Category: Bible & Theology

Kierkegaard on Becoming an Individual, Seriously

Here are two excerpts from Kierkegaard’s 1847 journal, written when he was 34 years old.

Kierkegaard is sometimes criticized for placing too much emphasis upon “the individual,” promoting a brand of individualism that places little if any value in social connections or community relationships.

In fact, nothing could be further from the truth.

Sadly, Kierkegaard’s philosopher MIS-interpreters have encouraged this common misunderstanding of the melancholy Dane by ignoring, or willfully remaining ignorant of, the centrality of Jesus Christ in Kierkegaard’s thinking.

Here is an example:

“Everyone would like to have lived at the same time as great men and great events.  God knows how many really live at the same time as themselves.  To do that (and so neither in hope nor fear of the future, nor in the past) is to understand oneself and be at peace, and that is only possible through one’s relation to God, or it is one’s relation to God.

“Christianity is certainly not melancholy, it is, on the contrary, good news – for the melancholy; to the frivolous it is certainly not good news, for it wishes first of all to make them serious.”

In other words, no one becomes the person, the unique individual, they were created to become until he/she stands submissively, and lives obediently, before the savior, Jesus Christ.  Only that authentic individual existing before God, who is who she is, who does what she does, who behaves as she behaves and decides as she decides because she lives to serve Jesus faithfully with all that she has to offer Him, will experience the joy of being her genuine, God-intended self.

That is authentic individualism, and it is only attained through the Good News of Jesus Christ.  Only these kinds of authentic individuals can compose a genuine Christian community where brothers and sisters in Christ serve each other freely and sacrificially.

In the American pursuit of secular individualism, constantly affirming the innate wisdom buried somewhere inside our inner rebel, that solitary soul fleeing God’s influence, we foolishly refuse to take ourselves seriously as sinners.

This is the Gospel’s first task:  to make us serious; serious about ourselves; serious about God.

It is the only route out of banal frivolity into eternal joy.

In this light, I suspect that the United States may be the least serious “Christian” nation on earth, nurturing a populous sucking at the teats of the most frivolous media culture – including the supposedly Christian media – ever devised.

Don’t live like the typical American consumer.  Set your sights on becoming an authentic Individual, please, before it is too late.

Has Jerry Falwell Jr. Embraced His Inner Dispensationalist Cult-Member?

Perhaps you have already heard about the latest brouhaha generated by Jerry Falwell Jr.’s interview with the Washington Post.  Aside from the

Jerry Falwell Jr.

political hypocrisy strewn throughout the entire piece, two points, in particular, have gained significant public attention.

If you have been following this controversy, you may want to skip down and begin reading at part two of this post.  Otherwise, beginning with part one will catch you up on the issues involved.

Part. One:

First, when asked, “Is there anything President Trump could do that would endanger that support from you or other evangelical leaders?”  Falwell flatly answered, “No.”

Falwell’s response unveils his cult-follower mentality when it comes to all things Trump.  Ruth Graham at Slate Magazine explains the ridiculous, idolatrous illogic of Falwell’s answer:

“His explanation was a textbook piece of circular reasoning: Trump wants what’s best for the country, therefore anything he does is good for the country. There’s

Ruth Graham, journalist

something almost sad about seeing this kind of idolatry articulated so clearly. In a kind of backhanded insult to his supporters, Trump himself once said that he could “stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody” without losing his base. It’s rare to see a prominent supporter essentially admit that this was true.”

I will go one step further and suggest that not even Jesus Christ himself demands such blind, a-moral loyalty.  At least, the apostle Paul admitted that he stopped short of offering that brand of devil-may-care devotion to Jesus Christ himself!

In 1 Corinthians 15:12-19, Paul seems to suggest that there is at least one thing the man from Nazareth could have done that would have caused Paul not to believe in him.

Jesus could have stayed dead.

For Paul insists:

“…if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised.   For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either.   And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile…”

Not even the Lord and Savior of the universe demands the type of undiscerning, a-moral devotion that Falwell has placed in Donald Trump.

Folks, Falwell expresses a truly idolatrous brand of politics.

Yes, I realize that sorting out this issue requires a conversation about the relationship between faith and historical evidence, but we don’t have time for that discussion here.  I suggestion that you take a look at my book, Encountering Jesus, Encountering Scripture and then follow up on its bibliography.

The second point of controversy was Falwell’s defense of his position by referring to his “two kingdoms” theology.  He explained:

“There’s two kingdoms. There’s the earthly kingdom and the heavenly kingdom. In the heavenly kingdom the responsibility is to treat others as you’d like to be treated. In the earthly kingdom, the responsibility is to choose leaders who will do what’s best for your country.”

I won’t bother to address the problems created by Falwell’s two kingdoms theology – though I have serious doubts about Falwell’s ability to express an informed opinion on Lutheran theology — since I have critiqued Luther’s own application of his two kingdoms theology, its dangerous uses in 20th century history, and explained what I understand to be the New Testament’s teaching about God’s kingdom in my book, I Pledge Allegiance.

Part Two:

So…this brings me to the thoughts motivating me to add something further to the conversation surrounding Falwell’s interview.  Others, like Professor John Fea (here and here), have covered the issues well, but I suspect there may be another suggestion yet to be explored:  the possible influence of dispensational theology in the age of Trump.  If this term is new to you, start with this Wikipedia page and Google on from there.

