Ecclesiastes 5:1-3 offers helpful insight regarding our approach to God. I realize we have a more direct access to God because of the work of Christ (Hebrews 10:19-22), in contrast to the former system of priests in Israel, but we should still approach God with reverence. He is the same God.
Therefore, as the author of Ecclesiastes reminds us, we should be thoughtful, contemplative, and reverent in our approach to God. Especially in public worship. We should place a priority on listening and considering the truths of Scripture.
This does not rule out joy or excitement or even verbal expressions of worship, but our excitement must be moderated by our remembering of God's exalted position (Isaiah 6:1-5). God has graciously condescended to us, but we must be humble in memory of the sin from which we have been saved, even as Isaiah was (Isaiah 6:6-7).
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Psalm 36: The Plans of Evil
Psalm 36:1-4 offers insight into the nature of sinful habits. These verses are speaking about the man who does not know God, but even we who know God can fall into similar patterns.
Notice the temptation in verse 1: "Transgression speaks to the ungodly within his heart."
Observe the deceitfulness of the temptation in verse 2, where it "flatters him", convincing him that his sin won't be discovered, and that it's acceptable to love sin, rather than hate it.
Look how his words begin to reflect the sinfulness of his heart in verse 3: "The words of his mouth are wickedness and deceit."
In summary, verse 4 describes the pervasiveness of temptation - even coming to this man when he is in bed at night, from which he gives in, rather than despising evil as he should.
We need to keep in mind the similar pattern described in James 1:14-15. We tend to forget the consequences (or "hook"/"trap") of a sinful choice in our eagerness to get the pleasure ("bait").
Returning to Psalm 36, David contrasts the wickedness of the man in Psalm 36:1-4 with God's righteous character toward His people in Psalm 36:5-9.
How can we avoid being like the ungodly man of Psalm 36:1-4? The answer is in Psalm 36:10-12. We ask God for His help (Psalm 36:10-11), and we remember the consequences of sin (Psalm 36:12), and, by implication, we actively stop doing whatever the sinful activity is. This requires replacement of the wrong with something good. Our minds and our habits are wired to work on this principle of replacement (Ephesians 4:22-24).
Notice the temptation in verse 1: "Transgression speaks to the ungodly within his heart."
Observe the deceitfulness of the temptation in verse 2, where it "flatters him", convincing him that his sin won't be discovered, and that it's acceptable to love sin, rather than hate it.
Look how his words begin to reflect the sinfulness of his heart in verse 3: "The words of his mouth are wickedness and deceit."
In summary, verse 4 describes the pervasiveness of temptation - even coming to this man when he is in bed at night, from which he gives in, rather than despising evil as he should.
We need to keep in mind the similar pattern described in James 1:14-15. We tend to forget the consequences (or "hook"/"trap") of a sinful choice in our eagerness to get the pleasure ("bait").
Returning to Psalm 36, David contrasts the wickedness of the man in Psalm 36:1-4 with God's righteous character toward His people in Psalm 36:5-9.
How can we avoid being like the ungodly man of Psalm 36:1-4? The answer is in Psalm 36:10-12. We ask God for His help (Psalm 36:10-11), and we remember the consequences of sin (Psalm 36:12), and, by implication, we actively stop doing whatever the sinful activity is. This requires replacement of the wrong with something good. Our minds and our habits are wired to work on this principle of replacement (Ephesians 4:22-24).
Friday, November 19, 2010
Repeating Earlier Mistakes
When reading through Genesis, it's intriguing to note that Isaac pretended his wife was his sister (Genesis 26:6-11), like his father Abraham had done (Genesis 20:2-3) - with the exact same pagan king (or at least a ruler of the same name/title from the same area), Abimelech. Rather than trusting God for protection, Abraham and Isaac showed fear before the pagan king, and indirectly, his false gods. This gave God a bad name in the sigh of the pagan king (s).
