The Bible Nerd

Anarchy sounds like a great idea at first.  If if feels good, just do it. We are all adults, aren’t we? God is the only one who can tell me what to do. That is my own personal, private business. Who are you to tell me what to do? Worry about yourself, buddy. All these thoughts and mindsets have been replaying themselves in my head for what seems like my whole life. I can honestly say that I am often a rebel without a clue. I usually love sitting in the back of a classroom. (being married, my wife loves the front, so we sit in the middle so neither of us can be happy…) At 13 years old, both my mother and teachers were ready to launch me into space to do some experiments for NASA. So, no, I have not always appreciated having accountability and leaders at church.

Our individualistic, Western oriented church has demanded our independence, especially since the 60’s and 70’s movements.  Reading through much of the “why the church must change or die” literature, I feel often like I am at a Occupy Seattle rally. I am not sure who the “man” is, but I am not going to swallow that pill and fall trap to the “system”. Stop trying to get me to join your church’s small groups, where I am sure that someone will ask me how my spiritual life is going and want me to set and stick to any kind of goal for my growth in Jesus. However, once again, that pesky New Testament will be hard to deal with carrying around this kind of attitude.

God has placed leadership in the church to provide accountability as well as make decisions that will determine the vision and programs of the body. We can’t even make it past Acts 6 without seeing the early church’s leadership engaging in both functions (there are many more things that church leaders do, but these are the ones I believe we struggle with). In Acts 5, God uses Peter to hold Ananias and Sapphira accountable.  Thankfully, most cases of church discipline are NOT this extreme.  In the very next chapter, the church leadership has to settle a dispute between the Hebrews and Hellenists over the widow list. The resulting decision created a whole new role in the church that today we call deacons (servants). If either side was displeased with the decision that the apostles made, Acts doesn’t mention it but it is hard to believe at least one person wasn’t still grouchy.

1 and 2 Corinthians are full of examples on how Paul expected church leadership to deal with problems that he had heard reported on.  From division and disunity (chapters 1 -4), sexual immorality and lawsuits (chapter 5 – 6), divorce (chapter 7), and all the way to issues with the resurrection (chapter 15), Paul was disturbed that church leaders in Corinth were either not addressing the issues, or were actually causing them! Sometimes today, we are so worried about not being “judgmental”, that our tolerance is then taken as moral indifference or relativism.  Of course, all believers are ultimately accountable to God, then to each fellow believer (Matthew 18:15-17), but He places responsibility on elders in the church to deal with members who refuse to repent.

This is one of the reasons that God places such high expectations and qualifications on church leaders as we saw in Titus 1:5-9 and 1 Timothy 3:1-13.  We can’t expect them to be perfect and without their own sin that needs accountability, but Jesus sure expects that they aren’t new believers or people with habitual sin in their lifestyles.  As we stated before also, it is a group leadership, yet they have to make very important decisions at times. In Acts 15, the early church leaders met together in a council to determine the requirements on Gentiles when they became Christians.  This decision easily was one of the most important ones they made, yet I don’t see them having all church members vote on this.  The majority ruling doesn’t always lead to godliness (once again, thank you America for the example).

Thankfully, in addition to accountability and decision making, God has given the church leaders for things we usually do like: pastoral care and teaching to name two. I must stress though that just like with accountability, it is not solely the leaders’ role.  Just as we hold each other accountable as fellow believers, God uses gifts of pastoral care and teaching through the whole body. In our next post, we will start to discuss the role of teaching in the church. In order to do that however, we will have to dive into the fun world of what should our church meetings (often called the worship service) look like.  That should be fun. Until then, let us search our own hearts for attitudes of individualism, pride, or rebelliousness that have no place in Christ. I need to be reminded that my unwillingness to trust leaders as well as not being open to correction is often most detrimental to me.  And I care about me after all.

Let’s face the truth.  Leaders and bosses can be jerks sometimes.  If you go to church long enough, I will almost guarantee that you will have a story about when “my pastor/elder/deacon/minister/small group leader hurt me when he/she said or did…..(fill in the blank with discouraging comments, poor decision, unjust resolution… you get the picture). Jesus talks to the disciples several times about being a servant, and not lording authority over people like the non Christians.  So, why don’t we just get rid of church leaders and just make it a democracy?  It worked for America right? (snicker, snicker)

While Jesus was the suffering servant who modeled humility and love, the New Testament is once again clear on the fact that there should be appointed leaders in every church.  In Titus 1:5, Paul’s command to Titus says, “This is why I left you in Crete, so that you might put what remained into order, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you.”  Then Paul goes on to list what the qualifications for an elder are (Acts 14:23 has Paul and Barnabas doing the same thing for Galatia).  Before you think that was just localized to Crete, he tells Timothy about church leadership for Ephesus in 1 Timothy 3:1. “The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task.”  Overseer is often left as “bishop”, and Paul also talks about requirements for deacons in this chapter.