Not long ago I came across a separate interview with Jerry Falwell Jr. where he said that he “did not look to Jesus” for guidance in his politics, but was directed instead by his concerns for “a law and order candidate.”  (Unfortunately, I have not been able to relocate the source for that interview.  Any help out there???).

Here are the two interesting puzzle pieces that got me thinking.

 One, Jesus’ life and teaching, items such as Jesus’ own pacifism, the Sermon on the Mount and the rest of our Lord’s ethical instruction, have no role in forming Falwell’s view of Christian politics.

 Two, he believes that Christian values in this “earthly kingdom” are separate and distinct from God’s values in the heavenly kingdom.

Well, it just so happens that those two positions were (are?) identifying characteristics of the earliest, die-hard advocates of American dispensational theology — a stream in which I suspect Liberty University is squarely planted.  Though I can’t cite a scientific poll to prove it, I am reasonably certain that dispensationalism (in one or another of its various forms) is the most commonly embraced “theology” in North America, especially among those who are theologically unaware.

American dispensationalism is the fuel that feeds the raging fire of U.S. Christian Zionism.  That alone is enough to make it highly suspect, as far as I am concerned.  It is also one of the several reasons I abandoned my youthful dispensationalism long ago.

Lewis Sperry Chafer (1871-1952), the founding president of Dallas Theological Seminary, which remains the Mecca of dispensational thinking to this day, was the first American systematician of dispensational thought.  His 8-volume work of Systematic Theology, first printed in 1947, remains in print today.  (My father gave me a complete set as a college graduation present.  Yes, I was, and probably still am, a nerd).

An important feature of Chafer’s dispensationalism was his emphasis on the postponement of Jesus’ ethics.  He taught that when Jesus said the kinds of “irrational” things we find in the Sermon on the Mount and elsewhere, he was speaking solely to the Jewish people who were supposed to receive him as their messiah.

But since the majority of Jesus’ contemporaries rejected his messiahship, the implementation of that ethical teaching was deferred, postponed until the future arrival of the “millennial kingdom” when all of Israel will finally recognized Jesus as the One they have been awaiting.  (For more detail, check out this page published by someone called The GospelPedlar.  It has a good summary with citations explaining Chafer’s theology of “Postponed Ethics.”

So, for old-time dispensationalists like Chafer and his modern devotees, Jerry Falwell Jr. is reflecting sound dispensational, theological conviction when he ignores Jesus’ ethics while deciding his politics.  For this frame of mind, the church does not now inhabit the proper kingdom age for the application of Jesus’ teaching to the Christian life, certainly not to a Christian’s politics.

This earthly kingdom is not the correct kingdom for Jesus’ ethics to be seriously applied, across the board, to all of Christian living.  Although Chafer’s dispensationalism has nothing to do with Martin Luther’s two kingdoms theology, we can see an important convergence of ideas at this point.

Arriving at the same place by different routes, both groups (Lutherans and dispensationalists) endorse the idea of different kingdoms in different spheres with different behavioral expectations for God’s people.

I admit that I have not called Jerry Falwell Jr. and asked him whether his political thinking has been self-consciously shaped by Chaferian dispensationalism.  After all, he is a lawyer with a B.A. in religious studies from, you guessed it, Liberty University.  Are my prejudices showing?

Maybe I should give him a call someday, but he probably wouldn’t talk to me. (See his refusal to talk with people like Shane Clairbone here, here, here and here.)

What I DO know is that ideas matter.  They matter a great deal.  Theological ideas matter supremely to God’s church.  (Any believer who is anti-theology doesn’t understand what he/she is saying.)  We don’t have to know their source or history.  We don’t even have to be able to articulate them clearly, much less expound upon their ramifications, whether intellectual or behavioral.

We simple breath in the lingering aroma of influential ideas, assimilating

Liberty University

them unwittingly from our (church) environment.  And the American church offers an environment seeped in the aroma of old-time dispensationalism.

As I continue to ponder the damning conundrum of America’s conservative/ evangelical/fundamentalist  church offering up its overwhelming support to Donald Trump, I can’t help but wonder if this is another part of the dispensational legacy fallen like poisoned fruit from the American tree of unbiblical theology.

What is Christian Worship? Part 5  Dispelling Two Common Errors

We have come to the end of this study in New Testament worship vocabulary, but I cannot close without taking note of two common obstacles that frequently hamper leaders who wish to act on the theology we have discovered by putting our theological conclusions into practice.  Perhaps you would like to review that theology in parts one, two, three and four.

 The key theological issue at stake is the New Testament’s elimination of the Old Testament distinction between the sacred and the profane (recall, especially, part four in this series).

Jesus Christ has made the Old Testament/Covenant idea of special/sacred space (a temple), personnel (priests), and activities (ritual offerings) obsolete.  The New Testament even goes so far as never to identify baptism or the Lord’s Supper as acts of “liturgy” or “worship,” as surprising as that may be.

But, for some odd reason, many churchgoers prefer living in a quasi-Old Testament world. Here is where we encounter the first obstacle.

