There are many things written today about drawing people into church. Should church be relevant or stick to tradition.
The answer is rarely easy. There are many authentic ways that a church can do many things.
But in all things the church must be authentic to itself and its call to be God's hands in the world. The church may reach out in many ways and there are many ways the church can authentically look.
But the church must always reach out in a way which is authentically biblical. The church is served by considering how to reach out, but always reaching out in an authentically biblical way.
The world will only be drawn to a the church if the church offers something the world cannot find outside of the church. The gospel is where the church stands or falls.
The church needs to learn to authentically preach and live out the gospel. To have the concern for truth that Jesus had without the harsh edge of judgement for those who seek truth.
To have the criticalness of the "members" of "the church" who do not seek the truth the way Jesus had of those only pretending to seek the truth.
The church must always look to the heart of matters. And judge spiritually, scripturally, and biblically.
Showing posts with label biblical. Show all posts
Showing posts with label biblical. Show all posts
Friday, September 25, 2015
Thursday, May 21, 2015
True Biblical Belief
Often people are examined today for being "biblical" based on what they say. Viewpoints on scripture are of course an important test for being "biblical," but far more important is how one lives.
Living biblical truth is far more important for being "biblical" than doting all the right points in a conversation. Living is what makes or breaks our faithfulness to scripture.
If we really understand scripture in a deep way it will change us. Understanding scripture in this way a way that really matters is ultimately what is important.
If you want to know how faithful we are biblically we need to not look as much at what we say, but look to what we do. The saying "talk is cheap" is very applicable.
If we want to know what we care about we often have to stop looking at what we say we care about and instead look at what our actions say we care about. Our actions flow from our heart and speak volumes to what we actually truly care about most.
Living biblical truth is far more important for being "biblical" than doting all the right points in a conversation. Living is what makes or breaks our faithfulness to scripture.
If we really understand scripture in a deep way it will change us. Understanding scripture in this way a way that really matters is ultimately what is important.
If you want to know how faithful we are biblically we need to not look as much at what we say, but look to what we do. The saying "talk is cheap" is very applicable.
If we want to know what we care about we often have to stop looking at what we say we care about and instead look at what our actions say we care about. Our actions flow from our heart and speak volumes to what we actually truly care about most.
Saturday, August 9, 2014
Biblical Miracles
Certain people have had difficulty with the concept of biblical miracles because they seem to violate or pass around the laws of nature. It is as if the laws of nature are an absolute which cannot be changed.
Of course the teaching of scripture is that in the beginning there was nothing. You see the idea of the laws of nature being distinct from creation is completely un-biblical. God created and continues to uphold all of the universe.
The laws of nature are a product of God's creative power. He chose how the world works. And he can as Creator choose at any moment to suspend or pass around those laws at his pleasure.
Often man gets bent up about biblical principles and objects against them because he does not like them. Miracles are impossible because of this or that many say. Miracles prove that Christianity is an incoherent system some say.
The reality is that from start to finish Christianity is a coherent system of belief. You cannot reject Christianity because miracles disprove Christianity, because the existence of the Christian God would entail the possibility of miracles.
It is often the case that most objections against Christianity and why the religion is "not possible" all fail once we understand the nature of the Christian God, the nature of man, and the relation of God and man. Of course understanding these things does not prove Christianity to the skeptic, but most objections to Christianity simply miss understanding the Christian message on issues.
Often people find a quick objection which "defeats" Christianity and move on because they do not like what it says about humanity. Humanity tends to be painted in Christianity in a far too dark light for most people's liking. Many people feel that man is naturally good and we really don't like the morbidity of the religion.
Of course if we take a realistic view of the state of the world and all that goes on in it we will see that Christianity paints an accurate picture of mankind. Man as a race is not nearly as good as he wishes he was.
Sometimes there are excuses that this or that is the fault of man's issues. There can be truth that certain societal or economic factors intensify the issues of mankind. Ultimately, however, there is nothing apart from God that really changes the heart of mankind to make it good.