Why in the world would Paul spend so much time in these letters for two different churches talking about what leaders should be like if he didn’t want leaders??? It wasn’t just Paul that spoke of leaders, as Hebrews 13:7, 1 Peter 5:1, and James 5:14 all talk about leaders in individual churches.  I would contend that our problem with church leadership isn’t that we have them, it is that our expectations of them are wrong and that too often too much power ends up in one man’s hands.  Leaders are human, which basically tells us that they are sinners who need the forgiveness of Christ just as much as the members.  While leaders are held to different standards in Scripture, we need to make sure that leaders are there to point us to Jesus, not to replace Him.

The issue which absolutely must be dealt with is how many churches have veered away from group leadership.  No where do New Testament writers allow for one person to be at the “top” of a hierarchical church leadership structure making all the decisions.  There is only one head of the church, and that is Jesus.  Leadership is always discussed in the plural; elderS, deaconS, overseerS.  As the early church grew, it took on the structure of the Roman Empire and other man made organizations having one leader who had the ultimate authority.  Instead of provincial governors, the church appointed bishops (overseers) over an area of churches.  The passages about bishops simply don’t support its use in this way.  Elders and deacons were replaced eventually by a priest over each church.  A priest??? are you kidding me?  How clear is 1 Peter 2:9 on the priesthood of the believers? It only got worse, with more power concentrated in invented roles like cardinals and popes.

The Protestant Reformation addressed the abuse of power and misuse of the title priest.  I can understand why they picked the use of the term pastor, with Jesus Himself discussing His role as the Great Shepherd.  The problem often is that the pastor simply replaced the priest as being one man making all the key decisions for a church.  What I don’t understand is why the reformers didn’t go back to using the terms elders and deacons alone?  There is only one passage in the whole New Testament that uses the term pastor (Ephes. 4:11) and gives no definition of what that role really is.  I can understand wanting to not use bishop due to how it was misused.  The question I am often asked is, “If we don’t use the term pastor, wouldn’t there still need to be one “head elder” of each church?”

I suppose if we agree with the sentiment behind the question, we could even still use the term “pastor” for the head elder.  I don’t have a problem with that.  My question back would be why do we need one head elder? Here is where my experience in ministry kicks in.  What I have seen is that without one person who serves as a “head” of a group/organization/ministry, there are often problems.  Meetings meander on with no clear guidance or mediation, people often keep deferring to each other when no one wants to make a decision, or the group comes to a standstill when there is no clear majority on an issue.  I know there are answers you could give to solving these issues without a leader, but I haven’t seen it work in the last 17 years. There also does seem to be some support for a “head elder” role in passages like Rom. 16:3-5, Philemon 1-2, Acts 15:22, Acts 21:18, Philippians 4:3, and some would say that Timothy acted in this role for the church at Ephesus for a time (1 Timothy).

The thought I want to leave you with is twofold.  First, we clearly need and are commanded to have leadership to be called a church. This is one of the reasons the two guys on the golf course or buddies at the coffee shop don’t qualify as a church.  They usually never have leaders.  In the next post, I will take us through some Scriptures that explain why we need leaders.  Second, we need to make sure that we return to the Biblical foundation of group leadership of our churches.  I actually don’t care if you use the terms elders, bishops, deacons, presbyters, minister, pastor, etc…, so long as all the power in a church doesn’t end up in one person’s hands.  That is usually a recipe either for disaster at the worst, or a church that never reaches its full potential at the best.

We are the church.  That is what I hear all the time.  Occasionally, that means, “Stop complaining about THE church, because we are THE church.”  Usually though, it means that Christians are the church; it isn’t a building, programs, or an institution.  While there is truth in there, it is being taken to mean that if a few Christians get together and talk about “spiritual” stuff, then that is church.  You don’t need a building, structure, or any of that “other stuff” to be the church.

