August 27, 2010

Paul had a weird way of handling theological differences:

Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind… So then let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding… Therefore accept one another as Christ has accepted you, for the glory of God. (Romans 14:1-15:7)

What was he thinking? If we love and accept and upbuild and have peace with one another, how we will know who’s right and who’s wrong?

August 26, 2010

Our target is to be like Christ. Right? That’s what Paul says:

…until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ… (Ephesians 4:13 ESV)

Imagine that all of your beliefs, traditions, practices, everything were rolled up into one score and placed on a target (like a dart board) in relation to your distance and direction from being “like Christ.” Obviously, no one would hit the bulls eye.

Now, imagine that other people’s “mark” were placed on the target (like other darts on the dart board) in relation to their distance and direction from being “like Christ.”

Would we be more comfortable with those who scored closer to us, or to those who scored closer to being “like Christ” but on the other side of the target from us?

If we can figure out why most are more comfortable with others who are closer to them instead of others who are closer to Christ, we may understand why we don’t live in and demonstrate the unity that we have in Christ.

What do you think?

August 13, 2010

Three year ago, I wrote a post called “Labels, Adjectives, and Division.” I was just beginning to study and consider how much the church is divided and fractured in the way we live. We are united in Christ, but we fail to live in that unity.

————————————————–

Labels, Adjectives, and Division

Assemblies of God church… Lutheran church… Baptist church… Presbyterian church… Methodist church… Anglican church… Catholic church…

Denominational church… nondenominational church…

Evangelical church… Liberal church… Orthodox church… Conservative church… Emerging church… Missional church…

Mega-church… house church… seeker church… simple church… cell church…

Traditional church… Progressive church… Cutting-edge church… Alternative worship church…

I have read that these labels are very important. The labels and adjectives tell people something about the people that form that particular church. But, to whom are these labels and adjectives meaningful?

Are the labels meaningful for nonbelievers? For the most part, no. There are some people who do not follow Jesus Christ, but who nevertheless know the difference between the various flavors of the many Christian denominations. Some unbelievers probably even know the slight differences between the various types of Baptists, Methodists, Anglicans, etc.

But, primarily, these labels and adjectives are used to distinguish one type of Christian from another type of Christian using terms and descriptions that are only meaningful to other Christians. Thus, these labels and adjectives tend to divide God’s family into various groups.

When people use these labels (Please, notice that I said “when”) to exclude brothers and sisters because they do not fit the “label”, then those people are being divisive and are not maintaining the unity of the family of God. Usually, this occurs because people want to congregate with those who are like them. This is not scriptural. We are part of the body of Christ with everyone who has been indwelled with the Spirit of God, whether or not they look like us, talk like us, smell like us, think like us, do like us, etc.

Excluding people because of labels also removes the responsibility and privilege of discipleship from believers. Instead of accepting others who are different from us (like Jesus accepted us) and teaching them how to walk with our Master, we exclude them from fellowship. Yes, discipleship can be difficult and messy this way. But, is anything else really discipleship?

Look at the variety of people that Jesus called disciples: fishermen, a tax collector, a zealot, a friend of the high priest, a thief, even women… unclean women… prostitutes. Jesus welcomed them and encouraged them to follow him. What would have happened if Jesus had excluded people based on labels? He would have ended up with a group of Pharisees following him… and the Pharisees would have been very pleased with this.

The next time you hear a follow of Christ referred to by a label, remember that the person is your brother or sister. You are part of the family of God with them. You need that person and that person needs you. Yes, teach them… but also, listen to them. You may find that God wants to use that person – the person that you might intend to exclude – in order to help you grow closer to him.

August 12, 2010

When writing to Christians in Rome, Paul concluded by sending his greetings to several groups meeting throughout the city (Romans 16). Then, he sends this warning:

I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive. (Romans 16:17-18 ESV)

I think that many Christians today live by this warning, as long as they can define what Paul meant by “doctrine that you have been taught.”

In fact, many people come up with different levels of doctrine and use those levels to determine levels of fellowship. I don’t think this is what Paul had in mind here at all.

I guess my question is this: Given the importance of unity throughout Scripture and without naming particular doctrines (teachings), how do we decide which teachings to divide over?

August 7, 2010

One of the things that the Ethiopian that I talked to could not understand is the amount of division among the church in America and the Western world.

I told them that some neighbors who are part of different churches have very little or even no fellowship with one another. And they just shook their heads… they couldn’t understand it.

I told them that church buildings might be located directly beside or across the street from one another, but the people who meet in each building may have very little or no interaction with one another. And they just shook their heads… they couldn’t understand it.

I told them that churches in the same city and often of the same denomination will not work together to proclaim the gospel and serve the people of their community. And they just shook their heads… they couldn’t understand it.

Why do we accept this kind of division in the body of Christ?

August 5, 2010

Dan (from “The Ekklesia in Southern Maine“) wrote an excellent post called “Unity in My Terms.” Dan describes how easy it is to seek unity on our own terms, instead of accepting people as they are.

But, as good as Dan’s post is (and it is good – read it), his wife Stephanie (from “Dead and Domestic“) stole the show with her comment on Dan’s post. Here is part of the comment:

If we’re going to BE the Church, then we have to tear down the walls we’ve built. We have to wash the bitter taste from our mouths and LOVE our brothers and sisters regardless of our beliefs or interpretations of scripture. Our SOLE focus should be Christ and our goal should be growing in Christ together.

So, according to Stephanie (and I agree), the picture that I’ve attached to this post does not show unity as Scripture describes it. Instead, it shows people finding unity on their own – linking hands with one another. To show true unity, we would need a picture of everyone holding tightly to Jesus Christ and Him alone.