Of course the teaching of scripture is that in the beginning there was nothing. You see the idea of the laws of nature being distinct from creation is completely un-biblical. God created and continues to uphold all of the universe.
The laws of nature are a product of God's creative power. He chose how the world works. And he can as Creator choose at any moment to suspend or pass around those laws at his pleasure.
Often man gets bent up about biblical principles and objects against them because he does not like them. Miracles are impossible because of this or that many say. Miracles prove that Christianity is an incoherent system some say.
The reality is that from start to finish Christianity is a coherent system of belief. You cannot reject Christianity because miracles disprove Christianity, because the existence of the Christian God would entail the possibility of miracles.
It is often the case that most objections against Christianity and why the religion is "not possible" all fail once we understand the nature of the Christian God, the nature of man, and the relation of God and man. Of course understanding these things does not prove Christianity to the skeptic, but most objections to Christianity simply miss understanding the Christian message on issues.
Often people find a quick objection which "defeats" Christianity and move on because they do not like what it says about humanity. Humanity tends to be painted in Christianity in a far too dark light for most people's liking. Many people feel that man is naturally good and we really don't like the morbidity of the religion.
Of course if we take a realistic view of the state of the world and all that goes on in it we will see that Christianity paints an accurate picture of mankind. Man as a race is not nearly as good as he wishes he was.
Sometimes there are excuses that this or that is the fault of man's issues. There can be truth that certain societal or economic factors intensify the issues of mankind. Ultimately, however, there is nothing apart from God that really changes the heart of mankind to make it good.
Monday, July 28, 2014
Biblical Broadness and Biblical Narrowness
The bible has a certain broadness to Christian unity that the contemporary church does not have. In another sense the bible is far narrower on certain issues than the contemporary church.
The difference is that the bible constantly distinguishes between what is essential and what may be differed upon. Many of the non-negotiables center around the nature of God and the nature of God's work in the world.
These are the sort of issues that the contemporary church at time disparages as "theology which divides." It is in a sense a complaint about the over division in the church which already exists. Therefore we should not divide over theological issues.
What is missed is theological issues over the nature of God, and the nature of the Gospel are what the church should be concerned over.
In the bible there is a large sphere of non-essentials. Many of the divisions in the contemporary church are over non-essentials which churches should not divide over.
Often the non-essential issues are over things like order of worship, elements of worship, or music played. There are elements of these things which are important but often the importance in the current day is magnified past what is reasonable.
Often there becomes an advanced theology behind order of worship or the elements of worship or the type of music played. It often becomes so involved that the theological extensions are many stages removed conceptually from the bible by logical argumentation.
In a sense the contemporary church of all shapes and forms has developed a massive set of extra-biblical theology of how worship should look and sounds that it frequently takes more seriously than questions related the the gospel and nature of God.
Often the issue in the church is that it is majoring in minors. It is greatly concerned with getting things right which make little difference and there is little time left to make sure that the really important things are getting done. I think the issue is that we are often trying to market the gospel.
It is as if the gospel is not the power by which the world is overcome. We rather act often as if we need to package the gospel to somehow get people to get past the gospel.
It is true the gospel is difficult. But we do not help ourselves much by trying to focus on marketing the gospel at the expense of constantly proclaiming the gospel.
The difference is that the bible constantly distinguishes between what is essential and what may be differed upon. Many of the non-negotiables center around the nature of God and the nature of God's work in the world.
These are the sort of issues that the contemporary church at time disparages as "theology which divides." It is in a sense a complaint about the over division in the church which already exists. Therefore we should not divide over theological issues.
What is missed is theological issues over the nature of God, and the nature of the Gospel are what the church should be concerned over.
In the bible there is a large sphere of non-essentials. Many of the divisions in the contemporary church are over non-essentials which churches should not divide over.
Often the non-essential issues are over things like order of worship, elements of worship, or music played. There are elements of these things which are important but often the importance in the current day is magnified past what is reasonable.