Perhaps many churchgoers secretly prefer the idea of living life day-to-day as a truly profane existence.  After all, stepping in and out of God’s presence, spending the majority of our time free from the presence of God, seems preferable for those who don’t want to deal with Christ’s Lordship.

In any case, humanity’s predilection for an obsolete manner of religious thinking appears in our need to invent new ways of importing Old Testament structures into the New Testament church.  It happens all the time in every tradition.  Think of the many ways we reinstall the

Cathedral of St. Mary

sacred/profane distinction into the Christian life.

We create uniquely sacred people with ordination ceremonies.  We even call them “priests,” as opposed to all of the other Christians who become the “laity.”

We Christianize sacred spaces via grand cathedral/church architecture, and we then refer to these places as “God’s house.”

We elaborate uniquely sacred acts through sacramental liturgies that may only be performed by the appropriately sacred personnel (i.e. the ordained) inside the proper sacred space.

All of this, every last bit of it, is absolutely wrong as far as the New Testament is concerned.  All I can say is, thank God that the grace of Jesus Christ is so bloomin’ big that it extends even to wrong-headed people like us.

The second obstacle issues from the first.  It becomes the rational justification for the ecclesiastical mistakes described above.

One of my former colleagues loved to repeat this standard rationale, imagining that he had slain his opponent (usually me) with a single thrust, “If everything is sacred, then nothing is sacred!”  Have you heard that one?

In other words, by this logic we’ve got to create ‘special’ moments/places/personnel in order to preserve some sense of the divine majesty.  Otherwise, familiarity will breed contempt, and it’s only a matter of time before any sense of awe before God is melted away into the mundane mix of inattentive daily living.

Right?  If so, let’s reintroduce Old Covenant thought and its priestly structures from stage-right.

No.  This is exactly the wrong thing to do.  Let’s think about it for a moment.

The first flaw in my friend’s argument is a matter of simple logic.

Notice that my colleague’s objection to the New Testament perspective on worship must assume the continuing validity of the sacred/profane distinction in order to make its point.

In other words, it ignores the very assertion it pretends to refute.  To put it another way, it tries to dismiss New Testament teaching (i.e. there is no more sacred/profane distinction for those who know Jesus) by keeping its feet firmly planted in the Old Testament framework (i.e. we must observe the sacred/profane distinction if we want to truly worship God).

The next time you hear someone using this invalid claim calmly inform them that you reject the premise of their conclusion.  Ha!  Not really.  They probably won’t know what you mean.

At the end of the day, this “sophisticated” sounding refutation of New Testament teaching is really nothing more than a stubborn refusal to come to grips with the newly redeemed creation awash with God’s unfettered grace now available through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

While I certainly understand the pragmatic concerns that lead people to cling to Old Covenant distinctions, I remain convinced that any practical decision contrary to biblical teaching, no matter how “helpful,” will ultimately prove crippling to God’s people.

It is better to wrestle with the difficult implications of sound theology than it is to ease the burden of church leadership by choosing expediency.
Yes, the innate limits of the human attention span may well require that we demarcate certain times and places for special events, i.e. a designated place…at a designated time…to gather together…for particular events and practices…as a community of faith.
BUT let’s never confuse the pragmatic needs born of human limitations with the proper theology of the New Covenant.  We do such things to accommodate human weakness, NOT because there are any real differences between different times, special places, or specially ordained people.

Christian worship, New Testament worship, is an obedient lifestyle where every day is received as the gift of God’s holy presence, personally indwelling us through the Holy Spirit, conforming us to the perfect image of His one and only eternal Son as we sacrifice ourselves in following His call.

Live out THAT life and you will worship and glorify our holy God all day every day without fail.

What is Christian Worship? Part 4

Thus far we have made several important, and unexpected, discoveries as we studied New Testament worship vocabulary.

First, we discovered that the New Testament never describes Christian gatherings as “worship services.”  New Testament believers didn’t “worship” when they gathered together.  Rather, they created group opportunities for edification and upbuilding of the Body of Christ.  Disciples use their spiritual gifts, confess their sins, sing new songs, praise and glorify God, encourage each other and meet one another’s physical and spiritual needs.

And, believe it or not, the New Testament does not call that “worship.”

Second, we found that the New Testament insists that Christian worship is the stuff believers do in their day-to-day lives as they obediently follow Jesus.  We worship God when we do the things Jesus has called us to do as members of his upside-down, counter-intuitive kingdom.
Worship is a lifestyle not because we sing praise songs and lift our hands while driving, but because we make the radically hard choices of actually being like Jesus and obeying his not-of-this-world teaching in our daily lives with others.

This is the point where I frequently hear an objection: If worship is an everyday affair, aren’t I minimizing the idea of worship as a “sacred/special” activity? 

To put the question more negatively, people sometimes object, “If everything is worship, then nothing is worship.”  (One of my former colleagues used to say this regularly).

“There must be something unique or ‘special’ about worshiping God,” they insist.  “Otherwise giving God our focused attention simply melts away into the repetitious fabric of mundane existence, and it will never really happen at all!”

This worry arises from a legitimate concern, but I believe that its impulses are misguided.  My response to this objection has two parts.   Here I will offer part one.  Part two must wait for the next post.