Similarly, Jacob followed the example of his grandfather Abraham (Genesis 16:1-3) by taking his female servant as a concubine, on multiple occasions (Genesis 30:1-5; 9-13). Isaac experienced similar familial strife as a result. Even as Hagar and Sarah despised each other (Genesis 16:4-6), and the descendants of Isaac and Ishmael have fought for centuries, so too Rachel and Leah sparred with each other for their husband's affection (Genesis 30:14-18), and their sons hated one another (Genesis 37:2-4), perhaps contributing to later occasions of war or conflict between the various tribes (e.g. Judges 8:1-3).
What can we learn from this? At a minimum, we learn that children often pattern themselves after their parents and grandparents. Also, our actions can have long-lasting consequences. Our actions can show God badly to the unsaved around us. Finally, failing to be content with God's provision of children, a wife, or anything else can lead to a lot of conflict.
I've had to consider this more carefully since the birth of our son, Braeden, who is not quite five months old. He watches me constantly. Am I being a good example for him? Or will he end up repeating my mistakes and sinful choices, just like Isaac and Jacob did in following their parents' examples?
Similarly, Jacob followed the example of his grandfather Abraham (Genesis 16:1-3) by taking his female servant as a concubine, on multiple occasions (Genesis 30:1-5; 9-13). Isaac experienced similar familial strife as a result. Even as Hagar and Sarah despised each other (Genesis 16:4-6), and the descendants of Isaac and Ishmael have fought for centuries, so too Rachel and Leah sparred with each other for their husband's affection (Genesis 30:14-18), and their sons hated one another (Genesis 37:2-4), perhaps contributing to later occasions of war or conflict between the various tribes (e.g. Judges 8:1-3).
What can we learn from this? At a minimum, we learn that children often pattern themselves after their parents and grandparents. Also, our actions can have long-lasting consequences. Our actions can show God badly to the unsaved around us. Finally, failing to be content with God's provision of children, a wife, or anything else can lead to a lot of conflict.
I've had to consider this more carefully since the birth of our son, Braeden, who is not quite five months old. He watches me constantly. Am I being a good example for him? Or will he end up repeating my mistakes and sinful choices, just like Isaac and Jacob did in following their parents' examples?
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Entertainment Choices
Like any decision, our entertainment choices should be based on Biblical principles. We examine what the Bible says, then we ask the right questions, then we make a choice.
Why is this important? Culture is inherently derived from religious systems in some way. So our response to and participation in culture has to be done with an awareness of this fact. It's not just a matter of "I like this" or "This is fun", but we are to be pleasing to God in all that we do (1 Corinthians 10:31).
Let's take the scenario of deciding whether or not to go see a given movie, or even rent that movie.
Biblical Principles
This list is by no means exhaustive, but a few principles to consider would include:
These questions are derived from the principles listed above. You may come up with better questions, but these are a starting point.
Why is this important? Culture is inherently derived from religious systems in some way. So our response to and participation in culture has to be done with an awareness of this fact. It's not just a matter of "I like this" or "This is fun", but we are to be pleasing to God in all that we do (1 Corinthians 10:31).
Let's take the scenario of deciding whether or not to go see a given movie, or even rent that movie.
Biblical Principles
This list is by no means exhaustive, but a few principles to consider would include:
- Ephesians 6:1ff - Children should obey their parents
- Phil 4:8 - The content of what we choose to watch, listen to, and surround ourselves with should be right. Remember we're talking about voluntary choices for entertainment, not leaving the world entirely or failing to witness, which we ought not do (per 1 Corinthians 5:9-13). Also, objectionable elements are present in the Bible, so this principle has more to do with how objectionable elements are presented vs. whether they are present. A helpful starting place is here.
- Romans 14:13, 23 - As a Christian, I should not cause another Christian to sin or to violate his conscience, whether correctly informed or not. My Christian brother's sanctification is more important than my enjoyment of a legitimate activity.
These questions are derived from the principles listed above. You may come up with better questions, but these are a starting point.
- What guidelines have my authorities established?
In the case of Ephesians 6:1, children (who live at home and are dependents) must obey parental guidelines (unless the guideline is something like "Don't read your Bible" or "Don't go to church ever", which God has explicitly commanded). - Is this activity right? This question is derived from Philippians 4:8 and similar passages.
- Will this activity cause me to violate my convictions (Romans 14:23)?
