge Jesus with their lips, and walk out the door, and deny Him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable." Will you please live out your faith? If not, will you stop telling people that you are a Christian? (BTW - I'm not talking about perfection, I'm talking about submission.)

church and culture - David F. Wells

Ways of thinking and organizing in our society often become our ways of thinking about ourselves and organizing our lives. Thus, those who gaze at a computer screen by day and a television screen by night may well feel awkwardly obsolete in church if there is not another screen on which to gaze. The demands of efficiency, and the rational, impersonal workings of bureaucracy, are so much a part of who we have become that many of us also want our churches to have the feel of a smoothly run corporation. Our capitalism has been so virile and abundant, filling our lives with goods in quantities unknown in any previous age, that it seems only natural - at least in middle class, white churches - to expect the same range of choice in programs and services as we experience in the commercial world. The norms of the workplace so easily and so unknowingly become our own internalized norms. And this is true of most people. - David F. Wells

found in David F. Wells, Above All Earthly Pow'rs (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 22-3.

Wells unfortunately points out that way too often, culture has transformed the church, but is that what is supposed to happen? No, as I stated a while back when I posted a short post called The kingdom of heaven, Christ calls us to transform culture, not for culture to transform us. So let me ask again: are we affecting the world around us?

Deciding in Community

The more I study the New Testament, the more I see a pattern of community involvement in many aspects of the life of the church. We see such patterns in passages like Acts 13:1-3 and Acts 15:6-29. Because of this conviction, I read the following letter to our church this morning:

Dear Messiah Family,

All we do as a body, personally and corporately, should be guided by the Holy Spirit which is according to the will of God. For this reason, I keep on reminding us that throughout the NT, we see that the church is guided by the Holy Spirit resulting in the believers being all in one accord. I strongly believe that God has put us in community for good reasons, and one of those reasons is that when we all seek his wisdom, I strongly believe that He will not only reveal it to us, but that He will make it known to the body in unity.

It is for this reason that I come to you this morning with a prayer request on my and Cindy’s behalf. I thought about sharing this on Sunday night, but I wanted to make sure that my words would not be misunderstood or misquoted. BTW - for this reason I will be posting this letter on my blog, so that people can go and read it if they have any doubts about what I said.

Cindy and I have no intention of moving from this community unless God directs us to do so. I hope this is evidenced by the fact that we bought a house in the community, and we felt so comfortable about the fact that we were going to be here for a while, that we bought the house with a little help from a government program which will penalize us if we sell the house within the first 5 years of ownership.¹

In mid February, I was contacted by LC, a Baptist college in Pineville, LA, asking me if I was interested in applying for a full time math faculty position starting this fall 2007. I answered that I was not interested, but they were persistent and have asked me to consider applying and interviewing for the position now, but waiting to start in fall 2008. Because the job description is very much so what God has gifted me & given me a desire to do and because the administration has been persistent in thinking it could be God’s will for me to fill the full time position and because this opportunity came to me completely unsolicited, I have decided to fill out the application and see where God takes it.

I believe that, like in Acts 13 when the Holy Spirit told the congregation at Antioch to set aside Paul and Barnabas, that if this is God’s will, He will affirm it not just to me, but to this entire body. This thinking is not a foreign thought to our Baptist heritage: there once was a time when a pastor would not leave a congregation until both he and they agreed that his departure was the leading of God.²

Messiah is our family and we could not think of seriously considering this opportunity in secret, as some pastor might sometime feel compelled to do. Cindy and I, like you, seek to serve God with all our heart, our strength, and our soul. We do not want to move from this community at this time, but will obey our Father in heaven in whatever way he directs us. Please be in prayer with us that we all will discern His will in this issue, as well as all areas of life: private and corporate.

¹ I am not mentioning this because of the financial implications, but just to point out that we had no intentions of leaving the area when we bought the house.

² H. Leon McBeth, The Baptist Heritage (Nashville: Broadman, 1987), 77.

Does our philosophy on the church matter?

Much discussion has taken place and is taking place in Christendom on ‘what is the church’, ‘how does a church operate’, etc. Some stress the importance of tradition, some stress the importance of changing with the times, some are seeking to go back to the church of the first century, and some say that it really does not matter, that it is just a matter of preference. Is it?

I believe that much of the discussion on style and music can be regarded as a discussion about preference, but I also believe that which is central to making the church the church is of great importance. Consider this quote:

“The New Testament’s pronouncements on Church order are to be read as a gospel - that is, Church order is to be regarded as a part of the proclamation in which the Church’s witness is expressed, as it is in its preaching. There may be times when this kind of proclamation is better heard and regarded by the world than are any words; and for that reason this part of the Church’s witness too must be given clearly and plainly.”¹

Thus according to Schweizer, church order is not just a matter of preference, but a way of proclaiming the gospel. A clear example of this is found in the first letter to the church in Corinth.

