* That was a great Super Bowl. I didn't really care who won, but I was glad to see Eli do so well after all the grief he has taken.
* I think I would rather have played on the Dolphins (1-15) this year than the Patriots (18-1). Being that close to perfection and losing it in the final game will hurt far worse than not having played in the Super Bowl at all.
* My favorite commercial was the Bridgestone commercial with the squirrell. Second favorite was the E-Trade commercial with the baby talking about spending his extra coin to hire a clown. I agree with the kid--clowns are creepy.
* We are expecting a snow storm tonight. Two days ago, they said that there would be a 10% chance of snow today. I would hate to be a meteorologist in Colorado. It seems they are never right. In Florida, you can see a hurricane brewing off the coast of Africa. Here, you can't see a snow storm coming over the mountains.
* Ever since my move to Colorado, my reading has been extremely limited. That is about to change (Lord willing and the creek don't rise).
*Village Seven is full of gifted authors and teachers. A few of them have given me their books and I am excited about reading them (really). One that I got today is Nabeel Jabbour's The Crescent Through the Eyes of the Cross. The subtitle is "Insights from an Arab Christian." Timely. Nabeel has taken some time to explain the Muslim worldview to me already (and promises to share more in the future). I am sure this book will be a worthwhile read. I will try to post something here when I finish it.
* Tomorrow night, I will go to my first caucus. I have always lived in a state that holds primaries rather than caucuses. Colorado does both. This should be interesting.
Monday, February 4, 2008
Random Thoughts
Thursday, January 17, 2008
The Story of the Bible
I taught the women's Bible study this morning at Village Seven. I tried to give an overview of the Bible in less than 30 minutes. I am not sure how successful I was. So, I thought I might post some of the ideas from it here. Since my teaching notes are too disorganized to post here, I will simply post some related articles that I have written on the subject. Unfortunately, these articles do not contain the creation-fall-redemption-consummation outline I used. Still, they communicate the main idea that the Bible is a single story with many sub-stories.
Why Read the Old Testament?
For many Christians, the Old Testament is a collection of interesting stories, enigmatic proverbs, and bewildering prophecies that have little application to daily life. Parts may be inspirational, but as a whole, the Old Testament remains a closed book of hidden mysteries and confounding tales. Yet, this clearly is not God’s intent. In writing to Timothy, the Apostle Paul said,
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. (2 Timothy 3:16-17, NIV)
The Old Testament, therefore, is useful for the believer. It is not merely a collection of archaic tales and mysterious prophecies, but an essential tool in equipping believers to fulfill their mission of glorifying God.
While there are many stories in the Bible, it is essentially one story—the story of Jesus. Jesus said that all the Scriptures are about Him (Luke 24:27). The Old Testament is not just an archaic precursor to the New Testament. Rather, together with the New Testament, it tells the story of God’s grace. In the words of one writer, the Old and New Testament form a two-act play. “If we only had Act Two, we would have to ask, ‘But where has it come from? Who are these people?’ . . . And if we only had Act One, we would say, “Yes, but where is it going? How will it develop? Will the hinted climax come and in what form? Without the New Testament, the Old is going nowhere, it is only a might-have-been, an unsubstantiated longing. And without the Old, the New lacks explanation. Its very words require Old Testament definition, and its central event, the cross, is inexplicable.”(Motyer, Alec, The Story of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2001), p. 10)
Therefore, to understand the Old Testament, one cannot read it in isolation from the New (nor can one read the New Testament in isolation from the Old). Together, the two testaments tell one story.
There are several themes that one can observe throughout the Bible that illustrates this story line. Two of these are the Promised Redeemer and the Covenants. These are not two separate themes, but two different threads woven in the tapestry Scripture. A third theme is the theme of Kingdom, but I will not cover that one here.
The Promised Redeemer
The Bible, while it contains many different stories that transcend thousands of years, is a book about a single story. All of the great stories of the Bible—Noah and the flood, David and Goliath, Samson and Delilah, Daniel and the Lions’ Den—are merely subplots in the Great Story. They are all part of the unfolding drama of redemption.
Like all great stories, the Bible begins with a crisis, moves to a climax, and concludes with resolution. The crisis happens quite early in the story, shortly after creation. Here we find Adam and Eve living in a world that God has proclaimed “very good.” They enjoy perfect intimacy with God and with one another. They also enjoy a world that God has made for them filled with delights. Nothing could be better.
Then, in Genesis 3, the Serpent slithers into Eden. In a single act of cosmic rebellion, Adam and Eve reject God’s blessings, turn their noses up at His provision, and make a grab for divine power by eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.
That could have been the end of the story. Yet, God is a merciful and gracious God. Rather than immediately giving Adam and Eve the punishment they deserved, He gives them a promise of hope. In Genesis 3:15, God pronounces His judgment on the Serpent, Eve, and Adam for their rebellion. In His curse to the Serpent, He gives hope to humanity. God said to the Serpent:
And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel. (Genesis 3:15)
In this curse, God promises that one day, the Offspring of the woman will rise up and crush the head of the Serpent. The Serpent, of course, is no ordinary snake, but is Satan disguised. So, by crushing the Serpent’s head, the Offspring of the woman will put an end to the tyranny of evil and restore the world to its proper order. The rest of the Bible is the unfolding of this oracle. It is the story of conflict between the Serpent and his offspring and the offspring of the woman. It is also the story of hope and expectation as the faithful look to the day when the Offspring of the woman will come who will crush the Serpent’s head.
So, the conflict that has been raging since the fall is between the offspring of the woman and the offspring of Satan. It is not the story of physical conflict, but of the great spiritual war of which all other wars and conflicts are but faint echoes.
When God speaks of the offspring of the woman and the offspring of Satan, He is distinguishing between the godly descendents of Adam and Eve, who will be influenced by God, and the ungodly descendents, who will be influenced by Satan. This idea is reinforce throughout the rest of Genesis, particularly chapters 4 and 5. In chapter 4, Adam and Eve have two sons—Cain and Abel. Abel follows God. Cain does not. Cain murders Abel. There we see the conflict between the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman illustrated.
Then Adam and Eve have another son named Seth. In chapter 4, we read the story of Cain’s ungodly line. In chapter 5, we see the account of Adam’s line as it goes through Seth. In these chapters, the writer is contrasting for us the godly line with the ungodly line, the descendents of the serpent through Cain with the descendents of the woman through Seth. In those chapters, you will see that each line creates its own cities and its own cultures.
The book of Revelation explains this further. In Revelation, we have the same image of the Serpent-Dragon and the Woman. In Revelation 12:17, we read, “Then the dragon was enraged at the woman and went off to make war against the rest of her offspring—those who obey God's commandments and hold to the testimony of Jesus.”
Later in the book of Revelation, we are told explicitly that the dragon is that great serpent of old, which is Satan (Revelation 20:2). So, it is Satan the Serpent who is making war against the offspring of the woman. The offspring of the woman are those who hold to the testimony of Jesus.
Here we see the theme of the Bible from Beginning to end. In the first three chapters of the Bible (Genesis 1-3), we read about: A) Creation, B) Life in Paradise, and C) The Fall, and D) The prophecy of hope. In the last chapters of the Bible (Revelation 20-22), we read: D) the prophecy of Genesis 3:15 is fulfilled, C) the effects of the fall are undone, B) Paradise is restored, and A) the New Creation.
In between Genesis 3 and Revelation 20, the Bible tells the story of this conflict and the One who will finally put an end to it by crushing the serpent’s head. So, throughout the story, the hero is the Offspring of the Woman. Essentially, it is His story—the story of Jesus. While it may seem that Jesus does not show up in the story until the New Testament, the truth is that He is the central character on every page.