We should realize that sometimes our convictions are derived from habit rather than clear biblical principles. Still, we should consider carefully, rather than quickly throwing out the red flags our consciences raise for us. - Will it cause a fellow Christian to sin if I participate in this activity (Romans 14:13)? Or, will my actions bring dishonor to Christ, since I profess to be His follower?
Part of this question deals with the fact that things which bother us as conservative Christians may not bother Christians from a different background, or our typical lost coworker, for example. Behavior and belief are connected, but sometimes we tend to emphasize behavior above belief, and become known for "Christians don't do ___" rather than "Christians believe ___." There are things we shouldn't do, but if we don't also have a clear verbal witness of our biblical basis for how we live, people will miss what's most important: salvation through Christ. They cannot live right until they have experienced that new life. Also, we have to get to know fellow Christians in order to recognize what will or will not create a temptation for them to sin. - Am I being a wise steward of resources by participating in this activity?
Entertainment is big business and much time or money can be wasted if we're not careful. Also, we should not make entertainment a higher priority than church or other Christian duties.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Should We Be Renaissance Men?
See two helpful posts by Carl Trueman here and here. A key point of the first is that we need to be careful about assuming we have to have a PhD in some field in order to have a correct or accurate assessment of it.
From the second post, I was motivated to learn my Bible better. I don't need to be familiar with all aspects of contemporary culture. However, I should be able to give some answer on all the key topics in the Bible, even if it is not an exhaustive answer. In other words, I need to know at least a little about everything, rather than everything about just one thing.
Trueman says again:
One does not necessarily have to be a Milanese fashion designer to see that someone in the street is badly dressed, or even completely naked.The tendency towards extreme specialization can occur even in theology because of the need to find something new to say about the Bible in order to get your degree. Having said that, I admire those who have put in the time and effort and money to acquire PhDs, and for many I'm sure they're better equipped by having done so.
From the second post, I was motivated to learn my Bible better. I don't need to be familiar with all aspects of contemporary culture. However, I should be able to give some answer on all the key topics in the Bible, even if it is not an exhaustive answer. In other words, I need to know at least a little about everything, rather than everything about just one thing.
Trueman says again:
In my experience, questions that touch on, say, how to understand the Bible relative to guidance, suffering etc. are always more common than questions on Scorsese. That narrows the field of appropriate generalism considerably; and, indeed, obtaining a simple catechism (the Westminster Shorter Catechism, the Heidelberg, either of Luther's) will give you a good guide to the kind of things of which I am thinking. Considered in these terms, the possibility of being a generalist does not seem quite so far-fetched.On a related note, the second set of ideas is helpful in general conversation. I don't need to know everything about cars in order to talk to someone, if cars are his thing, but I do need some basic information in order to ask the right questions. Obviously, when dealing with the Bible we're considering more critical subjects, so we should strive to know more about the key ideas. Especially if we're serving in some ministerial or leadership role, because people will expect us to know those answers.
Friday, November 12, 2010
Can Rap Be Christianized?
A thoughtful analysis of the question may be found here. I think Dr. Murray's strongest point is the concept that if rap is being used as a preaching medium, it perhaps violates Paul's methodology expressed in 1 Corinthians:
The Church is always at risk of slipping slowly and imperceptibly away from the "foolishness of preaching" to the seemingly reasonable and persuasive "wisdom of this world." In ancient culture, worldly wisdom said to Gospel preachers, "Use philosophy!" or "Use miracles!" but Paul stuck by the seemingly foolish method of a single, unaccompanied human voice authoritatively declaring the Truth. He did not use the common Greek Socratic method or the accepted Jewish Rabbinic model. He used God's method and model of preaching - culturally unacceptable then as now.
Through the years, the Church has been continually tempted to use various cultural fads and trends to reach the lost - Christian punk rock, Christian glam rock, Christian death metal - usually with little lasting fruit. The temptations take different forms in different cultures, but God has designed and designated preaching to be the universal means of gathering in His elect, no matter what culture or age we live in.
However, I do think we need to distinguish between several issues at stake, and I would like to emphasize a few different points other than the association question, which were covered well in his article. Plus, I think our conclusions about the appropriateness of rap has implications for other musical forms (techno, rock, country, etc).