 First, the New Testament has dramatically eliminated the Old Testament distinction between the sacred & the profane within the Christian life.

In the Old Testament, the “sacred” was conceived of in terms of proximity to God.  God’s presence appeared at certain shrines, in the Tabernacle or in the Temple.  These places involved sacred locations (like altars), sacred personnel (priests), sacred objects (vestments, incense burners) and sacred acts (sacrifices, offerings).

The profane, on the other hand, was excluded from the sacred.  Profane things involved the mundane, day-to-day, worldly affairs of normal life, normal places and normal people.

Old Testament saints lived within two different sets of distinctions:

One was the sacred/profane distinction described above.

The second was the covenantal distinction between Israel’s membership in the Abrahamic & Sinai covenants, compared with everyone else in the world who lived outside of God’s covenants.  Israel and Israel alone were the Lord’s covenant people.

These two dimensions of (a) sacred/profane and (b) inside the covenant/outside the covenant intersected Israel’s existence in significant ways.

All those living inside the covenant were God’s chosen people.  As God’s covenant people, Israel was commanded to maintain the distinction between the sacred – i.e. they went to the Temple, offered sacrifices and understood God’s presence to be centered in the Holy of Holies – and the profane – i.e. they believed that God always saw them and heard their prayers, but they never entered into God’s presence at home as they did when they entered into the Temple.

All of Israel’s life was lived within the covenant, but covenant life was not identical with the sacred way of life.  Even Israel’s priests – who were always members of the covenant – moved  back and forth between the sacred and profane, depending on their times of temple service.

With the coming of Christ, however, God instituted a radical change of affairs.  The Lord Jesus inaugurated the NEW Covenant, or the New Testament.

With the coming of God’s New Covenant, what had previously been two different distinctions (sacred/profane and in covenant/out of covenant) are now fused into one.  In other words, every member of the New Covenant is always living a sacred existence in sacred space. Those outside the New Covenant, because they do not know Jesus, live a profane life in profane space.

Anyone participating in the resurrection life of Jesus Christ can know that the previously profane has been transformed into the perpetually sacred.  The covenantal distinction is now identical with the sacred/profane distinction.  All disciples of Jesus are holy people.  Every Christian is a priest.  Every act of obedience is a sacred act, an offering of praise, a sacrifice acceptable to God.

I am convinced that this New Testament “universalizing” of the sacred, scattering sacredness throughout all of the Christian life, is a sign of Christ’s intention to restore the universe to God’s original design.

When Adam and Eve walked through the Garden of Eden, all of life was sacred.  The entire cosmos was sacred.  Sacred space was everywhere.  There was no place that was not a sacred place.  The Creator walked and talked with the first man and woman as they strolled through the aspen groves and smelled wild roses in the overgrown thickets along the bubbling stream.

Sacred space was all there was.

So now, since the coming of Jesus, the apostle Paul can describe his lifestyle of obedient discipleship as “his priestly service” (note the language of a sacred person offering a sacred activity – i.e. worship) given up to Jesus Christ from the dirty streets and dark alleyways of every Greco-Roman city where the apostle sets the light of the Good News ablaze.

Worship becomes a lifestyle of faithful kingdom citizenship, first and foremost, because of who we are.

Jesus makes us saints and priests whose every breath drawn in thanksgiving, every thought of God’s glory, every word spoken in the light of Christ’s presence, every decision made in accordance with God’s intention, becomes a moment of worship offered up by a sacred individual inhabiting God’s new world.

Now, is that amazing, or what?

Praise be to our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ for His indescribable gifts to us all!

When Disobedience is a Virtue, 5 — Principled Individualism Builds Better Community

This final installment of “When Disobedience is a Virtue” is another excerpt from my book, I Pledge Allegiance: A Believer’s Guide to Kingdom Citizenship in 21st Century America (Eerdmans, 2018), page 112.

If you know me personally or are a regular reader of this blog, then you know that I am a non-conformist.  Part of this is my personality.  I have always questioned authority and wondered (often out loud) about the real evidence behind public statements of “fact.”

But the greatest influence pushing me further and further into the arms of non-conformity has been my faith in Jesus Christ.  Every true disciple is a non-conformist to the ways of this world.

That includes pushing back against the various ways that this world sets up shop inside the church, selling God’s people worldly rubbish like a rogue sidewalk vender hawking enticing chili dogs without a license.

 “There will never be a sufficient consensus on anything in this life—including biblical interpretation and social activism—to eliminate all of life’s uncertainties. If we act only in the absence of uncertainty, then we will never do anything but wait and invent new excuses for our inactivity. Living a biblically directed life is the only way to deconstruct the false moral universes erected by this world and replace them with the moral universe created by the kingdom of God. Of course, as long as we remain in this world, we are partially blinded and crippled by the misshapen universe we are working to leave behind, so our interpretations and conclusions must be held lightly. But they must be held. Uncertainty never justifies apathy.

 “Second, there comes a time when the individual must act and act alone if necessary, while being prepared to accept the consequences of those actions, whatever they may be. It is no accident that Peter Haas introduces his discussion of Germany’s Christian rescuers by saying: “A common feature of any principled dissent . . . [is] that the rescuers are deviants, people who are misfits in their society. . . . [Their actions] grew out of the rescuer’s experience as social and political outcasts.”  Principled individualism, what the status quo will always condemn as the deviant behavior of misfits and outcasts, is the distinguishing characteristic of Christian faithfulness in this fallen world.