The Covenants
The Bible is a collection of sixty-six books written over a period of nearly 2000 years by 35 different human authors in three different languages. As a result, it is a marvelously diverse book. Yet, in spite of its remarkable diversity, the Bible is still a single book with a single theme woven throughout. While the Bible contains many stories, essentially it is about one story—the story of Jesus Christ redeeming the world from sin. One of the threads woven throughout the Bible that points to this central storyline is the covenants.
A covenant is like a contract in that it stipulates what happens if the contract is kept (blessings) and it stipulates what happens if the contract is broken (curses). We learn about covenants at a very early age. When a child says, “Cross my heart and hope to die,” she is making a covenant and is saying that she would rather die than fail to keep her promise or the terms of the covenant.
As we grow older, we enter into many covenants that are binding to us. There is the marriage covenant, business covenants, and neighborhood covenants. In all of these covenants, promises are made. For example, when you enter into a neighborhood covenant, you promise to follow the rules of the neighborhood association. If you follow the rules, you receive the blessing of living in a nice neighborhood. If you disobey the rules, the covenant contains penalties (or curses) that may include things such as putting a lien on your house.
Biblical covenants are the same in that they too contain blessings and curses. Just as in modern covenants, all parties have certain obligations.
The Covenant of Works
The Bible begins (Genesis 1-2) with God’s creation of the world, and all very good. At creation, God made a covenant with humanity. God gave humanity complete reign over the Garden of Eden and all the earth. The only stipulation that God gave to Adam and Eve was that they were not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. If they ate of this tree, they would break the covenant with God and bring upon themselves the curse of the covenant, which was death. We often refer to this covenant as the Covenant of Works.
As you know, Adam and Eve broke the covenant (Genesis 3, Hosea 6:7). As a result, they fell under its curse. Since Adam was representative of all humanity, all who are born to Adam are born into the curse of this covenant (Romans 5:12-19). Not only did the Fall of Adam affect humanity, but all creation suffered. Everything in this world is suffering because of sin. It is all under the curse (Genesis 3:14-19, Romans 8:18-21).
This is how the Bible begins. In doing so, it sets up the story of God restoring a fallen world. Even in the curse, one can detect a hint of a new covenant. This New Covenant, rather than being based on the work of Adam’s obedience, is based on God’s grace.
Adam and the Covenant of Grace
In Genesis 3:15, in pronouncing the curse upon the Serpent who tempted Adam and Eve to sin, God says,
And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.
Here, God promises that one day a man would come who would be struck by the Serpent, but would also destroy the Serpent. God, of course, is not talking about snakes. He is not explaining why people and snakes don’t get along. The Serpent is not just any old snake. He is the Devil himself. The promise is that a Son one day would be wounded by Satan, but would also destroy Satan and His reign of evil.
The Bible, which begins with this prophesy about the Offspring of the woman and the Serpent, ends with the fulfillment of the prophesy. In Revelation 20, we read that Jesus takes “that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan” and destroys him, just as was promised in Genesis 3:15.
The whole Bible, from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Revelation is this story. It is the story of one born of a woman, Jesus Christ Himself, who comes and destroys Satan and the tyranny of evil.
Abraham and the Covenant of Grace
As the Bible progresses, we find that this covenant of grace and God’s plan to save His people through the work of Jesus becomes more and more clear. In Genesis 15, God establishes a covenant with Abraham.
In Genesis 15, God has Abraham cut several animals in half. What usually would follow is that the partakers of the covenant would then pass through the animals. This would symbolically say, “May I be cut in half if I do not fulfill the terms of the covenant.” What is interesting, though, in Genesis 15, Abraham does not walk through the animal carcasses—only God does. Here, God assumes the obligations of the contract both for Himself and for Abraham. He assumes the curse.
We find the fulfillment of this covenant in Jesus Christ. While He kept the covenant complete and was always faithful to His people, we have sinned against Him. We have broken the covenant. As a result, His body has been broken for us. He endured the penalty of the covenant on our behalf, just as God had promised Abraham in Genesis 15.
God’s covenant with Abraham was not a covenant for everyone. The only ones who receive the blessings of the covenant are Abraham and his descendants. Later, the Apostle Paul would point out that the true descendants of Abraham and the true heirs of the covenant are not the physical offspring of Abraham, but those who have the faith of Abraham—those who turn to Jesus in faith (Romans 4:16 and Romans 9:8).
In Galatians 3:16, Paul points out that God’s covenant with Abraham was not with all the physical descendants of Abraham, but with one, namely Jesus. That means to receive the blessings of the covenant, we must be found “in Christ”, that is, united to Him by faith.
Moses and the Covenant of Grace
The Covenant of Grace unfolds a bit more under Moses. Under Moses, God gave the Law, including the Ten Commandments, which were the words of the Mosaic Covenant (Exodus 34:28). The purpose of the Law was not to show people how they could be good enough to deserve God’s favor. Rather, the purpose of the law was to show people that they could not be good enough to deserve God’s favor. It was not supposed to be a means of self-salvation but was supposed to drive us to God in faith. In Galatians 3:24, we find that the law had as its primary purpose to drive us to Christ. It shows God’s people that they need a Savior.
Even the Covenant of the Law, which was given under Moses, is part of the Covenant of Grace. That is because even the Covenant of the Law points us to Jesus. Jesus fulfills all of the demands of the law, keeping it at every point. Then, He takes the curses of the Law upon Himself. Where we broke the law, He endures the curse through our faith in Him. As a result, we are saved by grace.
David and the Covenant of Grace
Another place where we find the Covenant of Grace being expressed is to King David. In 2 Samuel 7, God promises David that His kingdom will endure forever and that one of his Offspring would sit upon the throne forever.
God has not forgotten this promise. Rather, He has fulfilled it in Jesus Christ. Both Matthew and Luke go to great lengths to prove that Jesus is the royal descendant from King David, that He is the true King David who will reign forever (Matthew 1:1-17, 9:27, 12:23, 15:22, 20:30-31, 21:9-16, 22:41-45, Luke 1:69, 3:23-38, 18:38-39, 20:41-44, Acts 2:22-26, 13:34-37).
The Prophets and the Covenant of Grace
All of these covenants, from Adam through David, point to Jesus Christ. They are not all separate covenants but find their fulfillment in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. The prophets continue this forward look. The prophetic vision is for the New Covenant. This New Covenant is alluded to throughout the prophets but is summarized in Jeremiah 31.
31“The time is coming,” declares the Lord, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. 32It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them,” declares the Lord. 33“This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time,” declares the Lord. “I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. 34No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest,” declares the Lord. “For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more.”
Once again, this covenant points to Jesus Christ. Hebrews 10, quoting this text, points to its fulfillment through Jesus Christ because it is through Jesus Christ that we have the law of God on our hearts. It is through Jesus Christ that we have the Holy Spirit, and it is through Jesus Christ that we have forgiveness of sins.
Conclusion: Christ and the Covenant of Grace
What we have seen in all the covenants is that Christ is the covenant of grace. All point to Him and He fulfills them all. Therefore, the New Testament is not separated from the Old Testament, but is the fulfillment of it. All of the Bible, not just the New Testament, points us to faith in Christ.
Furthermore, since all of the Old Testament covenants are part of the larger Covenant of Grace, that means that the church is not a completely separate entity from Israel. Therefore, God did not have one plan for Israel and another for the church. Rather, the church and Israel are the same. The people of God in the Old Testament were the Israelites, because they had faith in God. In the New Testament, the ethnic boundaries between Jews and Gentiles are taken down so that Gentiles are now included among the people of God. So, in the New Testament, God’s people are called the church rather than the ethnically distinctive name of Israel.
Why Read the Old Testament?