To begin, 1 Corinthians 1:18-24 is talking about preaching as a medium for reaching the unbelieving. Should music be used for evangelism? Paul appears to say no. Verbal proclamation of the gospel is the method God has chosen. We need to use God's chosen method in our evangelism, even though it may seem wiser to do something else. We can easily justify doing something besides preaching/verbally witnessing in evangelism because our alternate method is familiar/easier (comfort zone), effective (pragmatics), or more widespread ('everyone' does it). But even if we are sincerely trying to accomplish something good, sincerity is not the final test; conformity to biblical principle is. Our music does say something about us, but it is not to be the method of our evangelism.
What about in our worship services? We need to start with biblical principles, such as these, and then consider carefully our own context. Biblically accurate lyrics, music which fits those words and is appropriate to the church setting, and a structure that is ideally accessible for the normal person in our congregations to sing are a good starting point.
In contrast, taking words that reflect great gospel truths, such as the satisfaction of God's wrath, or our purpose in life, and then pairing those words with techno, rap, or similar styles that tend to distract from/drown out the words seems to violate several of these principles. This is in addition to the tendency of such forms drawing more attention to the performer or the emotional high than to the message. To clarify, I'm not saying that reverting to lyrics tied to classical or revival music is inherently better. But we need to be principle-driven in what we sing as a congregation, and evaluate what we sing by at least these three principles.
To begin, 1 Corinthians 1:18-24 is talking about preaching as a medium for reaching the unbelieving. Should music be used for evangelism? Paul appears to say no. Verbal proclamation of the gospel is the method God has chosen. We need to use God's chosen method in our evangelism, even though it may seem wiser to do something else. We can easily justify doing something besides preaching/verbally witnessing in evangelism because our alternate method is familiar/easier (comfort zone), effective (pragmatics), or more widespread ('everyone' does it). But even if we are sincerely trying to accomplish something good, sincerity is not the final test; conformity to biblical principle is. Our music does say something about us, but it is not to be the method of our evangelism.
In contrast, taking words that reflect great gospel truths, such as the satisfaction of God's wrath, or our purpose in life, and then pairing those words with techno, rap, or similar styles that tend to distract from/drown out the words seems to violate several of these principles. This is in addition to the tendency of such forms drawing more attention to the performer or the emotional high than to the message. To clarify, I'm not saying that reverting to lyrics tied to classical or revival music is inherently better. But we need to be principle-driven in what we sing as a congregation, and evaluate what we sing by at least these three principles.
I have to admit, I'm still thinking through these issues. For example, there may be some room for differences between "what we use in worship" vs. "what we listen to at home". There's a time and a place for Lord of the Rings soundtracks, at least for me, but Sunday morning during church isn't one of them. There's a time and a place for motivational music, such as at a soccer game. Still, it's hard for me to see how several popular musical forms (rap, techno, etc) fit with Hebrews 12:28-29, in connection with John 4:23-24. We cannot forget that our God demands reverence just because our culture, Christian and otherwise, has exalted personal emotional fulfillment over and above quiet contemplation. Also, life in our sin-scarred world is characterized by joyous sadness, which such music often does not reflect.
So we've considered music in evangelism, and music in congregational worship. What about at home? Is there a place for rap, techno, and similar forms in the category of personal motivation to holiness outside of congregational worship?
Before answering, we should perhaps ask ourselves how the early church was able to get by without all the props we seem to find essential to our sanctification. What did they have, beyond the Bible itself? (This is not a secret rant against seminary education or Bible dictionaries). My point is, the method for our daily growth in being like Christ is not found in allegedly Christian music, books, or apparel. The method for our sanctification is daily and consistent obedience to the principles laid out in the Bible; for example, 1 Thessalonians 4:3. Other things may encourage, to the extent they remind us of biblical truth, but they cannot transform.
The short answer is that we don't need to listen to Christian music in order to live a Christian life; admittedly, listening to secular music probably won't help us, either. We should perhaps consider as well whether a form is addictive (1 Corinthians 6:12), especially before jumping to the "But I like it" reason for using it. Can you be edified by rap? Perhaps. But at a minimum, make sure you're not trying to make your music take the place of studying the Bible itself or time in prayer before God. And make sure it's not controlling your life; this is something you probably need someone else to evaluate, because we are often blind to our own faults.