For example, in books that I have read lately, they said that the following counted as church: 1) two guys meeting to play golf every week, where between putting and chip shots, they discuss the Bible and other spiritual issues; 2) a few people getting together at Starbucks and doing a Bible study together; 3) a picnic at the park where they hand out food to the poor people and talk to them about God.  Now, none of these things are bad things, but NONE of them qualifies as being called church as far as the New Testament is concerned.  Much of this sounds a lot like New Age thought to be honest.  New Age thought focuses on making a spiritual connection, where the “journey” is more important than a book, building, or program.  You don’t need to go to church, a synagogue, or a mosque to connect with God; in fact, those places with all their rules and legalism will probably keep you from truly connecting to God.

How did some of our books about Christianity end up sounding like New Age stuff??? I think that some people are so fed up with problems they see in the churches they have attended, that they like the thought that they can have “church” without all that junk they dealt with before.  No pastors to make them feel guilty for not giving more, no elders telling them not to question church doctrine, and no boring meetings that you have to drag yourself to every Sunday.  Instead, you can order a mocha, sit in comfy, mod looking chairs, and talk about whatever you want with your friends.  Ditch the wooden pew and hymnals and let’s have deep thoughts about the latest, greatest Christian author.

I hate to throw cold water on all this post modern church talk, but “church” in the New Testament contains the following aspects: organized meetings with a group of Christians, appointed group leadership that holds the church accountable, teachers and preachers who disciple others in the truths of Scripture, and a ongoing relationship with the body of Christ as a whole.  I will take us through Scriptures for each of these, but let’s start out with the first one.  It is true that the “church” is used sometimes in the New Testament to mean all Christians together, and not one specific group.

For example, Matthew 16:18, Acts  8:3, and Ephesians 1:22 all use the “church” to mean not just one individual group, but all Christians worldwide or at least in one area.  In 1 Corinthians 15:9, Paul says, “For I am the least of the apostles, unworthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.”  We know that Paul persecuted Christians in many areas, so in this use, he means something closer to “all Christians”, and not just one individual group.  However, most New Testament references are referring to one individual group that is located in one area.  True, the “church of Corinth” might be made up of several house churches, but it is still an organized grouping of Christians in one area.  Christianity is not New Age thought in that it was never meant to be an individualistic experience. 1 Corinthians 16:9 brings it all together, “The churches of Asia send you greetings. Aquila and Prisca, together with the church in their house, send you hearty greetings in the Lord.”

Of course, church would be easier if it was just something you could do by yourself or with a select group of friends.  If you disagree and fight with yourself, you need serious help.  Yes, the location is not the issue, in that you could have a church meeting on a golf course, in a warehouse, or a coffee bar, but the heart of meeting together was fellowship, accountability, discipleship, and evangelism.  That organized body of believers could be contacted by others in different areas, recognized as a group, and held accountable in the larger body of Christ.  In 3 John 1:19, when there is an issue with a believer, John writes, “I have written something to the church, but Diotrephes, who likes to put himself first, does not acknowledge our authority.”  While we may not know what area exactly this church was in, John was able as an apostle of the early church to write to that organized group about an issue with one of its members.

In 1 Corinthians 4:17, Paul says, “That is why I sent you Timothy, my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, to remind you of my ways in Christ, as I teach them everywhere in every church.”  My point is this, how could Paul visit and teach in “every church” if there were no organized, recognizable group to meet with?  As much as we would like to free ourselves from all the hassle of meeting with other people, we just can’t do what we want and call it “church”.  Of course you can pray and meet with God outside of church.  Even more to the point, you don’t have to be a member of an organized church to go to heaven (that one might rile some feathers).  Playing golf and hanging out with your buddies just isn’t what Jesus had in mind when He talked about His bride the church.  In the next post, we will look at how the New Testament says that churches have leadership.  Maybe that is what we really are trying to escape by redefining church…

I have to be honest to start this whole series of posts on the church.  Yes, I have occasionally complained about “the church”.  Ok, ok, maybe I have complained a bit more than that.  I have read a few of the recent “manifestos” about how the church needs to change, and uttered an amen or two.  There are times when I have to use a whip and a chair to herd my family to church on Sunday mornings.  However, I have to wonder, when did “the church” become a bad word?  With the amount of negativity that is out there today, you would think we were talking about a root canal or a trip to the proctologist.