For many Christians, the Old Testament is a collection of interesting stories, enigmatic proverbs, and bewildering prophecies that have little application to daily life. Parts may be inspirational, but as a whole, the Old Testament remains a closed book of hidden mysteries and confounding tales. Yet, this clearly is not God’s intent. In writing to Timothy, the Apostle Paul said,
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. (2 Timothy 3:16-17, NIV)
The Old Testament, therefore, is useful for the believer. It is not merely a collection of archaic tales and mysterious prophecies, but an essential tool in equipping believers to fulfill their mission of glorifying God.
While there are many stories in the Bible, it is essentially one story—the story of Jesus. Jesus said that all the Scriptures are about Him (Luke 24:27). The Old Testament is not just an archaic precursor to the New Testament. Rather, together with the New Testament, it tells the story of God’s grace. In the words of one writer, the Old and New Testament form a two-act play. “If we only had Act Two, we would have to ask, ‘But where has it come from? Who are these people?’ . . . And if we only had Act One, we would say, “Yes, but where is it going? How will it develop? Will the hinted climax come and in what form? Without the New Testament, the Old is going nowhere, it is only a might-have-been, an unsubstantiated longing. And without the Old, the New lacks explanation. Its very words require Old Testament definition, and its central event, the cross, is inexplicable.”(Motyer, Alec, The Story of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2001), p. 10)
Therefore, to understand the Old Testament, one cannot read it in isolation from the New (nor can one read the New Testament in isolation from the Old). Together, the two testaments tell one story.
There are several themes that one can observe throughout the Bible that illustrates this story line. Two of these are the Promised Redeemer and the Covenants. These are not two separate themes, but two different threads woven in the tapestry Scripture. A third theme is the theme of Kingdom, but I will not cover that one here.
The Promised Redeemer
The Bible, while it contains many different stories that transcend thousands of years, is a book about a single story. All of the great stories of the Bible—Noah and the flood, David and Goliath, Samson and Delilah, Daniel and the Lions’ Den—are merely subplots in the Great Story. They are all part of the unfolding drama of redemption.
Like all great stories, the Bible begins with a crisis, moves to a climax, and concludes with resolution. The crisis happens quite early in the story, shortly after creation. Here we find Adam and Eve living in a world that God has proclaimed “very good.” They enjoy perfect intimacy with God and with one another. They also enjoy a world that God has made for them filled with delights. Nothing could be better.
Then, in Genesis 3, the Serpent slithers into Eden. In a single act of cosmic rebellion, Adam and Eve reject God’s blessings, turn their noses up at His provision, and make a grab for divine power by eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.
That could have been the end of the story. Yet, God is a merciful and gracious God. Rather than immediately giving Adam and Eve the punishment they deserved, He gives them a promise of hope. In Genesis 3:15, God pronounces His judgment on the Serpent, Eve, and Adam for their rebellion. In His curse to the Serpent, He gives hope to humanity. God said to the Serpent:
And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel. (Genesis 3:15)
In this curse, God promises that one day, the Offspring of the woman will rise up and crush the head of the Serpent. The Serpent, of course, is no ordinary snake, but is Satan disguised. So, by crushing the Serpent’s head, the Offspring of the woman will put an end to the tyranny of evil and restore the world to its proper order. The rest of the Bible is the unfolding of this oracle. It is the story of conflict between the Serpent and his offspring and the offspring of the woman. It is also the story of hope and expectation as the faithful look to the day when the Offspring of the woman will come who will crush the Serpent’s head.
So, the conflict that has been raging since the fall is between the offspring of the woman and the offspring of Satan. It is not the story of physical conflict, but of the great spiritual war of which all other wars and conflicts are but faint echoes.
When God speaks of the offspring of the woman and the offspring of Satan, He is distinguishing between the godly descendents of Adam and Eve, who will be influenced by God, and the ungodly descendents, who will be influenced by Satan. This idea is reinforce throughout the rest of Genesis, particularly chapters 4 and 5. In chapter 4, Adam and Eve have two sons—Cain and Abel. Abel follows God. Cain does not. Cain murders Abel. There we see the conflict between the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman illustrated.
Then Adam and Eve have another son named Seth. In chapter 4, we read the story of Cain’s ungodly line. In chapter 5, we see the account of Adam’s line as it goes through Seth. In these chapters, the writer is contrasting for us the godly line with the ungodly line, the descendents of the serpent through Cain with the descendents of the woman through Seth. In those chapters, you will see that each line creates its own cities and its own cultures.
The book of Revelation explains this further. In Revelation, we have the same image of the Serpent-Dragon and the Woman. In Revelation 12:17, we read, “Then the dragon was enraged at the woman and went off to make war against the rest of her offspring—those who obey God's commandments and hold to the testimony of Jesus.”
Later in the book of Revelation, we are told explicitly that the dragon is that great serpent of old, which is Satan (Revelation 20:2). So, it is Satan the Serpent who is making war against the offspring of the woman. The offspring of the woman are those who hold to the testimony of Jesus.
Here we see the theme of the Bible from Beginning to end. In the first three chapters of the Bible (Genesis 1-3), we read about: A) Creation, B) Life in Paradise, and C) The Fall, and D) The prophecy of hope. In the last chapters of the Bible (Revelation 20-22), we read: D) the prophecy of Genesis 3:15 is fulfilled, C) the effects of the fall are undone, B) Paradise is restored, and A) the New Creation.
In between Genesis 3 and Revelation 20, the Bible tells the story of this conflict and the One who will finally put an end to it by crushing the serpent’s head. So, throughout the story, the hero is the Offspring of the Woman. Essentially, it is His story—the story of Jesus. While it may seem that Jesus does not show up in the story until the New Testament, the truth is that He is the central character on every page.
The Covenants
The Bible is a collection of sixty-six books written over a period of nearly 2000 years by 35 different human authors in three different languages. As a result, it is a marvelously diverse book. Yet, in spite of its remarkable diversity, the Bible is still a single book with a single theme woven throughout. While the Bible contains many stories, essentially it is about one story—the story of Jesus Christ redeeming the world from sin. One of the threads woven throughout the Bible that points to this central storyline is the covenants.
A covenant is like a contract in that it stipulates what happens if the contract is kept (blessings) and it stipulates what happens if the contract is broken (curses). We learn about covenants at a very early age. When a child says, “Cross my heart and hope to die,” she is making a covenant and is saying that she would rather die than fail to keep her promise or the terms of the covenant.
As we grow older, we enter into many covenants that are binding to us. There is the marriage covenant, business covenants, and neighborhood covenants. In all of these covenants, promises are made. For example, when you enter into a neighborhood covenant, you promise to follow the rules of the neighborhood association. If you follow the rules, you receive the blessing of living in a nice neighborhood. If you disobey the rules, the covenant contains penalties (or curses) that may include things such as putting a lien on your house.
Biblical covenants are the same in that they too contain blessings and curses. Just as in modern covenants, all parties have certain obligations.
The Covenant of Works
The Bible begins (Genesis 1-2) with God’s creation of the world, and all very good. At creation, God made a covenant with humanity. God gave humanity complete reign over the Garden of Eden and all the earth. The only stipulation that God gave to Adam and Eve was that they were not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. If they ate of this tree, they would break the covenant with God and bring upon themselves the curse of the covenant, which was death. We often refer to this covenant as the Covenant of Works.
As you know, Adam and Eve broke the covenant (Genesis 3, Hosea 6:7). As a result, they fell under its curse. Since Adam was representative of all humanity, all who are born to Adam are born into the curse of this covenant (Romans 5:12-19). Not only did the Fall of Adam affect humanity, but all creation suffered. Everything in this world is suffering because of sin. It is all under the curse (Genesis 3:14-19, Romans 8:18-21).