To conclude, can rap be Christianized? For evangelism, no, because Paul said we should use preaching instead. For congregational worship, no, because it doesn't fit with certain biblical principles. For personal use, I'm not sure, but at a minimum, I can say it is not needed, as well as potentially addictive for some people. I don't plan to use rap in my church someday, as preaching or congregationally in worship, and I question its value for personal edification.
Before answering, we should perhaps ask ourselves how the early church was able to get by without all the props we seem to find essential to our sanctification. What did they have, beyond the Bible itself? (This is not a secret rant against seminary education or Bible dictionaries). My point is, the method for our daily growth in being like Christ is not found in allegedly Christian music, books, or apparel. The method for our sanctification is daily and consistent obedience to the principles laid out in the Bible; for example, 1 Thessalonians 4:3. Other things may encourage, to the extent they remind us of biblical truth, but they cannot transform.
The short answer is that we don't need to listen to Christian music in order to live a Christian life; admittedly, listening to secular music probably won't help us, either. We should perhaps consider as well whether a form is addictive (1 Corinthians 6:12), especially before jumping to the "But I like it" reason for using it. Can you be edified by rap? Perhaps. But at a minimum, make sure you're not trying to make your music take the place of studying the Bible itself or time in prayer before God. And make sure it's not controlling your life; this is something you probably need someone else to evaluate, because we are often blind to our own faults.
To conclude, can rap be Christianized? For evangelism, no, because Paul said we should use preaching instead. For congregational worship, no, because it doesn't fit with certain biblical principles. For personal use, I'm not sure, but at a minimum, I can say it is not needed, as well as potentially addictive for some people. I don't plan to use rap in my church someday, as preaching or congregationally in worship, and I question its value for personal edification.
HT: Tim Challies
Are You A Fundamentalist?
If so, make sure that the reason you use the label is doctrinal rather than merely cultural.
Disclaimer: I'm not on quite the same page regarding question #4. Still, the point that some professing Fundamentalists "care less about what you believe and more about what you do and don’t do" is right on. What we do or don't do is important, but if you don't know God, you can't even begin to do right in His sight. So right doctrine has to be the starting point; sometimes right action takes a lot longer (cf. the church at Corinth).
Disclaimer: I'm not on quite the same page regarding question #4. Still, the point that some professing Fundamentalists "care less about what you believe and more about what you do and don’t do" is right on. What we do or don't do is important, but if you don't know God, you can't even begin to do right in His sight. So right doctrine has to be the starting point; sometimes right action takes a lot longer (cf. the church at Corinth).
Should We Be 'Radical'?
An excellent review of the popular new book here. Confession: I have not read the book in its entirety, but from what I have read, I think Gary's criticism and praise are both well-founded.
HT: Tim Challies
HT: Tim Challies
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Is Interest Wrong?
This question arose while reading Proverbs 28:8. So I checked a few of my resources, and I like what Kidner says in the TOTC volume on Proverbs about this verse.
On a related note, credit card companies are completely justified when they exact interest from people for making unwise financial choices. On the other hand, perhaps they should make it harder to obtain credit in the first place.
Usury or (rsv) interest: the Mosaic law shows that the legitimacy of it depends on its context: what was quite proper in terms of economics (Deut. 23:20) was pronounced improper in terms of family care (Deut. 23:19)—as if a doctor should charge for treating his own children.Obviously interest is a key part of society today, but there are implications/applications of this passage in terms of not taking advantage of family members (and by extension, church members) in need. This would of course need to be filtered through the context of 2 Thessalonians 3:6-10, to avoid encouraging laziness or irresponsibility.
On a related note, credit card companies are completely justified when they exact interest from people for making unwise financial choices. On the other hand, perhaps they should make it harder to obtain credit in the first place.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
The Poor Always With You
Although we should be careful to fulfill our individual biblical responsibilities to demonstrate compassion to those in need, I think Matthew 26:11 is also a key verse to keep in mind. Obviously the main point in context is that Christ's ministry was almost over and His death was imminent, so the disciples should make the most of their time with Him. Still, the fact is that poverty will be a reality as long as men are sinners and until Christ returns to reign as righteous King.