Often there becomes an advanced theology behind order of worship or the elements of worship or the type of music played. It often becomes so involved that the theological extensions are many stages removed conceptually from the bible by logical argumentation.
In a sense the contemporary church of all shapes and forms has developed a massive set of extra-biblical theology of how worship should look and sounds that it frequently takes more seriously than questions related the the gospel and nature of God.
Often the issue in the church is that it is majoring in minors. It is greatly concerned with getting things right which make little difference and there is little time left to make sure that the really important things are getting done. I think the issue is that we are often trying to market the gospel.
It is as if the gospel is not the power by which the world is overcome. We rather act often as if we need to package the gospel to somehow get people to get past the gospel.
It is true the gospel is difficult. But we do not help ourselves much by trying to focus on marketing the gospel at the expense of constantly proclaiming the gospel.
Saturday, July 12, 2014
Responsibility of the Highest Degree
Responsibility at its highest level requires us to take responsibility for things which are not our responsibility. If we see this or that wrong or this or that wrong or issue we can fix we take responsibility if it is in our power to do so.
It is obvious we cannot do everything. We are cannot fix every problem but it should not stop us from doing what we can. To have great responsibility in life is to be aware that there are times we may need to act to fix things problems others creating.
Jesus is of course the greatest example of this responsibility. He took responsibility for sin when he himself had no sin.
There are conservative churches which have concern about speaking of Jesus as an example in life. There is some basis for the concern in that Jesus is first our savior and our God and only there after our example.
We cannot see Jesus as our example properly before we understand his nature, life, work, and stature seated at the right hand of God. But Jesus himself commands us to see him as our example, "a new commandment I give you that you love each other as I have loved you."
You see the movement in some conservative churches to avoid speaking of Jesus as an example because it feels risky is unbiblical. You cannot have concern for the teaching of God and then decide that you find the teaching of God too risky to speak of.
I am to a degree overstating my case, but not by much. If you begin to speak of Jesus as an example in many conservative churches you begin to see people cringe.
I believe the conservative church has more correct than the liberal church but at times the conservative church is so concerned with being "conservative" that it plays theology far safer than the Bible does to the extent of ignoring the word of God. Being biblical is to find what the Bible finds important.
It is obvious we cannot do everything. We are cannot fix every problem but it should not stop us from doing what we can. To have great responsibility in life is to be aware that there are times we may need to act to fix things problems others creating.
Jesus is of course the greatest example of this responsibility. He took responsibility for sin when he himself had no sin.
There are conservative churches which have concern about speaking of Jesus as an example in life. There is some basis for the concern in that Jesus is first our savior and our God and only there after our example.
We cannot see Jesus as our example properly before we understand his nature, life, work, and stature seated at the right hand of God. But Jesus himself commands us to see him as our example, "a new commandment I give you that you love each other as I have loved you."
You see the movement in some conservative churches to avoid speaking of Jesus as an example because it feels risky is unbiblical. You cannot have concern for the teaching of God and then decide that you find the teaching of God too risky to speak of.
I am to a degree overstating my case, but not by much. If you begin to speak of Jesus as an example in many conservative churches you begin to see people cringe.
I believe the conservative church has more correct than the liberal church but at times the conservative church is so concerned with being "conservative" that it plays theology far safer than the Bible does to the extent of ignoring the word of God. Being biblical is to find what the Bible finds important.
Tuesday, July 1, 2014
Biblical Definitions
Often the bible defines things quite differently than the world. Leadership in the bible is often servant leadership.
Success in the bible is living according to God's will and living life faithfully before God. You will see many people biblically who are great leaders and biblically very successful who the world views as having no success.
You see we often define things in ways quite contrary to biblical definitions. Our nature as fallen creatures is to define things in a certain way.
It'd be best to come to scripture originally from a state of neutrality from which to interpret scripture. Instead we come to scripture loaded down with unhelpful assumptions and unbiblical definitions.