This is how the Bible begins. In doing so, it sets up the story of God restoring a fallen world. Even in the curse, one can detect a hint of a new covenant. This New Covenant, rather than being based on the work of Adam’s obedience, is based on God’s grace.
Adam and the Covenant of Grace
In Genesis 3:15, in pronouncing the curse upon the Serpent who tempted Adam and Eve to sin, God says,
And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.
Here, God promises that one day a man would come who would be struck by the Serpent, but would also destroy the Serpent. God, of course, is not talking about snakes. He is not explaining why people and snakes don’t get along. The Serpent is not just any old snake. He is the Devil himself. The promise is that a Son one day would be wounded by Satan, but would also destroy Satan and His reign of evil.
The Bible, which begins with this prophesy about the Offspring of the woman and the Serpent, ends with the fulfillment of the prophesy. In Revelation 20, we read that Jesus takes “that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan” and destroys him, just as was promised in Genesis 3:15.
The whole Bible, from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Revelation is this story. It is the story of one born of a woman, Jesus Christ Himself, who comes and destroys Satan and the tyranny of evil.
Abraham and the Covenant of Grace
As the Bible progresses, we find that this covenant of grace and God’s plan to save His people through the work of Jesus becomes more and more clear. In Genesis 15, God establishes a covenant with Abraham.
In Genesis 15, God has Abraham cut several animals in half. What usually would follow is that the partakers of the covenant would then pass through the animals. This would symbolically say, “May I be cut in half if I do not fulfill the terms of the covenant.” What is interesting, though, in Genesis 15, Abraham does not walk through the animal carcasses—only God does. Here, God assumes the obligations of the contract both for Himself and for Abraham. He assumes the curse.
We find the fulfillment of this covenant in Jesus Christ. While He kept the covenant complete and was always faithful to His people, we have sinned against Him. We have broken the covenant. As a result, His body has been broken for us. He endured the penalty of the covenant on our behalf, just as God had promised Abraham in Genesis 15.
God’s covenant with Abraham was not a covenant for everyone. The only ones who receive the blessings of the covenant are Abraham and his descendants. Later, the Apostle Paul would point out that the true descendants of Abraham and the true heirs of the covenant are not the physical offspring of Abraham, but those who have the faith of Abraham—those who turn to Jesus in faith (Romans 4:16 and Romans 9:8).
In Galatians 3:16, Paul points out that God’s covenant with Abraham was not with all the physical descendants of Abraham, but with one, namely Jesus. That means to receive the blessings of the covenant, we must be found “in Christ”, that is, united to Him by faith.
Moses and the Covenant of Grace
The Covenant of Grace unfolds a bit more under Moses. Under Moses, God gave the Law, including the Ten Commandments, which were the words of the Mosaic Covenant (Exodus 34:28). The purpose of the Law was not to show people how they could be good enough to deserve God’s favor. Rather, the purpose of the law was to show people that they could not be good enough to deserve God’s favor. It was not supposed to be a means of self-salvation but was supposed to drive us to God in faith. In Galatians 3:24, we find that the law had as its primary purpose to drive us to Christ. It shows God’s people that they need a Savior.
Even the Covenant of the Law, which was given under Moses, is part of the Covenant of Grace. That is because even the Covenant of the Law points us to Jesus. Jesus fulfills all of the demands of the law, keeping it at every point. Then, He takes the curses of the Law upon Himself. Where we broke the law, He endures the curse through our faith in Him. As a result, we are saved by grace.
David and the Covenant of Grace
Another place where we find the Covenant of Grace being expressed is to King David. In 2 Samuel 7, God promises David that His kingdom will endure forever and that one of his Offspring would sit upon the throne forever.
God has not forgotten this promise. Rather, He has fulfilled it in Jesus Christ. Both Matthew and Luke go to great lengths to prove that Jesus is the royal descendant from King David, that He is the true King David who will reign forever (Matthew 1:1-17, 9:27, 12:23, 15:22, 20:30-31, 21:9-16, 22:41-45, Luke 1:69, 3:23-38, 18:38-39, 20:41-44, Acts 2:22-26, 13:34-37).
The Prophets and the Covenant of Grace
All of these covenants, from Adam through David, point to Jesus Christ. They are not all separate covenants but find their fulfillment in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. The prophets continue this forward look. The prophetic vision is for the New Covenant. This New Covenant is alluded to throughout the prophets but is summarized in Jeremiah 31.
31“The time is coming,” declares the Lord, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. 32It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them,” declares the Lord. 33“This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time,” declares the Lord. “I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. 34No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest,” declares the Lord. “For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more.”
Once again, this covenant points to Jesus Christ. Hebrews 10, quoting this text, points to its fulfillment through Jesus Christ because it is through Jesus Christ that we have the law of God on our hearts. It is through Jesus Christ that we have the Holy Spirit, and it is through Jesus Christ that we have forgiveness of sins.
Conclusion: Christ and the Covenant of Grace
What we have seen in all the covenants is that Christ is the covenant of grace. All point to Him and He fulfills them all. Therefore, the New Testament is not separated from the Old Testament, but is the fulfillment of it. All of the Bible, not just the New Testament, points us to faith in Christ.
Furthermore, since all of the Old Testament covenants are part of the larger Covenant of Grace, that means that the church is not a completely separate entity from Israel. Therefore, God did not have one plan for Israel and another for the church. Rather, the church and Israel are the same. The people of God in the Old Testament were the Israelites, because they had faith in God. In the New Testament, the ethnic boundaries between Jews and Gentiles are taken down so that Gentiles are now included among the people of God. So, in the New Testament, God’s people are called the church rather than the ethnically distinctive name of Israel.
Minus Seven
I was driving in to work today and my thermometer read -7 degrees. When we were considering moving here, we asked about the weather, one of our friends said, "There is no such thing as bad weather, only inappropriate clothing." I don't think they make appropriate clothing for minus 7 degrees (at least not for a person who spent the past 20 years in Florida).
Thursday, December 6, 2007
Evangelism in Post-Modern America
Note: The term "Post-modern" is overused, but I can't think of a better one to describe our contemporary era. So, I will continue to use it.
A friend of mine was a missionary in Paris in the late ‘80s and early ‘90’s. He found evangelism there to be very difficult. If you asked the typical Frenchman, "Where would you go if you were to die tonight?" He would look at you and say, "Who cares?" These people have given up on finding answers to life's most important questions. In the 90’s, I read a study by The Navigators of European youth that found that today’s teenagers regard questions like "did Jesus live?" or "Was he the Son of God?" as irrelevant and unimportant.
America today is no different. We live in an age of "make your own religion". In our day, all religious beliefs are seen as equally valid. There is no standard for separating truth from falsehood because the notion of truth and falsehood no longer apply to religious beliefs.
We now live in a post-Christian culture. It used to be that the vast majority of Americans believe that the Bible is literally true. Today, only 32% believe that it is true. That affects how we proclaim the gospel to this post-modern world.
Chuck Colson tells this story from World War II. After Hitler blitzkrieg-ed his way across France, demanding the unconditional surrender of the Allied forces in the European theater, thousands of British and French troops dug in along the coast of northern France in a last-ditch effort to hold off the German forces. Trapped on the beaches of Dunkirk, they knew they would soon be obliterated by the Nazis.
During that agonizing period, the British soldiers broadcast a terse message across the English Channel. Just three words: "And if not."
"And if not"? Was it code? No. It was a reference to the Old Testament episode when Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego stood before King Nebuchadnezzar's fiery furnace. "Our God is able to save us, and He will save us," the young men had said, "and if not, we will remain faithful to Him anyway."