 “Unfortunately, there are many pious voices that want to sedate this brand of individualism by wrapping it up tightly in the maudlin, anesthetic gauze of “community life.” Christian gatherings easily become the most repressive, stultifying crowds that squash the last vestige of creative individualism from its members: Never act alone. Never step out of line. Never speak when others are quiet. Never question authority. Never doubt what everyone else believes. Never question the way it has always been done. Never try to think outside the box. These are the conformist platitudes repeated by the crowd in its self-serving attempts to constrain passionate individuals, preventing them from acting for the sake of conscience.  At times the Christian church has become the most oppressive, do-nothing herd of them all.

 “So we must learn to discern the difference between a fellowship that participates in God’s kingdom and a collective that exists only to replicate carbon copies of the citizens of this world.”

Sandhya Rani Jha on Politics in Church

Sandhya Rani Jha is a minister in the Disciples of Christ denomination and director of the Oakland Peace Center.

If you don’t know the story she refers to about the French village, Le Chambon, I encourage you to read the book by Philip Hallie, Lest Innocent Blood Be Shed (Harper Row, 1979). It’s an amazing story of true kingdom citizenship lived out in a time of great danger.

The following excerpt is taken from the Christian Century article, “Do politics belong in church?”.  You can read the entire article here.

“My mind has been on the French village of Le Chambon recently. During World

The village of Le Chambon-sur-Lignon

War II, the village of maybe 5,000 people saved possibly as many as 5,000 people from the Nazis and the Vichy regime. As President Barack Obama noted on Yom HaShoah/Holocaust Remembrance Day in 2009, ‘Not a single Jew who came [to the area of Le Chambon-sur-Lignon] was turned away, or turned in. But it was not until decades later that the villagers spoke of what they had done—and even then, only reluctantly. “How could you call us ‘good’?” they said. “We were doing what had to be done.”

“In my current itinerating ministry, I have visited a lot of churches that are proud of their commitment to being nonpolitical because it makes them more inclusive. But a nonpolitical church’s politics supports the way things are. That

Jewish children hidden in Le Chambon

doesn’t make it an inclusive church. It makes it a church that is unwelcoming to people who want a different world. To riff off of a popular meme from the height of the Black Lives Matter movement, people of color are saying to the mainline church, ‘The American empire is literally killing us,’ and the mainline church is saying, ‘Yes, but . . . ‘

“The reason Le Chambon keeps showing up in my imagination is this: every Sunday for over a decade before France fell to the Nazis, the pastors of the village preached a message that reinforced their community’s identity and what that identity meant in practice. The message was:

  • We are Huguenots who survived persecution by the Catholic majority. That means we show up for people being persecuted.
  • We are Christians. This means engaging in nonviolent resistance to empires doing harm and protecting the people who are being harmed.

“In a sermon delivered the day after France surrendered to the Nazis, village

Le Chambon pastor, Andre Trocme

pastor André Trocmé said to his congregation, ‘The responsibility of Christians is to resist the violence that will be brought to bear on their consciences through the weapons of the spirit.’

“In Le Chambon, the church’s message shaped people’s identity and behavior.  That is not an inherently political message, but it is a message that demands people act out of a certain ethic.”  (emphasis mine)
Whenever I hear a pastor boast about his/her “nonpolitical” messages, I always want to ask a few questions, the same questions raised by Sandhya Rani Jha.
First, do the ethics of Jesus have any bearing on the way Christians ought to approach their politics?
How can any thinking pastor say no to that question?
Trocme’s congregation being taught to follow Jesus, conspiring to break the law and to protect the oppressed

 

OK then.  Secondly, if you are not teaching in ways that help your flock understand the the practical significance of Jesus’ radical, upside-down kingdom ethics for engaging the politics of this world, then aren’t you failing in your pastoral responsibilities?

The answer to the second question is a resounding yes.
The principle failure of Christian (at least evangelical) teaching on politics today is the near-complete absence of Jesus and his kingdom ethics.
For many pastors, politics is almost all they talk about, but the life and teaching of Jesus have been erased from their playbook.
But those who refuse to talk politics at all are really no different.  They have simply erased Jesus with a different brand of eraser.

What is Christian Worship? Part 3

In part one of our exploration into the meaning of New Testament worship, we did a few word studies of the Greek vocabulary translated by the English word “worship.”  We made an interesting discovery.  The New Testament writers do not like to describe the things that Christians do together in groups as “worship.”

Part two then asked the obvious follow-up question: If Christian gatherings are not described as times of worship in the New Testament, then when and where does worship happen?  We discovered that the New Testament consistently uses worship vocabulary to describe the daily life of obedient discipleship.  Christians worship God as they fulfill the Lord’s calling in their day-to-day lives, doing the things Jesus has sent them into the world to do.

But these observations raise another question.  If Christian gatherings are not “times of worship,” then what are they?  What are New Testament Christians doing when they gather together in groups, large or small?

The answer:  group meetings provide opportunities for mutual encouragement and building up the Body of Christ.

