Thoughts for Second Sunday in Lent, March 8, 2009
I’m preaching a series of sermons from 1 Corinthians to the church I serve during Lent. We are focusing on the essential and necessary oneness of the church that was forged in the crucifixion of Jesus. Part of the goal of these sermons is to introduce the congregation to some of the history of the so-called Restoration Movement while exploring the basis of our oneness in Christ. ‘We’ have a long history and I thought it would be appropriate to share some of that wonderful history that is so often overlooked when official church history is discussed.
Back in the day, there was a small publication that existed simply called The Plea. It was published in Tennessee by a Christian church and edited by Fred W Smith. I’d like to share a quote with you from the August 1951 editorial. He wrote:
“The Christian world is divided, not simply into congregations of believers for mutual benefit and service, but torn and rent by parties, factions, and schisms which claim exclusive rights to the promises of sacred Scripture. This is the ‘falling away’ which the Apostle Paul referred to in his epistles. (Fred W Smith, The Plea, August 1951, volume 7, #6. p 2)
The Restoration Movement was born out of a desire for Christians of all denominational stripes to recognize that unity has already been forged for us by Christ and that we need to but recognize and maintain it. The ‘founders’ of the movement came from Baptist, Presbyterian, Methodist and other denominations. Some were Pentecostal, some were not. Some believed in instrumental music, some did not. Some practiced infant baptism, some did not. Some believe in mission societies, some did not. Some believed in conventions, some did not. Some believed in weekly communion, some did not. Sometimes they got along and worked hard at being one. Other times they failed and became two.
For the most part, I think the Restoration Movement has been a failure, at least in practice. Instead of bringing together the denominations it has, sadly, created yet two or three or four or five or more denominations (depending upon how you count the various churches who claim as their heritage the work of Thomas and Alexander Campbell and Barton W Stone among others). Nevertheless, the ideal still prevails and should be recognized for what it is: A call to recognize what Christ has already declared in Scripture to be true. If we failed in practice, perhaps we haven’t failed in theory. Perhaps the theory is still a good idea. We may not forge it, but we can at least recognize and honor it.
Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. 4There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to one hope when you were called— 5one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. (Ephesians 4:3-6, NIV)
Or:
Therefore I, the prisoner of the Lord, implore you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called 2with all humility and gentleness, with patience, showing tolerance for one another in love, 3being diligent to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; 5one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all. (Ephesians 4:1-6, NASB)
So what is our goal? Are we as the people whom Christ has called walking in a manner consistent with our calling? Are we walking with humility, gentleness, patience? Are we showing tolerance in love for one another? Are we making it our ambition, as people of Christ, to preserve or maintain that unity that has been forged for us in Christ and worked out in the Spirit? Are we making it our goal to live in peace with one another? Seriously? We really need to ask ourselves these questions continually.
Are we wise enough to recognize that no matter how many different denominations we create, no matter how many theological systems we construct (all theology is a matter of opinion anyhow), no matter how many blogs we write (each one no doubt claiming exclusive rights (and rightness!) to the interpretation and proclamation of God’s truth!), no matter how much we fight and argue about who is right and who is wrong–at the end of the day: There is ONE body. We cannot change this. Christ has declared it to be so and nothing we can do will alter that declaration. There is ONE body. It is unfortunate that this Biblical fact causes so much upheaval among people. It is even more unfortunate that some have made it their life’s ambition to narrow this field as much as they can and cause as much division as they can in whatever way they can. Our goal, thus, should not be causing so much division that the expanse of the church is narrowed. Our goal should be recognizing and maintaining what Christ Jesus forged in his own blood.
That Body includes people that do not think like I do. That Body includes Democrats and Republicans and maybe even some Libertarians (I jest). That Body includes people who do not take communion every week like I do. That Body includes people who do not believe in a literal 6-Day creation like I do. That Body includes people who immerse as the first act of obedience instead of, as I do, the last act of conversion. That Body includes people who are monergistic and not synergistic like me. That Body includes Calvinists and Arminians and Calminians and Arminiasts. That Body includes pre-millenialists like John MacArthur and amillenialists like me and maybe even post-millenialists and pan-millenialists. That Body includes so-called Emergent types like Rob Bell and so-called hyper-Calvinsts like Mark Driscoll. Believe it or not, that Body even includes some Baptists, Lutherans. Methodists (like our good friend Chad on Sabbath), Catholics, Nazarenes, Church of Christ, Anglicans, and Eastern Orthodox (and others). And so on and so forth. My point is that who can number the Body but Christ? Whose job is it but Christ’s?