A Famine for Hearing God's Word
Amos 8:11-12 foretells a day when there would be a famine of hearing the word of the LORD. It seems that the gap between the Old and New Testaments is what this passage anticipates. No prophets spoke from the end of the Old Testament until the coming of John the Baptist and then Christ Himself.
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Good Advice for Fathers and Children
For fathers: Proverbs 19:18
For children: Proverbs 20:11
If you as a parent do not discipline your child, you are setting him on a course that will typically result in his physical death.
If you as a child want to gain respect, you must demonstrate wisdom by right action.
For children: Proverbs 20:11
If you as a parent do not discipline your child, you are setting him on a course that will typically result in his physical death.
If you as a child want to gain respect, you must demonstrate wisdom by right action.
The Fringes of God's Ways
After a description of various ways that God demonstrates His power in nature, Job concludes this segment of his discourse with Job 26:14. If these things are the "fringes of God's ways," how much more awesome will the full manifestation of His power be at the end of days?
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Should We Have Worship Leaders (revised)?
Update (11/2/2010): After realizing today that my blog comments were enabled but I wasn't being notified about them, I came across Bob Kauflin himself commenting on my post about Should We Have Worship Leaders? I was surprised, since I've only told a few people I was doing a blog; I'm guessing some Google tools are behind him finding this post. Regardless, I am grateful for him taking the time to interact with my thoughts, such as they are, and his kind tone in doing so.
Anyway, I went back and re-read Chapter 6 in Worship Matters several times. I have revised some things I said previously and have rewritten my conclusion, because I don't feel that I did his presentation justice. In addition, I realized some of my criticism has more to do with what I observe about how worship is practiced in contemporary American churches, rather than what Bob was saying in his book, and I didn't make that clear enough. I look forward to finishing the book soon, once things slow down a bit at work and home.
Revision of original: In his book Worship Matters, Bob Kauflin argues that we should have worship leaders. I've been reading his book off and on during the past month or so. The first few chapters were thought-provoking and helpful in terms of what worship is and our attitude as we approach worship--specifically on Sundays, since giving God glory (worship) takes place outside of the church assembled. But as he turns to the concept of worship leaders, I still have some reservations about the role of a worship leader.
From chapter 6, "What Does a Worship Leader Do?":
In contrast, many contemporary American churches are led in worship by a man, woman, or group whose primary qualification seems to be musical ability, especially vocally or with the guitar. If worship is a central aspect of the service, shouldn't the most essential qualifications be theological training and spiritual maturity? When they aren't, the result seems to be a prioritization of performance and entertainment, rather than a focus on God and how to rightly approach Him, with prayer and reverence and awe (John 4:24; Hebrews 12:28-29). Worship in these cases typically follows what's been happening for a while or else what people like.
I'm glad that Worship Matters urges those who lead in worship to think more biblically about the issues involved. In the absence of biblical precedent for much of what the church today does in worship, we need to step back and consider whether we do what we do out of habit, convenience, or preference, or because we are convinced that it is the best way to glorify God.
Anyway, I went back and re-read Chapter 6 in Worship Matters several times. I have revised some things I said previously and have rewritten my conclusion, because I don't feel that I did his presentation justice. In addition, I realized some of my criticism has more to do with what I observe about how worship is practiced in contemporary American churches, rather than what Bob was saying in his book, and I didn't make that clear enough. I look forward to finishing the book soon, once things slow down a bit at work and home.
Revision of original: In his book Worship Matters, Bob Kauflin argues that we should have worship leaders. I've been reading his book off and on during the past month or so. The first few chapters were thought-provoking and helpful in terms of what worship is and our attitude as we approach worship--specifically on Sundays, since giving God glory (worship) takes place outside of the church assembled. But as he turns to the concept of worship leaders, I still have some reservations about the role of a worship leader.