David Peterson hits the perfect note in his excellent book, Engaging with God:

“It is misleading to think of church services as occasions for worship in the sense of prayer and praise.  Paul’s teaching requires us to also recognize the central importance of the concept of edification for the meeting of God’s people…Paul uses the terminology of upbuilding or edification rather than the language worship to indicate the purpose and function of Christian gatherings.” (pages 195-96, 206; emphasis mine)

We shouldn’t miss this important point.  The language of “upbuilding” or “edification” is Paul’s favorite way of describing the different things that happen when followers of Jesus come together.  Here is a selection of New Testament texts describing the wide variety of activities typical of such group meetings.  Check them out and note what is happening in each instance:

  1. Matthew 18:15-20
  2. Acts 2:42-47; 4:24-31; 13:1-3; 20:7-12
  3. I Corinthians 11; 12; 14
  4. Galatians 3:5 (maybe)
  5. Ephesians 5:15-20
  6. Colossians 3:12-17
  7. I Thessalonians 5:16-22
  8. I Timothy 2:1-3:15
  9. Titus 1:7-2:15
  10. Hebrews 10:19-25
  11. James 5:14-18

Let me offer a few general observations:

  • As I mentioned in part one, explicit “worship” vocabulary only occurs in Acts 13.
  • Activities that we would normally associate with “worship” are certainly described; for instance:praise
    adoration
    singing
    hymns
    “spiritual songs”
    corporate prayer
    preaching
    the Lord’s Supper (but, notice, never baptism)

BUT the primary focus of these descriptions is “Body Life” (to use Ray Stedman’s terminology from the 1970s).  In other words, the goal of corporate gatherings is the health of the body of believers in all of its various dimensions

Note the lengthy discussion that Paul gives to the collective operation of spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 12 – 14.  Paul is very clear – without the full-fledged functioning of spiritual gifts, in some way, shape or form, there can be no healthy collection of God’s people.

It is impossible to escape the conclusion that the primary purpose of New Testament gatherings was NOT, first of all, to deepen one’s own personal experience of intimacy with God (even though that may well happen).  Rather, the principle objective is to further develop the overall health and well-being of others believers.

In other words, we come together in order to give ourselves away in service to each other.

Of course, that may happen when a gifted music team leads a time of praise and adoration in song.  But that is only the tip of the iceberg.
Authentically “New Testament-type” gatherings also require intentional moments where people are able to:

  •  share prayer requests
  • hear one another’s stories, both good and bad
  • confess their sins and ask for forgiveness
  • offer personal words of correction
  • teach a lesson from God’s word
  • correct a brother or sister who has gone astray
  • challenge those who have become lackadaisical
  • facilitate personal reconciliation
  • become vulnerable enough to know how to meet each other’s personal needs

Fortunately, the New Testament is not overly rigorous or unbending in requiring a specific model of organizational planning or group structure to accommodate this kind of Body Life.  As long as the leadership ensures that there is always room somewhere for these crucial, communal activities to be happening, the upbuilding and edification of the church will unfold.

And that is the main purpose for gathering together with our brothers and sisters in Christ.

Of course, several questions remain to be answered, but I will wait to answer them, as well as offer a few practical suggestions for real-world implementation, in upcoming posts.  Stay tuned!

Check Out the Work of Abby Martin

In my opinion, Abby Martin is one of the most significant independent journalists working today.

Abby Martin

I invite you to set aside some time and listen to this interview discussing media censorship, US imperialism, ongoing coup attempts in South America, and more.  Hopefully, this brief sampling will introduce a new perspective or two for those who take the time to listen.

I have become a regular follower of Ms. Martin’s work, especially the documentary program “The Empire Files” on Telesur English.  Previously, you could find her TV program “Breaking the Set” on RT.

Intelligent, educated people who want to remain life-long learners never stop reading and listening to new voices, especially voices with whom they think they disagree.  Sometime, those are the voices that become most illuminating to us.

Furthermore, I am absolutely convinced that Christian discipleship requires us to live as citizens of the world.  The international Body of Christ commands my first loyalty in this life, not my country, not my ethnicity, not my gender.  I believe this fact requires me to become reasonably well informed

Perhaps the most famous image from the Viet Nam war. A child flees her village after it was bombed with napalm.

about world  affairs.  More than that, as a citizen of the most powerful country in the world with a long history of treating other nations as its servants, I am required to speak out against American injustice and to defend those who suffer from US dominance.

The traditional conservative Christian social critique of “us against them” has never been a sound theology or a helpful way to engage the world.  For far too many, secular humanism and its adherents have been the “enemy,” opposing the things of God.  So these so-called secularists were to be shunned, criticized and displaced whenever, wherever possible.

Please don’t think that way.  And stop now if you have in the past.

The creation story in the book of Genesis makes two very important points about God’s world….and, yes, this is still God’s world, lock, stock and barrel.

First, the entire creation, including human beings, were declared to be “good.”  In fact, human beings are much more than good,  we are the best of the best,  the cherry on top of God’s creation.  God judged everything else to be “good,” but people are “very good.”

The entire universe is good, but people are fantastic in God’s eyes.

Extolling the virtues of intolerance. Her shirt says Intolerance is a Beautiful Thing. Sadly, for many, their intolerance extends beyond ideas or actions to include people.