Then I heard the number of those who were sealed: 144,000 from all the tribes of Israel. (Revelation 7:4)
After this I looked and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands. (Revelation 7:9)
What he heard and saw corresponded in some way. He heard a perfect number; he saw a massive heap. And yet:
And they cried out in a loud voice:
“Salvation belongs to our God,
who sits on the throne,
and to the Lamb.” (Revelation 7:10)
They sang together. They worshiped the Lamb as One! Do you see? Do you understand?
Practically speaking, the Restoration Movement was doomed before it started. Who, to be sure, could ever decide what is opinion enough for there to be liberty and what is essential enough for there to be unity? ‘We’ were stumped in those two places before we ever got to the ‘in all things love’ part. Still, I think there is hope and we are not outwitted just yet and I don’t think that our un-oneness has caused the Lord great consternation or upheaval. Could just be that our un-oneness exists also for his glory.
Maybe this is why he specifically told us to Love one another. Maybe this is why he said we are saved by grace. Alone.
“Christianity also is not intolerant because anyone can believe, regardless of race, gender, or social status. No one is excluded. Christianity is the most inclusive and exclusive of all religions. Anyone can believe, but it is only by faith in Jesus Christ that a person is saved. It is that glorious message of salvation through Christ alone that should be our banner and that which unites us. Jesus said, ‘If I be lifted up, I will draw all men to me.” Let our churches [and, I might add, our blogs] be known, then, for their strong and unwavering message about the crucified Christ, the very Son of God.” (Bob Russell & Rick Atchley, Together Again, 53)
28 Comments(+Add)
I agree with the overall point of your post. However the challenge is how to address specific doctrinal differences, some fringe but others substantive, while still exhibiting love, grace, and observable humility. While we may disagreee on which doctrinal points are substantive, we must all agree to walk in Christ even, maybe especially, when having disagreements.
It is deeply tragic how some of the evangelical community manifests such graceless interaction concerning doctrinal issues, and even more shocking exhibiting such condemning verbiage about the lost and needy world. We have a ton of doctrine and theology and opinions for sure, but we, as the living representatives of the Living Christ, seem to have forgotten HIM. Yes, HIM.
We defend the “truth” with carnal methods that are not truth, and in fact, we don’t remind people of Jesus anymore. We’re all guilty, but without a revival of “being like Jesus” we will continue to evolve further and further away from the salty light that was supposed to shine from high atop a lowly hill named Golgotha.
Come Holy Spirit…
This will remain a challenge. What I think should stop is the name calling, heretic declaring, method condemning and sin seeking in Christianity. It is directly opposite to what Jesus commanded us to do – LOVE ONEANOTHER AS I HAVE LOVED YOU
Come Holy Spirit
We need thee…
And in keeping with the Lent theme (which I do not celebrate) it has become increasingly obvious that we observe the annual day of resurrection, commonly called Easter, as an historical event and not so much as a living power that drives our lives. The entire western world knows all about Easter, but how much resurrection power have they experienced by coming in contact with a living offspring of that same resurrection?
How many people are so moved by the wonder of our lives that they must ask us about “the hope that lies within us”? In so many ways we have made Christianity a religion, full of doctrines and organizational constructs, and have missed the weightier matters of the Spirit. Which is greater, the doctrines we espouse or the doctrines we live out?
And we are called to be grave diggers, that by the power of God’s gospel, preached and lived, are used of God to exhume dead corpses and breathe God’s very life and see the bones gain flesh and blood and join us as we go to another grave site. And so often we walk quietly by grave after grave with dry eyes and without the shovel of the Spirit, and worse yet some shovel more dirt upon the graves of the spiritually dead and call it “ministry”. Indeed.
I am old now and not in very good health but I long to have the Spirit do a fresh work in my life, one that will increase Christ and decrease me. A work that will, without manipulation and publication, lead those who know me to wonder what has happened.