From chapter 6, "What Does a Worship Leader Do?":
We can glean some important principles from Old Testament Levites....But we can't transfer everything they did then to what we do now.A few paragraphs later:
Second, the most important worship leader is Jesus. He reveals God to us and through his perfect sacrifice provided the only way into the Father's presence (1 Timothy 2:5; Hebrews 10:19-22).
We can't do what only Jesus does.And a little further on:
Humanly speaking, the pastor is the worship leader. He is the one responsible before God for the corporate worship of the church (Hebrews 13:17; 1 Thessalonians 5:12-13).In light of these reasons, which are obviously not exhaustive, is there a biblically based role for a non-pastoral worship leader? Kauflin states that "teaching and leading roles are pastoral in nature"; therefore, in Sovereign Grace churches, worship leaders are men. At the end of the chapter, he outlines his definition of a worship leader, which is very good.
In contrast, many contemporary American churches are led in worship by a man, woman, or group whose primary qualification seems to be musical ability, especially vocally or with the guitar. If worship is a central aspect of the service, shouldn't the most essential qualifications be theological training and spiritual maturity? When they aren't, the result seems to be a prioritization of performance and entertainment, rather than a focus on God and how to rightly approach Him, with prayer and reverence and awe (John 4:24; Hebrews 12:28-29). Worship in these cases typically follows what's been happening for a while or else what people like.
I'm glad that Worship Matters urges those who lead in worship to think more biblically about the issues involved. In the absence of biblical precedent for much of what the church today does in worship, we need to step back and consider whether we do what we do out of habit, convenience, or preference, or because we are convinced that it is the best way to glorify God.
Monday, November 1, 2010
Our Place in God's Plan
Much of the conflict and wasted effort throughout church history has resulted from failing to understand the difference between God's overarching plan for history and our place in that plan.
Definition
What is God's plan? There are various ways of putting it, but a simple definition could be: To glorify Himself by setting apart a people for Himself and conquering His enemies to reign finally and eternally over all His creation.
Categories
What was Israel's place in God's plan? God set apart Israel as a family (of Jacob), then a theocracy (Judges 2:16 - mediated through the judges), then as a theocratic kingdom (2 Samuel 7:26 - mediated through Saul and later David's family line). Israel's primary obligation was to follow the Law given to Moses, and to serve as the one ethnicity through whom God's influence in the world would be mediated. Israel failed, both in following the Law and in serving as a light to the Gentiles.
What is the church's place in God's plan today? God set apart the church from the day of Pentecost as a real yet intangible grouping of those called out by regeneration and faith in the Gospel (2 Thessalonians 2:13-17), from among every nation (Revelation 5:9), composed into local assemblies (Romans 1:7; 2 Corinthians 1:2, etc) . Her mission is to fulfill the Great Commission of Matthew 28:18-20, by making disciples who make disciples, instructing them in the teachings of God, then establishing more local churches which follow the corporate commands given in the New Testament (e.g. Hebrews 10:24-25).
What is the individual Christian's place in God's plan today? Essentially, after believing in the gospel (Romans 10:8-10), his place is to obey the commands of God that were given generally to humanity (e.g. Genesis 1:28-30) or to New Testament believers individually (e.g. 1 Thessalonians 4:3-7).
There are other categories which precede the above (Adam; the patriarchs) or come after (the Millennial Kingdom, the eternal state), but I want to focus on the three highlighted above.
Issues
The church is not an extension of or a replacement to the nation of Israel. Confusing the two usually results in misapplying promises or assuming things that are similar are identical.
For example, Israel received promises of physical health and material wealth. If applied to the church, these promises can easily be twisted into a "health and wealth" gospel. Or, circumcision has some similarities to baptism, but assuming they are the same thing results in the error of infant baptism, despite no Scriptural evidence for the practice.
God has given some responsibilities to the local church as a gathered assembly; others were given to individual members in the local church, as participants in humanity as a whole. Confusing the two results in the church becoming distracted from her primary mandate of establishing and grounding churches.