But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or an uninformed person comes in, he is convinced by all, he is convicted by all. And thus the secrets of his heart are revealed; and so, falling down on [his] face, he will worship God and report that God is truly among you. - 1 Cor 14:24-25

Here we see how the observance of a healthy meeting of believers can clearly convey the gospel message to unbelievers. But it should not stop with the gathering. Scripture states that we are the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:27). Doesn’t it make sense that we, the church, therefore represent Christ? Since that is the case, I would say that our philosophy on the church matters. It is not a matter of preference; even when Scripture is not prescriptive, it is a matter of representing the gospel to a dying world. I love reading the church fathers and have appreciated the wisdom that we find in tradition, but if tradition does not align itself with Scripture, we have the potential of presenting the wrong image of Christ to a lost world. We have to ask ourselves two questions: “what kind of picture are we painting?” and "what kind of picture is the church we meet with painting?”

I believe that I am living in an age where God is raising men and women who are willing to think critically and Biblically about the church; who are questioning our practices and asking if they align with Scripture; and who have a desire to be as Biblical as possible. I join Paul in saying: “Now to Him who is able to do exceedingly abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that works in us, to Him [be] glory in the church by Christ Jesus to all generations, forever and ever. Amen.” - Eph 3:20-21 (emphasis mine)

¹ Eduard Schweizer, Church Order in the New Testament, trans. Frank Clarke (Naperville, IL: Alec R. Allenson, 1961), 14.

Entertain strangers

Just the other day Alan, at the Assembling of the Church, posted an article entitled Justice, Kindness, Mercy..., reminding us that the early church followed the mandates in Scripture to take care of the elderly and the poor. He then shared his own struggles and need for God’s teaching and guidance in the matter.

With that post in the background, let me share with you some of my struggles. Yesterday I was walking home after class when, while still on campus, I was approached by an elderly lady who asked me for $10 so that she could get some food. As has been my custom now for years, I told her that I would not give her money, but I’d be glad to buy her some food. This is a practice that I learned from my mom, who taught me to have compassion for people in need. I can remember many times when mom stopped at a store to buy a beggar something to eat. She always told me never to give them money, for who knows what they will use it for, but instead, to go ahead and buy them some food. Sadly, I have to admit that I did not put her advice into practice until after I became a Christian: before Christ transformed my life there was much selfishness and very little compassion in my heart.

But getting back to my story … so I asked the lady where she was planning to go eat. She told me Skippers. Now, Cindy and I rarely go out to eat (our entertainment budget is set at $20 per month) and thus I had no idea of the price range of dishes at Skippers, all I knew is that it was located close by. On the way, the lady shared with me that she has a couple of young ones at home, so I kindly suggested that maybe we could go to Domino’s and I could buy her a pizza that she could take home. She told me that she had been craving real food, so we continued to Skippers.

Upon arrival, I discovered that the dish she wanted was $15.99. I told her that was too expensive and that it would be better to go and get her a pizza. She then asked if she could get the shrimp dish instead of the barbeque, she thought it was less expensive. It turns out that it was $10.99: cheaper, but still very expensive for a single meal. I reasoned with her that it would make more sense to get a pizza for that price, so that she could share it with her family. Apparently, her heart was set on shrimp because she told me that she would not eat it all and would share her leftover shrimp with her family. I couldn’t believe my ears!

I finally told her that I would buy her a pizza, and we headed over to Domino’s. On the way and as well as in the store, I shared with her about the God who changed my life: the reason why I was actually doing this. She told me I was a good person, to which I answered that I was not: the good she saw was God acting in my life.

I was not being pious, inside I was extremely frustrated with her, and the only thing that kept me from just leaving was the love of Christ. Cindy and I had discussed earlier that day that we did not have money to go eat at Taco Bell, and here I was buying a stranger food and she was being picky about the food she was getting, wanting to go eat out at a restaurant that my wife and I would not go to because we consider it too expensive.

I sit here asking myself did she just take advantage of me. Then I think of Alan’s post and Scriptures like Heb 13:2 which states: Do not forget to entertain strangers, for by so doing some have unwittingly entertained angels.

And there in lies my struggle: what has God called me to do in a situation like this?

Ephesians 4:11 - Spiritual gifts or positions?

And He Himself gave some [to be] apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers,

For quite some time I have been thinking of this verse, Eph 4:11, as being a list of gifts, not a list of positions in the church. As usual, I have godly brothers in Christ who will call me to account for my opinions, and so I've decided to spend some time looking into this passage.

Where could the idea of gifting come from when looking at this passage? After all, the NKJV titles it Spiritual Gifts, the NLT actually renders it “He is the one who gave these gifts to the church: the apostles …”. Paige Patterson and D.A. Carson both present this passage as a list of gifts¹, and Horner entitles this section of his commentary “The distribution of the gifts,”² just to name a few examples.