* A work that drowns me in an ocean of forgiveness
* A work that opens new frontiers of grace
* A work that awakens me to a greater depth of God’s love
* A work that gives Scripture my life and not just my words
* A work that cannot be explained by facts and events
* A work that sees others high above myself
* A work that helps the Spirit touch people through me
* A work that both uses and insulates me in this very world
* A work that simply seeks, thirsts, and presses toward knowing Him
On April 12, 2009 most churches will observe Easter, and they will dress up and have palms and communion and many special pageantries to celebrate that event that changed everything forever. However let us not forget that today is a resurrection day for all of Christ’s followers. We are not bound by a date that changes every year, and we are not bound to an observance. We have most assuradely walked out of that same tomb, and we have come forth from the coldness of spiritual death.
We must be today’s representatives of today’s resurrection, you and I must be fresh from Joseph’s sepulchre today with the smell of resurrection power invading the dead air of our community. If we are different by today’s firstfruits then let it be known to all who we walk among that Jesus is alive forevermore, not just in April, but in the lives of all who have been changed by His resurrection power.
Have we not made the resurrection a point of doctrine and an annual observance and been blind to the glorious truth that it is surely not the day that we must observe but the Risen Christ Himself? And we do not observe the Risen Christ but He in reality lives through us. The “what would Jesus do” slogan should be “what is Jesus doing” as it pertains to our lives.
The resurrection does not approach, it is here, today. It beats in our spirits, it moves our hearts, and if released it can lift up the Son of God our Savior for all to see. And this question remains – What could God do through a people who did not see the resurrection as just an event, but also as a living personal experience?
Rick,
You need a blog.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I appreciate good dialogue and feedback.
jerry
#3:
Rick, Seriously. What Jerry said.
Great post Rick and very much appreciated
One thing for sure-
There would be no need for ADM’s, ODM’s or this blog, because the travesty we call Christianity today in America does not represent a living Christ walking in us, showing the power of the Holy Spirit horizontly to mankind. If it did, and the majority of churchmen were saved and represented this desire, We would be evangelizing, sharing our goods, loving our neighbors, and this world would look a whole lot different, to the Glory of God.
Thanks Rick, for a vision of what could be. Let’s all dump all things that hinder us from that possibility. As it stands now, we are in need of a move of the Spirit, the resurrection power of Christ. As long as we hold to pride, self righteousness, hatred for the brethren, however, it will not take place.
Hey, Rick.
This isn’t really about the OP, but…
In recent threads around here there was some references to Open Theism.
http://revivaltheology.gharvest.com/9_openness/piper.html
I recently found this article and it was really helpful to me to better understand the issues…
Thought you’d enjoy it.
Jerry – I was inclined to acquiesce to your request by this post.
nc – I will never get all the hoopla about open theism. When we discuss the attributes of the Almighty we can be sure we are all seeing “through a glass darkly”. Boyd himself openly subscribes to the fundamentals of the faith, so I guess the issue is that open theism is incongruous with the core of reformed theology. (That just may be the most attractive aspect of all!)
Uh, guys. Rick has had a blog for years. “Following Judah’s Lion”
John – I’m pretty sure they were kidding, but thanks for the pub!
Nope, beyond reformed theology. Heretical stuff this.
If God does not fore-know the future decisions and actions of His free will creation then that is not the God of Scripture but some lesser deity.
Yikes. Went right over my head. Just trying to be helpful.
Mr. Boyd seems to be a very nice individual and although I would see his views as heretical I would not say he is a heretic as this is a non-essential doctrine in my opinion. Would I sit under him? No. Do I challenge his arguments? Yes.
So (a), Yes, I believe this view is unscriptural. God’s own self proclaimed name — I AM — for me, silences any arguments in regards to God’s transcendance. He is outside of time, existing in an eternal now. Never “I Was”. Never “I Will BE” always “I AM”.
(b) This does not necessarily pose a danger to the Christian faith, but has the potential to do so in that it could very easily weaken one’s faith in the God who does not yet know.
(c) Not my concern.
I actually think that Greg Boyd is a very good teacher. As far as the open theism stuff, it doesn’t even make it into most of his sermons at his church, and it actually closer to what the majority of Christians believed prior to the Reformation than people realize. Most free will theists simply didn’t spend too much time trying to solve the paradox. Boyd, on the other hand, has spent more energy speculating on it. I think it’s simply because he’s a brilliant guy and his mind just always wants to know how things work.