In the upcoming weeks, we will be discussing what the Bible has to say about the church, talk about all this focus on the New Testament church, and even delve into the deep waters of the Emerging Church movement.  Before we do any of that, I feel we need to step back and remember just what it is that we are talking about.  Too many have an irreverent, careless attitude when discussing something that God seems to care a whole lot about.  On the other hand, we can’t keep sticking our heads in the sand and act like there isn’t something monumental happening right now in the Western church.

The apostle Paul spent most of his life (actually risking his life) in order to see churches planted all over the Roman Empire.  In three passages specifically, he gives us God’s view on the church.  In 1 Timothy 3:15, he says, “… if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.” First, Paul calls the church “God’s household”, which means that the church as God sees it isn’t a lifeless institution, but the people He calls His own and that “live” with Him.  Not only that, but He also says that the church functions as the “pillar and foundation of the truth”.  How does it do this?  God uses the church to teach the world truth through the study and teaching of His Word that happens in church, as well as through the behavior of the church members. I don’t work in construction, but I think things like pillars and foundations are pretty important to a building.  Based on this illustration, take out the church, and the whole thing God is building comes crashing down. (Yes, I know Jesus is the foundation and cornerstone in other illustrations)

In Ephesians 3:10-11, Paul blows us away with the following, “His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms, according to his eternal purpose that he accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord.”  Wow! Paul is saying that God is using the church to make His wisdom known to spiritual powers.  How does He accomplish this?  In the context of chapter 3, the point is that as Jews and Gentiles come together in the church, the world (both natural and supernatural) will see God’s ultimate plan to unite us all in the redemption of Christ. Most people would be thrilled to get a revelation FROM an angel, but do you realize that as a part of the church, you are a revelation TO an angel?

Finally, Ephesians 5:25-27 should give us pause before we speak about the churh, “… just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless.”  The Old Testament prophets such as Hosea introduced the theme of God’s people as the bride or wife of God.  Paul continues this in presenting the church as the bride of Christ, and this comes to ultimate fulfillment in Revelation 19 where we see the marriage supper of the Lamb.  To those of you who are married, how do you (or would you) feel when someone is bad mouthing your wife?  Warm and fuzzy?  I don’t think so.  Yet, we often speak of the church forgetting the great love that Jesus has for it, even giving his own life to purify her.

Look, the church isn’t a building or a bunch of programs.  The church is the people of God, gathered together to worship, disciple, evangelize, and love this dying world.  Yes, we have to meet somewhere and we will discuss house churches and the lot later.  No, the New Testament never refers to one individual Christian as a/the “church”, so we are talking about a group.  She may be a woman with problems, but she is God’s household making His truth known, a vessel to show God’s wisdom to the heavenly powers, and the bride of Jesus.  Let’s show some respect and fear of God as we discuss the church.

The above statement may be both offensive and stating the obvious.  I can still remember standing in a parking lot and talking to a former co-worker about his latest support raising campaign.  He told me that he used this line in his support presentation as to why he was working with Bible schools training missionaries.

I thought two things when I heard this.  First, I wondered whether this guy would ever raise funds with the ever so slightly, brash way of presenting his vision.  Second, he was right.  I don’t mean that God has an over supply of stupid missionaries, and since that quota has been reached, He has closed the door for now on accepting any new ones.  Nor would I imply that I am somehow in the “smart missionary” group looking down on someone else.  More, the bottom line is that in order to achieve full potential in missions or ministry or life for that matter, we have to be prepared and knowledgeable.  Passion and vision are great and necessary, but not enough.

Enter where we left off last time and the transition to the story of Josiah.  You may recall (if you actually read the last post, or are you here instead because you Google searched the word “stupid” and are here by accident?) that we left off with the last blog by putting our latte down, and pondering our response to this time in church history we find ourselves in.  Both 2 Kings and 2 Chronicles spend quite a bit of time talking about the reign of the good king Josiah (2 Kings 22-23 and 2 Chronicles 34-35).  Both accounts together tell us that from age 16 on, Josiah became a passionate follower of God.  He began then to truly “seek the God of David”.  At age 20, Josiah began to initiate a series of reforms over his nation, most of which focused on removing the influence of idolatry.  His reforms are so radical that they sweep out of his political kingdom of Judah and affect the land to his north that used to be under the control of Israel.    Of all the kings, only Josiah seems to measure up and exceed the standard of David in every way.