As astonishing as it seems today, the oblique message was immediately understood by the British people. In the days that followed, a ragtag flotilla of fishing boats, pleasure cruisers, yachts, and rowboats set out from the shores of England, managing to rescue 338,000 Allied troops. If the same message were sent in America today, it would be greeted with raised eyebrows and blank stares—even from many Christians. The tie that binds us is no longer common religious belief or heritage.
Practically, what this means that most of the evangelism methods that we use today have a very limited effectiveness because they do not communicate with the modern mind. The people of the world no longer share basic presuppositions with us that are necessary for our gospel presentations to be intelligible. We can no longer simply proclaim that "Jesus is the answer" because most people don't even know what the question is.
Our "modern" tools for evangelism are designed for people who are already ripe for the gospel. They are used for reaping for those already prepared to hear the gospel. Unfortunately, the percentage of people who are already prepared is decreasing. That means churches and parachurch organizations are constantly scrambling to reach a small harvest among the prepared while the majority of unprepared are neglected in our evangelistic outreach.
According to a leader in Billy Graham's ministry, in the early years of Billy Graham's ministry most of those responding to the gospel came from liberal churches where they were not hearing the gospel. By the 1990’s, more than 90% come from what he calls "our evangelical churches." When asked why the change, he said, "the tree has been shaken."
So, what do we do? How do we communicate the gospel to a generation with whom we have nothing in common? We need a three-pronged strategy. I will develop these thoughts later (Lord willing), but let me introduce it here.
1. Prayer
This is obvious, but it needs stating. One man said, “"...Men may spurn our appeals, reject our message, oppose our arguments, despise our persons -- but they are helpless against our prayers." We must remember this. Nothing happens without prayer.
2. Challenge the Prevailing World View
I am a big proponent of presuppositional apologetics. In this form of “defending the faith”, the Christian does two things. First, we expose the weaknesses of our culture’s world view. That is, we need to help our non-Christian friends see that their worldview doesn’t hold water. The predominant worldview cannot answer questions of purpose or meaning. They can’t even explain such basic concepts as love or beauty. While they say that evil is a problem for Christians, it is an even bigger problem for those who are non-theist. Christians often are defensive about their faith. I think we should be more lovingly aggressive in asking our non-believing friends to defend their faith. Frankly, this is an easier task than most Christians realize.
We must work from our world-view to show them the deficiency of their world-view. We must, from the point of a biblical philosophy of life show them the inadequacy of their own philosophy of life. Whether the natural man realizes it or not, the Bible tells us certain things are true about him. He is guilty of sin and his own conscience convicts him. A woman may delude herself into thinking that her feelings of guilt are only false echoes of a Victorian ethic, but she cannot extinguish them. The feeling of guilt is there, and, even though it might be buried, it never goes away. Because all humans are created in the image of God, there is worth, value, and significance to human life. However, nothing in their world-view can support this notion.
The second task in presuppositional apologetics is showing the foundation for the Christian worldview. We explain to them why we believe in Jesus. Here, we can show that our own faith is internal consistent, which is more than they can claim about their non-theistic faith.
For more information on this, there are a number of excellent sources. The easiest to read is Richard Pratt’s Every Thought Captive (the video series of this has much better content, but the production values are lacking). John Frame has a great book, but it is more challenging to read for most people. Bill Edgar’s books are terrific and examples of this (Reasons of the Heart, The Face of Truth). They are very readable. Del Tackett’s “The Truth Project” (produced by Focus on the Family), does a great job of presenting a Christian worldview and deconstructing a secularist worldview. It can be very helpful in informing Christians with the truth they need to talk with others. This is especially true if they learn Del's respectful tone.
3. Deeds of Justice and Compassion
Besides being biblical (as if that were not enough of a reason), the church should be engaged in deeds of justice and compassion because it gives credibility to our message. Compassion ministry for the poor is part of the way we announce the coming of Christ’s kingdom. Tim Keller says that mercy ministry is the apologetic of the post-modern era. I agree. Unless the church engages in ministries of mercy, we will not have credibility in our message with many of our contemporaries, especially younger people. The Evangelical church foolishly (and sinfully) has seperated the proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom in words from the proclamation in deeds. The two must be brought back together.
A friend of mine was a missionary in Paris in the late ‘80s and early ‘90’s. He found evangelism there to be very difficult. If you asked the typical Frenchman, "Where would you go if you were to die tonight?" He would look at you and say, "Who cares?" These people have given up on finding answers to life's most important questions. In the 90’s, I read a study by The Navigators of European youth that found that today’s teenagers regard questions like "did Jesus live?" or "Was he the Son of God?" as irrelevant and unimportant.
America today is no different. We live in an age of "make your own religion". In our day, all religious beliefs are seen as equally valid. There is no standard for separating truth from falsehood because the notion of truth and falsehood no longer apply to religious beliefs.
We now live in a post-Christian culture. It used to be that the vast majority of Americans believe that the Bible is literally true. Today, only 32% believe that it is true. That affects how we proclaim the gospel to this post-modern world.
Chuck Colson tells this story from World War II. After Hitler blitzkrieg-ed his way across France, demanding the unconditional surrender of the Allied forces in the European theater, thousands of British and French troops dug in along the coast of northern France in a last-ditch effort to hold off the German forces. Trapped on the beaches of Dunkirk, they knew they would soon be obliterated by the Nazis.
During that agonizing period, the British soldiers broadcast a terse message across the English Channel. Just three words: "And if not."
"And if not"? Was it code? No. It was a reference to the Old Testament episode when Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego stood before King Nebuchadnezzar's fiery furnace. "Our God is able to save us, and He will save us," the young men had said, "and if not, we will remain faithful to Him anyway."
As astonishing as it seems today, the oblique message was immediately understood by the British people. In the days that followed, a ragtag flotilla of fishing boats, pleasure cruisers, yachts, and rowboats set out from the shores of England, managing to rescue 338,000 Allied troops. If the same message were sent in America today, it would be greeted with raised eyebrows and blank stares—even from many Christians. The tie that binds us is no longer common religious belief or heritage.
Practically, what this means that most of the evangelism methods that we use today have a very limited effectiveness because they do not communicate with the modern mind. The people of the world no longer share basic presuppositions with us that are necessary for our gospel presentations to be intelligible. We can no longer simply proclaim that "Jesus is the answer" because most people don't even know what the question is.
Our "modern" tools for evangelism are designed for people who are already ripe for the gospel. They are used for reaping for those already prepared to hear the gospel. Unfortunately, the percentage of people who are already prepared is decreasing. That means churches and parachurch organizations are constantly scrambling to reach a small harvest among the prepared while the majority of unprepared are neglected in our evangelistic outreach.
According to a leader in Billy Graham's ministry, in the early years of Billy Graham's ministry most of those responding to the gospel came from liberal churches where they were not hearing the gospel. By the 1990’s, more than 90% come from what he calls "our evangelical churches." When asked why the change, he said, "the tree has been shaken."
So, what do we do? How do we communicate the gospel to a generation with whom we have nothing in common? We need a three-pronged strategy. I will develop these thoughts later (Lord willing), but let me introduce it here.
1. Prayer
This is obvious, but it needs stating. One man said, “"...Men may spurn our appeals, reject our message, oppose our arguments, despise our persons -- but they are helpless against our prayers." We must remember this. Nothing happens without prayer.
2. Challenge the Prevailing World View
I am a big proponent of presuppositional apologetics. In this form of “defending the faith”, the Christian does two things. First, we expose the weaknesses of our culture’s world view. That is, we need to help our non-Christian friends see that their worldview doesn’t hold water. The predominant worldview cannot answer questions of purpose or meaning. They can’t even explain such basic concepts as love or beauty. While they say that evil is a problem for Christians, it is an even bigger problem for those who are non-theist. Christians often are defensive about their faith. I think we should be more lovingly aggressive in asking our non-believing friends to defend their faith. Frankly, this is an easier task than most Christians realize.