He doesn’t say God doesn’t know the future. He says that the future isn’t fully created yet. In a sense, you could say the future is being co-created by God, humans, and other spiritual forces. Yes, God is still omnipotent, but it seems His desire to be in relationship with humans is greater than his desire to constant demonstrate His omnipotence – at least omnipotence in the sense of overruling their free will.
The revised dualism/warfare view is actually very similar to how many apostolic saw things. The reason the monergistic view came into play was really because Christianity started adapting more and more to Greek philosophy. This is why the way God is described in Calvinism is more in line with the way Plato describes him then Yahweh of the OT.
Phil,
Free will does not limit God’s omnicience in any form or fashion. To perfectly know all the free will choices *now* that I will make in *my* future does not necessarily affect them.
Also free will, contrary to what Calvinists say, does not affect God’s omnicience because free will, though I believe it exists, is not the most powerful force in the universe. I am forced to do things against my will every day and many, many things happen to me that aren’t in my will at all and yet they do happen. Further my will can be coerced, deceived, influenced, overpowered, etc., etc. Many Calvinists argue this means in reality there is not free will, but I strongly disagree with this conclusion.
I would also add that Boyd doesn’t say God doesn’t know what will happen in the future. He knows every possible outcome of every possible decision, but He leaves the actual outcome dependent on human choice. And you’re correct, John, our will can be influenced by many things. But in case, God is working with people to bring about His desired outcome. It does seem that there are things that don’t always go the way God would like if we read Scripture honestly. God expresses regret, anger, and even surprise to some extent.
So, yes, God holds all of time and history in His hands, but the way He created the universe seems to indicate that He has left some things partially open about the future.
I’d rather not be a stick in the mud here, but for Rick’s sake, this may be an open forum, but this post is not about open theism. If someone would like to write a post about that, perhaps we could guest it or something and have the discussion elsewhere.
Thank you,
the otherwise happy to see a good theological discussion,
jerry
I personally love Greg Boyd’s teaching. His passion for the Word is incredible.
In a sermon from a few months back, as he described his understanding of some of the workings out of “open theism,” it was crystal clear that he ascribes all of the honor and glory to God.
He spoke in such a way that I was forced to think about my own understanding of the sovereignty of God. He did not persuade me to be an open theist. But he did persuade me that he is passionate about the glory of God and how powerful and wise and sovereign this God is.
Being a puppet master (strong hyperbole intentially) and sitting back and watching your script unfold is a stark contrast to my understanding of Mr. Boyd’s view of God as a God who is powerful and wise and strong enough to rule and reign over a creation that is moving and making decisions and sinning and repenting and sinning again and killing each other and etc, etc, etc…
“Almost, thou persuadest me…”
Sorry, Jerry.
We were typing at the same time.
I loved the OP.
Your pastor’s heart shines through clearly.
You congregation is blessed.
Shalom
Jerry,
I do apologize for going as far as I did. Sorry about that.
I will note though, that like Nathanael said, I think that Boyd’s love for Christ just comes across in his teaching. I would also note that I can even sense this when I hear John Piper speak, even though I would disagree mightily with much of what he says.
I think that’s the key. Good teachers know it’s not about them. They point to God, and not their doctrine. That’s why I can worship with people I disagree with. When we’re looking at the Son, our views on predestination, evolution, or the millennial reign don’t seem all that important.
I didn’t mean to derail the OP…I was just posting something for Rick.
John Hughes, did you read the whole thing?
The ending comment from Boyd that you posted can only be understood in light of his rebuttals to Piper’s objections that make up the body of the article.
His rebuttals actually make sense…and require careful reading.
I don’t really have a dog in the hunt…I just think it’s interesting watching the evangelicals discover/do their own take on process theology.
And Phil brings it back to the OP…
SHOWOFF!
Phil,
Thanks. You nailed it: It’s not about us.
jerry
ps–to all: i hope i didn’t come off the wrong way there. if i came across poorly to anyone, i too am sorry.
I find you reference to today’s Christinaity as travesty as offensive as it is naive.
I’d like you to show me a time, since the Edict of Milan, when the majority of churchmen have been saved.
I believe that if they did, but happened to be politically liberal, you’d castigate them nonetheless…
You know, this would be nice if I thought for a minute you believed it. I’m sorry, I hate to ruin a great post and thread with such a off-color comment. But you show now indication whatsoever that you believe this or practice it.
Back to your regularly scheduled programming.
Thats the way to get there!