Second, all human beings are created as “the image of God.”  We won’t go into the meaning of that designation here, but whatever the details, it means nothing less than the fact that if you want to find an approximation of God on earth, stare long and hard at the next person you see.  That’s the best God-approximation you’ll see this side of heaven.

The intrusion of sin into the creation did not change any of this.  That, too, is a discussion for another day.  But its true.

So, why in the world would anyone who loves God and His works ever imagine that it would be a fine idea to wall themselves off from the largest portion of His Very Best Creation, their thoughts, insights, artistry or alternative ways of thinking?

Oh my goodness, how incredibly knuckle-headed Christians can be.

I thank God for Abby Martin and her work.  I pray that she will come to know Jesus one day.  I have written to her on Twitter, letting her know that there  are thoughtful Christians in America.  In the meantime, she continues to teach me a tremendous amount about this broken world.

The image of God shines brightly in Ms. Martin. In certain respects, she reflects the ethics of Jesus and his kingdom more clearly than a good many Christians I know.

What is Christian Worship? Part 2

In part 1 of this series, What is Worship, we performed a few word studies covering the New Testament vocabulary translated by the English word “worship.”  If you haven’t read that piece yet, I encourage you to go back and look it over.  It is foundational to everything to come.

The basic observation made there is that the language of “worship” is very, very rarely used to describe the things Christians do when we gather together in groups, doing whatever it is Christians do when they gather in groups.  Although the one or two exceptions we found indicate that it was possible to use worship vocabulary in that way, it is painfully obvious that the New Testament writers did not like to talk that way.

Large group gatherings, where Jesus’ disciples met to sing songs, pray and study scripture together, are not described as “worship services.”  Surprising, perhaps, but true.

This conclusion raises two important questions:  First, what types of activities are described as Christian “worship” in the New Testament?  If not gatherings, then what?  Second, how do the New Testament authors describe Christian gatherings?

This post will answer only the first question.  We’ll save the rest for another day.

Some readers may have noticed that the answer was already hinted at in our previous word studies.  Christian worship occurs in and through obedient living, not in church, not (necessarily) in groups, but in day-to-day (secular) life.

 For the New Testament, worship is a lifestyle.

In saying this, I do not mean to describe a person that listens to praise music while driving to the market, punctuates every sentence with “praise

No, not this. Though it’s ok.

the Lord” and “hallelujah,” or hums the latest Christian top-20 wherever they go.  It’s not that kind of lifestyle. While those activities might be fine, it is not what the New Testament refers to when describing worship as a lifestyle (and not simply because the early Christians did not have cars or radios).

Worship, first and foremost, is a life lived in continual obedience to our heavenly Father.  We realize that God’s gift of salvation, abundant life now and in eternity, is wholly and exclusively the product of His mercy shown in Jesus Christ.  So, we offer all that we are back to Him in perpetual – day by day, moment by moment – gratitude.  That is New Testament worship.

The clearest expression of this sentiment appears in Romans 12:1-2. Paul says,

“I urge you, brothers/sisters, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God – which is your reasonable/understanding (logikē)  worship (latreia).  Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind.”

First, notice that worship is offered in view of God’s mercy.  It is an offering of thankfulness, gratitude, and appreciation every single day for all the undeserved gifts of divine love made available to us in Jesus Christ.  Doing full justice to this component of worship requires a study in the New Testament language of “thanksgiving” and the many injunctions to “always give thanks, at all times, in every circumstance.”  Perhaps, we will look at that element of Christian faith in the future.

For now, let’s focus on the ways that worship is defined as each believer’s daily obedience to God, given up because we understand (logikē) the magnitude of all that Christ has done for us.

Also notice the accumulation of cultic/temple language in Paul’s sentence:  “living sacrifice,” “holy,” “pleasing/acceptable to God,” “worship,” all liturgical vocabulary piled on top of each other, jumbled together.  In other words, a life lived in a continually responsive understanding and appreciation of divine grace is the New Testament equivalent of offering “worship” in the “holy place” of the Jerusalem temple with a “blood sacrifice”.

Whoa Nelly…

THAT, my friends, is a dramatic and shocking statement – at least it would have been shocking to a good many of Paul’s Jewish contemporaries.  What Israel used to do in the temple cult with the assistance of priests, goats, sheep and other sorts of “offerings,” Christians now do on their own by (a) understanding how much they owe to God and (b) self-consciously devoting all of life to His (c) service.

Yes…wow.

Paul begins his letter to the Romans by describing his own life in this way.  He says in Romans 1:9,

“God is my witness, whom I worship/serve (latreuein) with my whole being in preaching the gospel of His Son, how I constantly remember you in my prayers.”

In other words, Paul worshiped God by preaching the good news of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles.  Why?  Because that is what God has called him to do with his life.  In fulfilling his life’s purpose, Paul was giving worship to God.