We could look at this story and see the value of passion and a sold out man for God (or person to be PC).  However, there is a key event which transforms Josiah personally as well as his revival.  At age 26, Josiah gave instructions to clean out the temple of God in Jerusalem.  While there, they find the “Book of the Law” which apparently had become lost.  This “Book of the Law” was what we think of as the Bible!  The “people of God” had lost the Bible.  We aren’t sure for how long, but when you look at Josiah’s father and grandfather, it wouldn’t be too much of a stretch to think that it had been 70 years with no Biblical influence on the kings of Israel.

When the Book is read to Josiah, he tears and clothes in grief as he realizes that God’s judgment is coming down on his people.  He sees how far his people are still from obeying the law of God.  In fact, his reading of the Book prompts an even broader reform and time of purging listed in 2 Kings 23.  The list of things purged is a nightmare inducing list full of idolatry, even in the temple itself.  For all of Josiah’s passion and seeking of God, without the Book (the Bible), his passion wasn’t enough to change his nation or know truth.  He needed both passion and knowledge to affect a true change.

At this point, I turn to you and yell in a loud voice, “Will we be the generation of Josiah?”  Mainly, because that would look cool on a T-shirt, “The Josiah Generation”.  I can see the hats, bumper stickers, etc… until I get sued because I am sure someone has already trademarked this in the church.  So, if we want to see true change in our church, community, workplace, nation, and world, it will take more than our passion.  Or, does God really need more stupid missionaries?

Two topics already beaten to death? Check!  Pithy introduction sounding humble yet sarcastic?  Check!  One more thing to go on my list of “Things you have to do when first starting a cool, post modern, Bible blog”.  Convince everyone you have some amazing insight into the future of the church, thereby forcing them to read your blog to see how everything is going to happen?  Here we go.

No, I won’t be giving you the exact date of Jesus return, nor wax eloquently on war in the Middle East as Iran and the United States inch closer to a massive showdown.  Instead, I will attempt to combine some observations on the church globally with what I am seeing in Christian writing now.

1) Decline of Christianity in Europe:  This is no great revelation or secret.  Nominalism, Humanism, and the rise of immigrants bringing other religions have accumulated to greatly weaken Christendom in Europe.  Of course, it is way too early to sound the death toll, and there are many vibrant churches and ministries still there.  Yes, the Emerging Church movement has hit (mainly in England), as I will discuss below.  However, this weakening combined with the move of Christianity to the Global South (also see below), will effectively remove Europe from being in the driver’s seat of Christian theology that it has occupied for over a thousand years (nothing more on this below, in case you wondering).  From the Protestant Reformation to the Enlightenment and the Age of Reason, church history and theology have seen the greatest influence coming from Europe.  What does the church look like when this is no longer true?

2) Rise of Christianity in the Global South: As Christianity declines in Europe (and possibly the US to follow??), it is on the rise in Asia, Africa, and Latin America.  In his works on the future of the church, Philip Jenkins predicts that by 2050, most of the world’s Christians will be from one of these three areas.  As such, he tells us we must then realize how that will radically change the way theology and the church look in the future.  The charismatic movement and a conservative leaning are just a few of these characteristics of the church of the Global South.  Unfortunately, a lower level of Biblical literacy and understanding of sound doctrine have also been trademarks of these churches.  What does it look like when the world’s top theologians are from the Global South?  when most missionaries are coming from there and targeting Europe?

3) The Emerging Church movement: from Brian McLaren to Mark Driscoll, this movement has challenged and discussed almost every major doctrine and practice of the church.  Yes, it is a Western movement at heart, and yes, it is mostly appealing right now to a very set demographic, but we have to acknowledge WHY it has gained so much traction.  The monoliths that we know as denominations are struggling not only in Europe, but in the USA as well.  Droves are fleeing the mainline denominations, and are finding homes in either the “Evangelical”, “Non Denominational”, or “Emerging” churches springing up everywhere.  This dissatisfaction with how older denominations are running their churches, combined with the Post Modern age we live in, is deconstructing and reconstructing the church.  Isn’t that the essence of a Reformation?

I put all these together and wonder if the church will look back at this time 100 years from now, and give it a cool name like “the New Reformation”.  Ok, so that is a lame name.  “Reformation Next (hasn’t that already been used?)” “Reforming the Reformation”,  or my favorite, “Reformation-o-rama”!  Anyway, I will leave it to someone else to name this thing, and slip into the oblivion of guys who said my mother’s favorite line, “I told you so”.  Tomorrow, we talk about Josiah and if we should actually do something with this information or just take a sip of our latte, and go, “Hmm….. interesting.”