May 9, 2010

Joel at “The Double Edged Sword” continues his series on unity in his post “Gathering in Unity: Part 3.” One paragraph of this post is one of the best things I’ve read on the relationship between love and unity:

I believe part of our error has been we see love as weak. We think to love will surely make us a push-over. If we all only love, who will stand for what is right? Who will defend God’s end of things? Who will come against the scores of error and false teachings that are within the so-called “church”? I used to feel that it was my role in all circumstances. I’m learning that it is, in fact, not. I somehow felt like I had to seek out error, expose it and pass it on to everyone that I came into contact with (just peruse 50% of my older articles written over the past three or four years). In the midst of this season, I realized something that really changed my view. It’s the simple fact that I can easily judge and condemn, even “righteously” – it does not take much effort and absolutely no restraint. I did it for years. It comes “natural” to me. Error abounds in the Body and it only takes a few seconds to sit down and find a “ministry” to criticize and find fault with. Even a non-Believer with the ability to only read the Bible could do it properly. It is being loving, forgiving, patient and tenderhearted that requires patience, self-control and determination, for me.

I think Joel is on the right track… what do you think?

April 19, 2010

A few weeks ago, in my post “New Contest: Toward a Bigger Church,” I introduced a new contest that I’m running on my blog.

The purpose of this contest is to answer the following question: How do we reach across the man-made boundaries that are currently keeping the church “small”?

If you would like to take part in this contest, send me an email at aknox@sebts.edu explaining how you would reach across man-made boundaries in order demonstrate and maintain relational unity with other brothers and sisters in Christ. You can write about actual experiences that you’ve had, or you can write about suggestions to help the church move toward relational unity.

I will accept email contest entries through TODAY, Monday, April 18, 2010. The person who writes the winning entry will receive a free copy of Armstrong’s book Your Church is Too Small.

April 15, 2010

You’ve probably heard the concept of the multilevel (or tiers) of doctrines. Generally, depending upon who is talking or writing about this, there are two or three tiers of doctrines. The first tier typically separates believers (Christians) from nonbelievers (non-Christians). The second and/or third tiers then separate believers from one another, usually determining whether or not the person talking/speaking feels it necessary to relate to someone who differs from him/her.

In other words, two people who both agree on the ‘first tier’ of doctrines would consider each other believers, but they would not find it necessary to fellowship, serve, meet, whatever together if they disagreed on second and/or third tier doctrines.

I think there is a huge problem with this multi-tier view of Christianity. The problem is that unity is a ‘first tier’ doctrine. What do I mean? Look at this passage from Titus:

But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned. (Titus 3:9-11 ESV)

According to Paul, a person who divides from brothers and sisters should be warned twice. If the person still remains divisive, then the church should separate from him. In other words, “divisiveness” is a reason supposing that someone is NOT a brother or sister in Christ.

In Scripture, there are very, very few reasons given for one believer to separate from another believer. This separation is the same as refusing to recognize someone as a brother or sister in Christ. Thus, “divisiveness” is a first-tier doctrine that is placed on the same level as teaching a false gospel, practicing gross immorality, and refusing to work to support yourself and others (yes, this is a ‘first tier’ doctrine also).

What does this mean? It means that just as it is impossible for someone to receive the gospel of Jesus Christ and be indwelled by the Holy Spirit and continue in gross, unrepentant immorality, it is also impossible for a believer to divide himself or herself from brother or sisters based on disagreements (i.e., in Titus, Paul describes these as “controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels”… we have plenty of those, don’t we?).

The various ‘tiers’ only provide us reasons and justifications for dividing from others who we still consider to be Christians. Thus, they allow us to verbally acknowledge someone as a child of God without accepting them as a brother or sister in Christ. This is a concept that is completely antithetical to the Scriptures and the gospel of Jesus Christ.

There is, then, in fact, only one ‘tier’… if you want to call it that. Either someone is or is not a brother or sister in Christ. If someone is a brother or sister in Christ, then we MUST treat that person as a brother or sister in Christ, regardless of disagreements. Otherwise, WE are the ones being divisive, and the church should seek to divide themselves from us.

April 14, 2010

Last week, in response to my post “Toward a Bigger Church Contest Reminder” (and don’t forget about the contest!), my good friend Art from “Church Task Force” left the following comment:

What if you encouraged people to visit other churches close to them a few times a month? Purposes?

1. To build connections where weekday relationships might be built.

2. To bring needs from nearby churches back to the assembly, for prayer and for practical ministry considerations (how can we help our brothers and sisters in this…)

3. To set an example of finding and purposely seeking pathways of connection with other believers.

To be honest, until a few years ago, I would have thought this was the craziest thing I had ever heard! What?!?! Actually encourage people to visit other churches? But, they might decide to keep going to that other church, and that would be just awful!

Since that time, my understanding of the church has changed, my understanding of members has changed, my understanding of leadership has changed, and my understanding of unity has changed. And, guess what? This not only sounds like a good idea, it’s something that I do on a regular basis.

No, really, it’s true. I’m an elder/pastor of a church, and I encourage people to meet with other churches. (Crazy, right?)

Now, I think that Art’s 3 points above are great. I would only add a few things.

1. Don’t simply meet with the other church. Instead, plan to have lunch/dinner with someone in order to get to know them. By the way, if you don’t plan it (ahead of time if possible), then many times it won’t happen because people tend to scatter as soon as the “benediction” is prayed.

2. Don’t only make leader-to-leader relationships. Try to build relationships with others (and I’m going to ask about this later).

3. Don’t use this time as a bash session. If you want to talk about the other church, then find reasons to praise them, don’t criticize them.

Now… here’s the question that I have for my readers. If you were going to do this – if you were going to encourage people to meet with other churches – which churches do you think they should choose? What criteria would you use?

(If you want to make comment on this topic, or add to the suggestions/reasons/etc. please feel free to do so.)