For example, the local church is instructed to observe the Lord's Supper as a memorial to his atoning death (1 Corinthians 11:23-26). An individual church member cannot legitimately observe that ordinance apart from the assembly. Other commands of a similar nature include the "one another" passages, focused primarily on ministry in the church gathered (Hebrews 10:24-25). On the other hand, the individual church member is commanded to submit to government (Romans 13:1-7). Though local churches should also be law-abiding, that command is not intended primarily for the church as a whole but individuals in the church.
Summary
Regarding Israel and the church, we must avoid the error of supersessionism. The church is not a continuation of Israel nor a replacement for Israel.
Regarding the local church and the individual member of the church, we must avoid confusing corporate and individual responsibilities. There are "two kingdoms"1; though they overlap, in that the individual Christian participates in both, they are not identical. We must be careful to obey God's commands both for the church as a whole and for individual members in day to day life.
1 For more information, please consult Dr. Mark Snoeberger's excellent session notes from the 2010 Mid-America
Conference on Preaching, which was themed Church, Kingdom, Mission. His notes may be found here.
Definition
What is God's plan? There are various ways of putting it, but a simple definition could be: To glorify Himself by setting apart a people for Himself and conquering His enemies to reign finally and eternally over all His creation.
Categories
What was Israel's place in God's plan? God set apart Israel as a family (of Jacob), then a theocracy (Judges 2:16 - mediated through the judges), then as a theocratic kingdom (2 Samuel 7:26 - mediated through Saul and later David's family line). Israel's primary obligation was to follow the Law given to Moses, and to serve as the one ethnicity through whom God's influence in the world would be mediated. Israel failed, both in following the Law and in serving as a light to the Gentiles.
What is the church's place in God's plan today? God set apart the church from the day of Pentecost as a real yet intangible grouping of those called out by regeneration and faith in the Gospel (2 Thessalonians 2:13-17), from among every nation (Revelation 5:9), composed into local assemblies (Romans 1:7; 2 Corinthians 1:2, etc) . Her mission is to fulfill the Great Commission of Matthew 28:18-20, by making disciples who make disciples, instructing them in the teachings of God, then establishing more local churches which follow the corporate commands given in the New Testament (e.g. Hebrews 10:24-25).
What is the individual Christian's place in God's plan today? Essentially, after believing in the gospel (Romans 10:8-10), his place is to obey the commands of God that were given generally to humanity (e.g. Genesis 1:28-30) or to New Testament believers individually (e.g. 1 Thessalonians 4:3-7).
There are other categories which precede the above (Adam; the patriarchs) or come after (the Millennial Kingdom, the eternal state), but I want to focus on the three highlighted above.
Issues
The church is not an extension of or a replacement to the nation of Israel. Confusing the two usually results in misapplying promises or assuming things that are similar are identical.
For example, Israel received promises of physical health and material wealth. If applied to the church, these promises can easily be twisted into a "health and wealth" gospel. Or, circumcision has some similarities to baptism, but assuming they are the same thing results in the error of infant baptism, despite no Scriptural evidence for the practice.
God has given some responsibilities to the local church as a gathered assembly; others were given to individual members in the local church, as participants in humanity as a whole. Confusing the two results in the church becoming distracted from her primary mandate of establishing and grounding churches.
For example, the local church is instructed to observe the Lord's Supper as a memorial to his atoning death (1 Corinthians 11:23-26). An individual church member cannot legitimately observe that ordinance apart from the assembly. Other commands of a similar nature include the "one another" passages, focused primarily on ministry in the church gathered (Hebrews 10:24-25). On the other hand, the individual church member is commanded to submit to government (Romans 13:1-7). Though local churches should also be law-abiding, that command is not intended primarily for the church as a whole but individuals in the church.
Summary
Regarding Israel and the church, we must avoid the error of supersessionism. The church is not a continuation of Israel nor a replacement for Israel.
Regarding the local church and the individual member of the church, we must avoid confusing corporate and individual responsibilities. There are "two kingdoms"1; though they overlap, in that the individual Christian participates in both, they are not identical. We must be careful to obey God's commands both for the church as a whole and for individual members in day to day life.
1 For more information, please consult Dr. Mark Snoeberger's excellent session notes from the 2010 Mid-America
Conference on Preaching, which was themed Church, Kingdom, Mission. His notes may be found here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)