Paul revisited this idea at the end of Romans in 15:16,

“…God gave me the grace to be a servant/priestly worshipper (leitourgon) of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles with the priestly duty (hierourgounta) of proclaiming the gospel of God so that the Gentiles might become an acceptable offering to God…”

 Paul again deliberately takes the worship vocabulary traditionally reserved for the Levitical priests offering sacrifice in the Jerusalem temple, and he uses it to describe his work as an evangelist to the Gentiles.  Obeying God’s call to be an apostle is the way Paul worshiped his Lord, every day, all the time.  That is Paul’s offering of the daily “living sacrifice” which is his “acceptable, understanding worship” as described in Romans 12.

He simply did what God called him to do.  Period.

Here are a few additional examples that you can explore on your own:

Philippians 2:17, “I am being poured out like a drink offering on the sacrifice and service/worship (leitourgein) coming from your faith…”

Philippians 2:30, “Epaphroditus almost died for the work of Christ, risking his life to make up for the help/service/worship (leitourgia) you could not give to me.”

Philippians 3:3, “We are the circumcision, we who worship/serve (latreuein) by the Spirit of God, who glory in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh…”

[In the example above, we could easily substitute the word “live” for “worship.”  In other words, true worshipers are those who have received the Holy Spirit by believing in the gospel of grace and now live in light of that gift.]

 2 Timothy 1:3, “I thank God whom I serve/worship (latreuein), as my forefathers did, with a clear conscience, as I constantly remember you in my prayers night and day.”

Paul also refers to worshiping through our finances and generosity:

Romans 15:27, “If the Gentiles have shared in the Jews’ spiritual blessings, they owe it them to share/serve/worship (leitourgein) with them in their material blessings.”

2 Corinthians 9:12, “The ministry of this service/worship (leitourgia) is not only supplying the needs of God’s people but is also overflowing in many expressions of thanks to God.”

So, don’t stop singing songs to the Lord while driving, if that is what you enjoy.  Just keep your eyes on the road and hands on the wheel, please.  But don’t ever be misled into thinking that special “churchy” activities are the principle ways to worship.  Far from it.  That way of thinking is very, very wrong.

You worship when you talk to your friends about the way Jesus is working in your life and then share the gospel with them.

You worship when you make a change of some sort in your lifestyle because you know the Lord wants you to do it.

…even when it means standing alone.

You worship when your discipleship creates difficulty or hardship, but you move forward anyway because you want to obey Jesus more than you wish for a comfortable life.

You worship when you share your stuff with the poor – especially when you don’t worry about receipts.

You worship when you make yourself “one of the least of these” and sit at the lowest end of the table, without expecting any recognition or reward, in order to serve hurting people in need.

In other words, you worship spontaneously as you surrender the shape of your life to the radical remolding of God’s kingdom revealed in the ethical teaching of Jesus Christ.

After all, that’s how Jesus worshiped his heavenly Father every moment of every day.  He came to be our model.

He still is.

A Prayer Request and More Praise for My Book, I Pledge Allegiance

Like most authors, I always appreciate receiving feedback from my readers.  I am especially grateful whenever I hear a story about how my work has stirred positive transformation and been encouraging to someone, especially when that someone is trying to follow Jesus faithfully.

Below I have copied a very kind note I recently received from a minister who has read my newest book, I Pledge Allegiance: A Believer’s Guide to Kingdom Citizenship in 21st Century America (Eerdmans, 2018).

Thank you, pastor, for taking the time to be an encouragement to me:

“At the recommendation of [a] long-time friend and former parishioner… I just finished reading….for the second time…your book, “I Pledge Allegiance”. All I can say, David, is THANK YOU!!! You’ve helped me find some renewed sense of balance in what it means to live in this country at this time as a follower of Jesus. Having just recently retired from parish ministry… I’m aware of how often I waffled, especially in my preaching. There are times when I experience guilt and wish I could begin again to deal in a better way with the influences of congregants. And then there are those times when I’m grateful that I made it through without getting kicked out. The events of this past week put me into an even deeper depression. However, your insights and reminders have helped me immensely. Again, thank you!! And, please, keep writing. David”

In response to this man’s last sentence, let me say that I am trying to continue my writing.  But I am facing a few obstacles.  I mention this because, if you are a praying person, I could use your prayers about my next (possible) writing project.

I want to write a book about both(1)  the theological problems of Christian Zionism and (2) the human suffering entangled with American evangelicalism’s blind support for the nation of Israel.  The book will be half Biblical theology and half real-life stories.

The theology sections will explain the serious errors of “Christian Zionism” (i.e. those who believe that modern Israel is the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy in need of the church’s, and America’s, wholehearted support).

The real life stories will describe graphic instances of Palestinian suffering and abuse that I have witnessed first-hand during my visits to the West Bank area (captured by the Israeli army during the 1967 war and kept under military occupation ever since).

My proposal for this book has now passed over a number of publisher’s desks.  One publisher said (I am paraphrasing), “Dave, we think this would be a good book, but your previous books haven’t been great sellers for us.  We don’t think we’d make much money from this one, either.”

Four other well-known publishing houses have all said something similar, “David, we like and agree with your proposal.  We think this would me a good book, but we can’t figure out how we would sell it.  Sorry.  Good luck.”

Needless to say, I am a bit frustrated and disappointed.  So, I would very much appreciate your prayers as I try to figure out where next to send the proposal.  I firmly believe this book needs to be written.

Otherwise, perhaps I am at the end of my writing career.  I hope not, but who knows.