What would you consider the three greatest gifts of God? Of course Christians would commonly go immedidately to the gift of Christ -- the Word becoming flesh. That is true, but perhaps some reflection would reveal a deeper understanding of just what this means. I would propose three very specifc gifts.
The first gift is found in Genesis. God saw fit to create the universe and all that is in it. The Word participated in that creation:
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind." John 1:1–4 (NIV)
What happened during the creation event is truly remarkable.
" So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them. (Gen. 1:27)
The first great gift of God to Man was life itself. And, this was not just any life, but life that was created in His own image. What exactly it means to be created in the image of God has been much debated. Some elements seem obvious. Man can talk to God and have a relationship to him. Man seems to be God's representative on earth and has dominion over it at God's command. Man has intellect and can reason. Man has the capacity to have godly attributes: love, purity, compassion, etc.
This brings me to what I propose is the second greatest gift bestowed upon man. Man has the ability to make choices. Man has free will. This is also an attribute that has been endlessly disbuted. Some in the scientific world would postulated all actions, even those that appear to be freelly made, are determined by only cause and effect. Others would ask how can we have free will if God already knows what is going to happen in advance? There are other endless arguments whether free will exists with varying defintions. ( examining each would take several books, not a short essay) What seems clear is God gave man the ability to choose one's course of action over another whether one defines this as "free will" or not. We are not robots.
Alas, this freedom to choose a particular course of action lets man make unwise choices. Coupled with this abiltiy to choose is one's responsibility for one's actions. Since Man through Adam and Eve made a choice forbidden to them, they sinned against God. In short they wished to be completely like God. This, then. leads to the third greatest gift of God.
" for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith.' (Ro 3:23–25).
This gift truly is the grace of God towards Man. What a gift? The gift of justification by grace through Christ and received by faith. So, we return to the first gift--life itself. God gave Man life, the ability to chose, and even when their choice would lead to death, and then gift of life again if we choose to believe in Christ to be justified by Him. What a glorious God!
Sunday, April 20, 2014
Friday, April 18, 2014
Reflections on Cooperation and Religious Divisions
Attendance at a recent Missions Resource Network benefit dinner, sparked thoughts of the religious divisions and lack of coorperation that long characterised congregtions of the churches of Christ. I was born and raised in the 40's, 50's, and 60's--more than 50 years distance from our present culture. During those times, many good practices were prevalent, chief among them a study and knowledge of scripture. Alas, knowledge does not in itself mean understanding and practice.
Congregational autonomy was taken to a fault. Other than area "Sunday singings," little real cooperative efforts were the norm. Sometimes a local city campaign with a prominent speaker in the church induced a "Billy Graham" effort of cooperation. The 60's in particular were marked by the "anti" movement. When my wife and I moved to Phoenix right out of the university, we sought the nearest congregation to our little one bedroom furnished apartment. It was an "anti" congregation where the entire sermon was condemning other Christians who "cooperated" in any way with Christian based groups--Christian universities, orphan homes, other congregations and Christians who supported them, and those who did not conduct their services in the right way. It was so bad we did not feel comfortable taking communion there. Fortunately, we found a loving and accepting congregation nearby. Though the "anti" movement within the churches of Christ has almost dissipated over the last half century, in my view it damaged the message of Christ for decades.
The Restoration heritage of "back to the bible" unfortunately evolved in some circles into an insistence on "doctrinal purity" before one congregation could "be in fellowship" with another congregation. This usually focused on insisting on using some "accepted" form of worship for being "in fellowship." However, what was "doctrine" for one group was "liberty" for another group. The emphasis was on what what perceived to be the accepted "pattern" and not on relationships--whether relationship with God, with one another, or with other Christians. The admonition in Ephesians 4 to use our God given spiritual gifts for service to others was little heard. "Home Bible Studies" consisted primarily of how the church was established in Act 2, on baptism, and on the organization of the church. Christ was not at the center of these lessons. We know, as my wife and I created a separate chart on the life of Christ. The charts we were using had little about Christ. This insistence on "pattern" or particular "forms" of worship lead to multiple splits or divisions within the church.
Concurrent with the divisions within the church itself was an insistence that a congregation could not cooperate in any overt way with others in the community. Those who were providing a service to others--other faith based groups or community service groups-- could not be associated with. The thinking was "the church" would not get the credit for the service provided. Doing so would lend tacit consent to the doctrine of denominations that we did not agree with. Note here the insistence that the church of Christ was not a "denomination" but was "The Church"--never mind that the churches of Christ fit precisely the normal English language dictionary definition of a denomination. ( Of course, Christ's church universal is one and not a denomination. The forms it takes certainaly are different even within the churches of Christ).