We must work from our world-view to show them the deficiency of their world-view. We must, from the point of a biblical philosophy of life show them the inadequacy of their own philosophy of life. Whether the natural man realizes it or not, the Bible tells us certain things are true about him. He is guilty of sin and his own conscience convicts him. A woman may delude herself into thinking that her feelings of guilt are only false echoes of a Victorian ethic, but she cannot extinguish them. The feeling of guilt is there, and, even though it might be buried, it never goes away. Because all humans are created in the image of God, there is worth, value, and significance to human life. However, nothing in their world-view can support this notion.
The second task in presuppositional apologetics is showing the foundation for the Christian worldview. We explain to them why we believe in Jesus. Here, we can show that our own faith is internal consistent, which is more than they can claim about their non-theistic faith.
For more information on this, there are a number of excellent sources. The easiest to read is Richard Pratt’s Every Thought Captive (the video series of this has much better content, but the production values are lacking). John Frame has a great book, but it is more challenging to read for most people. Bill Edgar’s books are terrific and examples of this (Reasons of the Heart, The Face of Truth). They are very readable. Del Tackett’s “The Truth Project” (produced by Focus on the Family), does a great job of presenting a Christian worldview and deconstructing a secularist worldview. It can be very helpful in informing Christians with the truth they need to talk with others. This is especially true if they learn Del's respectful tone.
3. Deeds of Justice and Compassion
Besides being biblical (as if that were not enough of a reason), the church should be engaged in deeds of justice and compassion because it gives credibility to our message. Compassion ministry for the poor is part of the way we announce the coming of Christ’s kingdom. Tim Keller says that mercy ministry is the apologetic of the post-modern era. I agree. Unless the church engages in ministries of mercy, we will not have credibility in our message with many of our contemporaries, especially younger people. The Evangelical church foolishly (and sinfully) has seperated the proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom in words from the proclamation in deeds. The two must be brought back together.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
The Church as a Mission
The church is both a home and a mission.[1] It is a home to its people and a mission to its community. As a home, the church provides care for its people, nurtures them, and equips them to live out the Great Commandment and Great Commission in their daily lives. As a mission, the church is an embassy of the Kingdom of God, announcing the arrival of King Jesus, calling people to allegiance to Him, seeking to bring everything under His reign, and seeking to bring the blessings of His kingdom to a world in need.
In this role of the church as a mission, we are facing unprecedented challenges and opportunities in our day. If the church is going to overcome these challenges and seize the opportunities before it, then some of our models of ministry must change.
Much has been written over the past thirty years on the spiritual and social changes in American culture. While most Christian leaders are very familiar with these changes, I am not convinced we have taken them seriously enough. The church continues to minister as if it were the 1950’s, except in some cases we have replaced the organ with guitars and hymnals with PowerPoint. While there is nothing wrong with these changes, these changes are, for the most part, cosmetic and do not address the real challenges ahead.
In his book, Living Proof, Jim Peterson outlines the problem well. While churches and Christian ministries may say that they are trying to reach the whole population, they really are simply competing for an ever shrinking piece of the pie. Most churches are only capable of reaching people who have a particular background. Truly secular people have worldviews and assumptions that are so radically different from Christians that the average church member (and leader) is no more equipped to reach out to them than they are to the tribal people of New Guinea. They no longer speak the same language. The gap is widening.
In the 1950’s, most non-Christians in America at least had a Christian heritage. They were not truly secular. For the most part, they accepted the authority of the Bible, they believed in God. They believed in the concept of sin. Furthermore, the cultural gap between those inside the church and outside the church was not that great. Most Americans shared certain core values that were essentially Judeo-Christian.
That is not the case today. America has become increasingly secular. The church and most evangelism techniques still work well with the segment of the population that conforms to the old values. However, neither the church nor most evangelism programs have any idea of how to reach those who are further away. Yet, the church continues to minister as if we live in the world of Ozzie and Harriett. Ozzie and Harriett are still out there, but their numbers are shrinking greatly. We are ministering as if we are in a Christian society instead of ministering as if we are in a secular society. The result is, we are relevant to ever decreasing percentage of the population and are quickly moving (if we are not already there) to being a ghetto of mainstream society.
In The Celtic Way of Evangelism, George Hunter notes that “The Church, in the Western World, faces populations who are increasingly “secular”—people with no Christian memory, who don’t know what we Christians are talking about. These populations are increasingly “urban”—and out touch with God’s “natural revelation.” These populations are increasingly “postmodern”: they have graduated from Enlightenment ideology and are more peer driven, feeling driven, and “right-brained” than their forebearers. These populations are increasingly “neo-barbarian”; they lack “refinement” or “class,” and their lives are often out of control. These populations are increasingly receptive—exploring worldview options from Astrology to Zen—and are often looking “in all the wrong places” to make sense of their lives and find their soul’s true home. ”
Hunter goes on to tell the story of St. Patrick. Patrick was born in Britain in the year 387. When he was 16 years old, he was kidnapped by the wild people of Ireland and forced to live as a slave. However, six years later, he escaped and returned to Britain. Upon his return, he entered the priesthood. However, after a few years, he petitioned the church to be sent back to Ireland as a missionary. However, the church was reluctant to do so because the church at that time did not believe the Irish could ever become Christians. Why? Because the Irish were barbarians. The assumption was that a population had to be civilized in order to be Christianized. Secondly, if they ever were Christianized, they were expected to adopt the “Roman way” of doing things”. Since the Irish clearly were not civilized, they could not be Christianized.
That mentality (either intentionally or unintentionally) is pervasive in the church. For example, if you see one kid wearing all black, who has black eyeliner all around the eyes, and a series of tattoos, and you see another kid in khakis and wearing a polo type shirt, which one is most likely to become a Christian? Who is most likely to become a Christian, the president of the PTA or the president of Hell’s Angels?
In the way we talk, the way we do ministry, our churches are designed to minister to “civilized” people. If a person is conservative, moral, and preferably Republican, our church is a warm environment. However, one who does not fit our standards of civilization is often excluded based on his behavior and cultural values before we even have the opportunity to talk about Jesus.
We think you have to behave then believe, and once you do those two things, you belong. However, Jesus reverses all of this. By eating with sinners, Jesus does not condone sinful lifestyles but attests that these persons and their lifestyles can be transformed.
The problem is, as Christians, we see the moral failure of our culture and we want to address this. So, we take a strong stand for moral behavior. We accept those who behave properly and reject those who do not because we do not ever want to send the message that we condone immorality. However, in doing this, we reverse the biblical order.
The gap between the Church and the culture, though, extends far beyond behavior. Our worldviews are so different that we do not know how to talk to one another. Living in our own communities has become so cross-cultural that there is a natural tendency for Christians to gather together with people who think like we do. The problem is, we are gathering together, maintaining our culture, but becoming a ghetto of the dominant culture. We are quickly becoming the Amish, only we are more fashionably dressed.
A while back, I attended a wedding in a Greek Orthodox Church. It was beautiful. I had never been to anything like it. However, it was also completely foreign to me. I did not understand the rituals. It seemed to me to be extremely culturally bound. It was as if when I got out of my car and entered the church, I was transported to a different country. I was a foreigner there. That experience caused me to wonder if that is how secular people feel when they attend our church.
The answer is not to compromise. That is what the liberal church has done. We are not called to blend into the culture, but to transform it with the gospel. The answer then, is neither to compromise or retreat to our ghetto, but to be missionaries. We are to live and act as resident aliens in our culture. Instead of trying to maintain our culture and protect it, our calling is to engage the culture, incarnate the gospel in the culture, in order to transform the culture.