If you look back at v. 7, "Paul states that each believer is given a gift according to the measure of the gift of Christ."³ Paul then proceeds to quote Psalm 68 in v. 8 in which we see that the one who ascended on high, that is Christ, gave gifts to men. Ephesians 4:9-10 then parenthetically comments on Psalm 68. Thus v. 11 is positioned on the tail of a discussion about gifting, not positions in the church, and from that perspective it seems logical to assume that in v. 11 the topic of discussion continues to be gifting rather than positions.

One could point out that this is not a list of gifts, but a list of gifted people. I would agree with that, but the fact that they are gifted people does not make this a list of positions, or as some would call them: offices (I personally do not like the term office … I guess that will be the topic of a future post). We see something similar in 1 Cor 12 where Paul lists gifts in vv. 8-10, and then in vv. 27-30 he lists people who are gifted in such a way. The fact that he is talking of gifted people rather than positions in the church is emphasized by v. 31 where he states: “But earnestly desire the best gifts” (emphasis mine) not “the best positions”. In contrast, we see Scripture teaching in 1 Tim 3:1 that the people desiring the position of overseer desire a good work, not a good gift.

As a final note, I would say that if this were a list of positions in the church, one would expect to see overseers and deacons mentioned as well, but they are not. Some might counter that pastor/teachers are mentioned in the place of overseers. I would argue instead that here we read about the gifting, pastor/teacher, that every overseer/elder should have (see Acts 20:28, 1 Peter 5:2, and the qualifications for overseers in 1 Tim 3), but which gifting some others in the church could have even though they do not have the position of overseer/elder.⁴ I co-pastor a congregation which has many who are gifted as pastor/teachers, but at this time the congregation only recognizes two as holding the position of pastor/elder.

¹ Paige Patterson, The Troubled Triumphant Church – an Exposition of First Corinthians (Dallas: Criswell Publications, 1983), 211 and D.A. Carson, Showing the Spirit – A Theological Exposition of 1 Corinthians 12-14 (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1987), 35-6.

² Harold W. Hoehner, Ephesians - An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002), 538.

³ Ibid, 541.

⁴ Ibid., 544-7.

Thinking in community ...

The other day I was talking to a friend about a variety of things including the church. His opinion, and he is not alone on this, is that the preferred mode of teaching/learning in the church, is for a learned man to study a scripture passage for 20+ hours (preferably 40+) and then explain it to others at a weekly meeting.

Why am I mentioning all of this? It has been my conviction for some time, that lecturing is not the ideal way of learning for most people. I put this conviction to practice in my math/physics/computer classes by alternating lecturing with practice time, work on the board time, discussion time, etc. I put that conviction to practice in the classes I take by participating and asking questions. I put that conviction to practice when I disciple, by not relegating discipleship to just sitting down and teaching, but by also making sure that I live out my faith (on this last one, see a great post by Alan).

But I think that this discussion goes beyond the best way for the pupil to learn and includes the best way for ALL to learn. The other day I was sitting in Philosophy class and the professor stated that class discussion was beneficial, even for him, because it helped us ALL to learn. That is learning in community. Think about it this way ...

I stand and state my knowledge. Guido disagrees with me. If I am just lecturing, that is where Guido's learning process and my learning process stops (at least in that occasion). If we are learning in community, Guido states his disagreement. To be able to do that Guido has to think about his opinion and formulate it in a intelligible way. It is also possible that Guido has a good point and in that case I am forced to adjust my views. OR Guido has a flawed view and I then reply to Guido. To do that I have had to process Guido's view, which might be something I have never thought about, and see its impact on my views. After I stated my reply Guido is faced with a challenge to his opinion which forces him to see it from a different perspective and possibly adjust his views. As you can see, learning is happening everywhere in this scenario. Disagreement is not necessary, though. Guido could be furnishing complimentary information.

Consider the following scenario. Mandie comes to the house for supper. As usual we talk about many things and I mention that I have been trying to understand why I think that Eph 4:11 is talking about spiritual gifts and not positions in the church (post to come soon). I am doing this because of a question asked by another brother in Christ while we where learning in community on a Wednesday night home group. Immediately Mandie, who is very interested in women's issues, starts thinking out laud about this passage and the implications of the spiritual gift vs. position discussion from the perspective of women in the church, authority, etc. I, who love women, after all I married the best one out there, realize that I had not even thought about those implications while I was thinking of Eph 4:11. You see what happened? We learned in community. Had Mandie not come by the house or had I been lecturing, this stretching of my thoughts would not have happened.

Should I study 20+ (or even 40+) to understand God's word better. Yes! Should the people I interact with do the same and be allowed to share their thought publicly for maximized learning of all parties. Yes!