The above attitudes contributed to the common perception that the members of the Churches of Christ believed they were the only ones going to heaven. When pressed most members would deny this, but then insist only those believed or practiced as they did would would be acceptable to God. The presupposition not stated was the Churches of Christ had completely restored the New Testament church found in the bible. Never mind the fact there were significant differences in the understanding of the workings of the Holy Spirit, and continual squabbles on forms of worship and other doctrinal matters. The "worship wars" that came to other faith based groups came to the churches of Christ also--just later in time.
We are thankful that many of these attitudes are fading in our fellowship. Para-church groups like MIssion Resource Network, Let's Start Talking, Eastern European Missions, Great Cities Missions, Kairos, Mission Alive, etc. are doing much for the Lord and are supported by both members and congreagations alike. Christian universities and colleges are supported as well. Local congregations support groups such as Habitat for Humanity, Samaritan Inn, Local Food Banks, and Children's Relief Fund. Members are emphasizing real relationships with God, each other, and developing relationships with their neighbors and the unchurched. All of this does not mean we have abandoned baptism for the remission of sins, or even a cappella music. But, it does mean the restoration of doctrine is balanced with the restoration of relationships. It also recogizes that using the bible as a "rule book", "constitution", or a using "pattern" hermenutic may not be the best way or even a good way of determining what God wishes us to do as individual Christians or congregations.
Congregational autonomy was taken to a fault. Other than area "Sunday singings," little real cooperative efforts were the norm. Sometimes a local city campaign with a prominent speaker in the church induced a "Billy Graham" effort of cooperation. The 60's in particular were marked by the "anti" movement. When my wife and I moved to Phoenix right out of the university, we sought the nearest congregation to our little one bedroom furnished apartment. It was an "anti" congregation where the entire sermon was condemning other Christians who "cooperated" in any way with Christian based groups--Christian universities, orphan homes, other congregations and Christians who supported them, and those who did not conduct their services in the right way. It was so bad we did not feel comfortable taking communion there. Fortunately, we found a loving and accepting congregation nearby. Though the "anti" movement within the churches of Christ has almost dissipated over the last half century, in my view it damaged the message of Christ for decades.
The Restoration heritage of "back to the bible" unfortunately evolved in some circles into an insistence on "doctrinal purity" before one congregation could "be in fellowship" with another congregation. This usually focused on insisting on using some "accepted" form of worship for being "in fellowship." However, what was "doctrine" for one group was "liberty" for another group. The emphasis was on what what perceived to be the accepted "pattern" and not on relationships--whether relationship with God, with one another, or with other Christians. The admonition in Ephesians 4 to use our God given spiritual gifts for service to others was little heard. "Home Bible Studies" consisted primarily of how the church was established in Act 2, on baptism, and on the organization of the church. Christ was not at the center of these lessons. We know, as my wife and I created a separate chart on the life of Christ. The charts we were using had little about Christ. This insistence on "pattern" or particular "forms" of worship lead to multiple splits or divisions within the church.
Concurrent with the divisions within the church itself was an insistence that a congregation could not cooperate in any overt way with others in the community. Those who were providing a service to others--other faith based groups or community service groups-- could not be associated with. The thinking was "the church" would not get the credit for the service provided. Doing so would lend tacit consent to the doctrine of denominations that we did not agree with. Note here the insistence that the church of Christ was not a "denomination" but was "The Church"--never mind that the churches of Christ fit precisely the normal English language dictionary definition of a denomination. ( Of course, Christ's church universal is one and not a denomination. The forms it takes certainaly are different even within the churches of Christ).
The above attitudes contributed to the common perception that the members of the Churches of Christ believed they were the only ones going to heaven. When pressed most members would deny this, but then insist only those believed or practiced as they did would would be acceptable to God. The presupposition not stated was the Churches of Christ had completely restored the New Testament church found in the bible. Never mind the fact there were significant differences in the understanding of the workings of the Holy Spirit, and continual squabbles on forms of worship and other doctrinal matters. The "worship wars" that came to other faith based groups came to the churches of Christ also--just later in time.
We are thankful that many of these attitudes are fading in our fellowship. Para-church groups like MIssion Resource Network, Let's Start Talking, Eastern European Missions, Great Cities Missions, Kairos, Mission Alive, etc. are doing much for the Lord and are supported by both members and congreagations alike. Christian universities and colleges are supported as well. Local congregations support groups such as Habitat for Humanity, Samaritan Inn, Local Food Banks, and Children's Relief Fund. Members are emphasizing real relationships with God, each other, and developing relationships with their neighbors and the unchurched. All of this does not mean we have abandoned baptism for the remission of sins, or even a cappella music. But, it does mean the restoration of doctrine is balanced with the restoration of relationships. It also recogizes that using the bible as a "rule book", "constitution", or a using "pattern" hermenutic may not be the best way or even a good way of determining what God wishes us to do as individual Christians or congregations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)