Even in seeking to be missionaries to our culture, we must be careful that we do not merely focus on doing that which is attractive to the culture rather than that which is transformational. For those of us who value cultural relevance, we have been driven by a desire to reach lost people. As a result, we have worked hard to grab their attention and speak with relevance. Much of the results of this have been good. We have seen many people come to church and eventually to Christ that never would have gone to church before. The truth of the Bible has not been veiled behind unintelligible liturgies. Lives truly have been changed by the gospel.
However, churches have not just grown by attracting non-Christians, but by attracting Christians. People now crave relevance more and more. In reality, they want a church that entertains them and puts on a good show. We have created a church that values entertainment over doctrine. I heard a pastor of one of the largest churches in my denomination say, "If we changed our theology, a few people might leave. If we changed our music, half the church would be gone by next Sunday".
I agree that church should not be boring. God isn’t boring. It is the equivalent of a modern miracle how we preachers can talk about our amazing God in such a way that puts people to sleep. However, the danger is, when you build your church on having a good “show”, you now have created an appetite for entertainment that constantly needs to be fed.
While the contemporary church has been far more successful in reaching lost people than the traditional church (look at the PCA’s statistics on those joining by profession of faith and this is obvious), it also has grown by attracting people who are bored with their old church. If people come to you because you are more exciting than their old church, then they will leave when they find another church that is more exciting than yours.
This has created a consumer mindset in church members. The members of the church no longer see themselves as owners/ministers, but as consumers. Just as they will leave their old grocery store to shop at Wal Mart, they will leave one church for another if it provides a better show or better services for their family.
We are seeing this all over the country. I can cite a number of examples in my own denomination where a church was once the hot church in its community, but now is experiencing decline because some other church has come that puts on a better production. The drive for cultural relevance has resulted in consumerism. Consumerism will eventually bite the church. It is a beast that cannot be contained.
So, the church must recognize that it is ministering in a secular society. It also must approach ministry with a missionary mindset—seeking to reach the people of its culture in a way that makes sense to them. At the same time, the church must guard against compromise and consumerism. Instead, it must function as a missionary society that loves the people of its community and desires to see them transformed by God’s grace.
[1] I “borrowed” this simple model from Randy Pope at Perimeter Church. I like its simplicity.
In this role of the church as a mission, we are facing unprecedented challenges and opportunities in our day. If the church is going to overcome these challenges and seize the opportunities before it, then some of our models of ministry must change.
Much has been written over the past thirty years on the spiritual and social changes in American culture. While most Christian leaders are very familiar with these changes, I am not convinced we have taken them seriously enough. The church continues to minister as if it were the 1950’s, except in some cases we have replaced the organ with guitars and hymnals with PowerPoint. While there is nothing wrong with these changes, these changes are, for the most part, cosmetic and do not address the real challenges ahead.
In his book, Living Proof, Jim Peterson outlines the problem well. While churches and Christian ministries may say that they are trying to reach the whole population, they really are simply competing for an ever shrinking piece of the pie. Most churches are only capable of reaching people who have a particular background. Truly secular people have worldviews and assumptions that are so radically different from Christians that the average church member (and leader) is no more equipped to reach out to them than they are to the tribal people of New Guinea. They no longer speak the same language. The gap is widening.
In the 1950’s, most non-Christians in America at least had a Christian heritage. They were not truly secular. For the most part, they accepted the authority of the Bible, they believed in God. They believed in the concept of sin. Furthermore, the cultural gap between those inside the church and outside the church was not that great. Most Americans shared certain core values that were essentially Judeo-Christian.
That is not the case today. America has become increasingly secular. The church and most evangelism techniques still work well with the segment of the population that conforms to the old values. However, neither the church nor most evangelism programs have any idea of how to reach those who are further away. Yet, the church continues to minister as if we live in the world of Ozzie and Harriett. Ozzie and Harriett are still out there, but their numbers are shrinking greatly. We are ministering as if we are in a Christian society instead of ministering as if we are in a secular society. The result is, we are relevant to ever decreasing percentage of the population and are quickly moving (if we are not already there) to being a ghetto of mainstream society.
In The Celtic Way of Evangelism, George Hunter notes that “The Church, in the Western World, faces populations who are increasingly “secular”—people with no Christian memory, who don’t know what we Christians are talking about. These populations are increasingly “urban”—and out touch with God’s “natural revelation.” These populations are increasingly “postmodern”: they have graduated from Enlightenment ideology and are more peer driven, feeling driven, and “right-brained” than their forebearers. These populations are increasingly “neo-barbarian”; they lack “refinement” or “class,” and their lives are often out of control. These populations are increasingly receptive—exploring worldview options from Astrology to Zen—and are often looking “in all the wrong places” to make sense of their lives and find their soul’s true home. ”
Hunter goes on to tell the story of St. Patrick. Patrick was born in Britain in the year 387. When he was 16 years old, he was kidnapped by the wild people of Ireland and forced to live as a slave. However, six years later, he escaped and returned to Britain. Upon his return, he entered the priesthood. However, after a few years, he petitioned the church to be sent back to Ireland as a missionary. However, the church was reluctant to do so because the church at that time did not believe the Irish could ever become Christians. Why? Because the Irish were barbarians. The assumption was that a population had to be civilized in order to be Christianized. Secondly, if they ever were Christianized, they were expected to adopt the “Roman way” of doing things”. Since the Irish clearly were not civilized, they could not be Christianized.
That mentality (either intentionally or unintentionally) is pervasive in the church. For example, if you see one kid wearing all black, who has black eyeliner all around the eyes, and a series of tattoos, and you see another kid in khakis and wearing a polo type shirt, which one is most likely to become a Christian? Who is most likely to become a Christian, the president of the PTA or the president of Hell’s Angels?
In the way we talk, the way we do ministry, our churches are designed to minister to “civilized” people. If a person is conservative, moral, and preferably Republican, our church is a warm environment. However, one who does not fit our standards of civilization is often excluded based on his behavior and cultural values before we even have the opportunity to talk about Jesus.
We think you have to behave then believe, and once you do those two things, you belong. However, Jesus reverses all of this. By eating with sinners, Jesus does not condone sinful lifestyles but attests that these persons and their lifestyles can be transformed.
The problem is, as Christians, we see the moral failure of our culture and we want to address this. So, we take a strong stand for moral behavior. We accept those who behave properly and reject those who do not because we do not ever want to send the message that we condone immorality. However, in doing this, we reverse the biblical order.
The gap between the Church and the culture, though, extends far beyond behavior. Our worldviews are so different that we do not know how to talk to one another. Living in our own communities has become so cross-cultural that there is a natural tendency for Christians to gather together with people who think like we do. The problem is, we are gathering together, maintaining our culture, but becoming a ghetto of the dominant culture. We are quickly becoming the Amish, only we are more fashionably dressed.
A while back, I attended a wedding in a Greek Orthodox Church. It was beautiful. I had never been to anything like it. However, it was also completely foreign to me. I did not understand the rituals. It seemed to me to be extremely culturally bound. It was as if when I got out of my car and entered the church, I was transported to a different country. I was a foreigner there. That experience caused me to wonder if that is how secular people feel when they attend our church.
The answer is not to compromise. That is what the liberal church has done. We are not called to blend into the culture, but to transform it with the gospel. The answer then, is neither to compromise or retreat to our ghetto, but to be missionaries. We are to live and act as resident aliens in our culture. Instead of trying to maintain our culture and protect it, our calling is to engage the culture, incarnate the gospel in the culture, in order to transform the culture.
Even in seeking to be missionaries to our culture, we must be careful that we do not merely focus on doing that which is attractive to the culture rather than that which is transformational. For those of us who value cultural relevance, we have been driven by a desire to reach lost people. As a result, we have worked hard to grab their attention and speak with relevance. Much of the results of this have been good. We have seen many people come to church and eventually to Christ that never would have gone to church before. The truth of the Bible has not been veiled behind unintelligible liturgies. Lives truly have been changed by the gospel.
However, churches have not just grown by attracting non-Christians, but by attracting Christians. People now crave relevance more and more. In reality, they want a church that entertains them and puts on a good show. We have created a church that values entertainment over doctrine. I heard a pastor of one of the largest churches in my denomination say, "If we changed our theology, a few people might leave. If we changed our music, half the church would be gone by next Sunday".
I agree that church should not be boring. God isn’t boring. It is the equivalent of a modern miracle how we preachers can talk about our amazing God in such a way that puts people to sleep. However, the danger is, when you build your church on having a good “show”, you now have created an appetite for entertainment that constantly needs to be fed.
While the contemporary church has been far more successful in reaching lost people than the traditional church (look at the PCA’s statistics on those joining by profession of faith and this is obvious), it also has grown by attracting people who are bored with their old church. If people come to you because you are more exciting than their old church, then they will leave when they find another church that is more exciting than yours.
This has created a consumer mindset in church members. The members of the church no longer see themselves as owners/ministers, but as consumers. Just as they will leave their old grocery store to shop at Wal Mart, they will leave one church for another if it provides a better show or better services for their family.
We are seeing this all over the country. I can cite a number of examples in my own denomination where a church was once the hot church in its community, but now is experiencing decline because some other church has come that puts on a better production. The drive for cultural relevance has resulted in consumerism. Consumerism will eventually bite the church. It is a beast that cannot be contained.
So, the church must recognize that it is ministering in a secular society. It also must approach ministry with a missionary mindset—seeking to reach the people of its culture in a way that makes sense to them. At the same time, the church must guard against compromise and consumerism. Instead, it must function as a missionary society that loves the people of its community and desires to see them transformed by God’s grace.
[1] I “borrowed” this simple model from Randy Pope at Perimeter Church. I like its simplicity.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Better than Panera
For years, Panera has been my second office. The combination of comfortable seats, light classical music, free wi-fi, cinnamon crunch bagels, and an endless supply of coffee have kept me coming back for years. Today, I found something better--the East Library on Union. The library sits on top of a hill (6600 feet). The west side of the library is a curved wall of windows, giving you a panoramic view of Pikes Peak and the Front Range. It is spectacular. It even has a coffee bar and free wireless. While they don't give free refills and there are no cinnamon crunch bagels, the view makes up for it. If I can get a decent picture, I will post it here.
Another Colorado experience -- A few weeks ago, I went hiking in Waldo Canyon with some friends. It was seven miles of beautiful scenery and great conversation. I thought I was doing pretty good to make the hike when this girl went running past. She was running the trail I was hiking. What is worse, when we neared the end of the hike, she was running back for lap two. Embarrassing.
Last week, I had several great Colorado experiences. A couple of days, Tricia and I got up early and went on hikes in Palmer Park before the girls went to school. Then, some guys in the church took me fly fishing. I had never done it before. I have to admit, I was a bit skeptical. The idea of standing in ice cold glacier water while the air temperature is cold enough to kill an Orange grove, and throwing some bug on a string into the water didn't sound all that great. So, I took a vacation day on Wednesday and we headed up to "The Dream Stream", just above the 11 Mile Resevoir. Despite my initial hesitation, I soon discovered it was a blast. I didn't catch anything, but standing there in a stream on a sunny day, surrounded by the Rocky Mountains was a real treat. The fellowship was great as well. As far as being cold goes, even though it was in the high teens when we started, I never got cold. As a friend on the Search Committee told me before we moved, "There is no such thing as bad weather, only inappropriate clothing." That really is true. If you are properly dressed and the sun is shining, it is a beautiful day.
Then, on Friday, my regular day off, Tricia was busy all day. So, I drove up to Copper Mountain just to check things out for our family trip in December. I spent the morning skiing. Even though they haven't had much snow and only had a couple of Blue runs open, it was wonderful. The drive up there was worth the trip.
Another Colorado experience -- A few weeks ago, I went hiking in Waldo Canyon with some friends. It was seven miles of beautiful scenery and great conversation. I thought I was doing pretty good to make the hike when this girl went running past. She was running the trail I was hiking. What is worse, when we neared the end of the hike, she was running back for lap two. Embarrassing.
Last week, I had several great Colorado experiences. A couple of days, Tricia and I got up early and went on hikes in Palmer Park before the girls went to school. Then, some guys in the church took me fly fishing. I had never done it before. I have to admit, I was a bit skeptical. The idea of standing in ice cold glacier water while the air temperature is cold enough to kill an Orange grove, and throwing some bug on a string into the water didn't sound all that great. So, I took a vacation day on Wednesday and we headed up to "The Dream Stream", just above the 11 Mile Resevoir. Despite my initial hesitation, I soon discovered it was a blast. I didn't catch anything, but standing there in a stream on a sunny day, surrounded by the Rocky Mountains was a real treat. The fellowship was great as well. As far as being cold goes, even though it was in the high teens when we started, I never got cold. As a friend on the Search Committee told me before we moved, "There is no such thing as bad weather, only inappropriate clothing." That really is true. If you are properly dressed and the sun is shining, it is a beautiful day.
Then, on Friday, my regular day off, Tricia was busy all day. So, I drove up to Copper Mountain just to check things out for our family trip in December. I spent the morning skiing. Even though they haven't had much snow and only had a couple of Blue runs open, it was wonderful. The drive up there was worth the trip.
Friday, October 12, 2007
What I Learned Today
Now that I am a Coloradoan, I decided I better start living like one. So, I have done a little hiking, I am getting ready for ski season, and today, I decided to go mountain biking in Palmer Park. The park is great because they mark trails well. They even tell you if they are green (beginner), blue (intermediate), or black (advanced), just like ski runs. I have been mountain biking before, but I am not sure the trails out at Chuluota, Florida really qualify. It is kind of hard to go mountain biking if there are no mountains. So, I decided to do a green trail. Next time, I will be looking for the bunny slope. It was an educational experience. Here is what I learned:
1. The fool says in his heart that there is no God and that bike helmets are for dorks.
2. Middle age + out of shape + high altitude = lots of heavy breathing.
3. If you are from Florida but now live in Colorado, there is no such thing as a small hill.
4. A corollary to the above: just because it doesn't look like a hill doesn't mean it is not a hill.
5. Little boulders can be big problems.
6. Going downhill is more fun than going uphill.
7. If you are going fast down a hill and you are on a dirt trail, just because you have good tires, that does not mean you can turn.
8. My back hurts.
By the way, the Colorado Springs Gazette now has a great website with a guide and map for all sorts of hiking and biking trails in the region. I put it in my links to the left. The site is Colorado Springs Outdoors. Check it out.
1. The fool says in his heart that there is no God and that bike helmets are for dorks.
2. Middle age + out of shape + high altitude = lots of heavy breathing.
3. If you are from Florida but now live in Colorado, there is no such thing as a small hill.
4. A corollary to the above: just because it doesn't look like a hill doesn't mean it is not a hill.
5. Little boulders can be big problems.
6. Going downhill is more fun than going uphill.
7. If you are going fast down a hill and you are on a dirt trail, just because you have good tires, that does not mean you can turn.
8. My back hurts.
By the way, the Colorado Springs Gazette now has a great website with a guide and map for all sorts of hiking and biking trails in the region. I put it in my links to the left. The site is Colorado Springs Outdoors. Check it out.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