It is not that we intentionally come to scripture at a disadvantage, but each culture in every time and place is fallen and brings its wrong assumptions to the text.
The bible meets us where we are, but if we are faithful to the bible we will find that it always demands that we think and it often prods us to be better people or to change in this or that way.
We never stop growing in this life. If we think we are without sin we make God a lier. We grow slowly by grace throughout all of life. Day by day becoming more like Christ.
Success in the bible is living according to God's will and living life faithfully before God. You will see many people biblically who are great leaders and biblically very successful who the world views as having no success.
You see we often define things in ways quite contrary to biblical definitions. Our nature as fallen creatures is to define things in a certain way.
It'd be best to come to scripture originally from a state of neutrality from which to interpret scripture. Instead we come to scripture loaded down with unhelpful assumptions and unbiblical definitions.
It is not that we intentionally come to scripture at a disadvantage, but each culture in every time and place is fallen and brings its wrong assumptions to the text.
The bible meets us where we are, but if we are faithful to the bible we will find that it always demands that we think and it often prods us to be better people or to change in this or that way.
We never stop growing in this life. If we think we are without sin we make God a lier. We grow slowly by grace throughout all of life. Day by day becoming more like Christ.
Saturday, June 28, 2014
Righteousness Requires Action
Righteousness is being set apart and different than the world. Often the church mostly sees righteousness in avoidance of certain actions.
Of course righteousness is avoiding sin, but it is also active. Often righteousness requires us to act. The world often has very little concern for certain issues.
True biblical righteousness requires that we act. Jesus did not simply avoid sin perfectly as his fulfillment of all righteousness. He also acted and his action completed his perfect righteousness.
The Pharisees misunderstood the law by making it fulfillable by the keeping of external states and avoidance of sin. They missed the fact that active righteousness and concern for the other is the core of righteousness.
True righteousness understands that love is more important then religious expectations when these collide. Jesus did what was right when he worked on the Sabbath to alleviate dire suffering.
Of course righteousness is avoiding sin, but it is also active. Often righteousness requires us to act. The world often has very little concern for certain issues.
True biblical righteousness requires that we act. Jesus did not simply avoid sin perfectly as his fulfillment of all righteousness. He also acted and his action completed his perfect righteousness.
The Pharisees misunderstood the law by making it fulfillable by the keeping of external states and avoidance of sin. They missed the fact that active righteousness and concern for the other is the core of righteousness.
True righteousness understands that love is more important then religious expectations when these collide. Jesus did what was right when he worked on the Sabbath to alleviate dire suffering.
Thursday, June 12, 2014
Where the Bible is Silent
The Bible is silent on many topics which many churches have strong stances on. It is a theological travesty of sorts that the church takes strong stances on issues which the bible does not take stances on.
I am not speaking of issues which arise out of modern technology that were not applicable to the biblical day but on topics which were equally applicable to the biblical day, but the bible takes no stance on.
An interesting topic is education. It is held as a sacred truth in many churches that Christian education is really the only legitimate choice for education.
You can see the great frustration and exasperation growing on people if you even suggest that the local public school might have some benefits to students (i.e. interacting with people of other faiths, interacting with people of different income levels, and in a few communities possibly higher quality education for some students).
The whole point is not if Christian education or public education is superior in general. The whole argument is worthless since public education varies wildly and Christian education varies wildly. The point is the horror with which many in the Church view the idea of considering the possibility that public education in some areas may have benefits.
To me it is a travesty that many churches take such a strong view on something which the bible takes no position on. While members in these churches can ask questions freely if we have any obligation to attempt to help the poor in other countries and no one bats an eye.
Often such lack of concern for the bible is phrased in the terms of are we really being helpful or just hurting the poor. The question is asked and then the answers is "we don't know" and then the solution is "we will not help the poor."
It is a great shame how the church in the current day often has great concern for things the bible has no concern for and the church has no concern for some of the most major ethical concerns of the bible.
I am not speaking of issues which arise out of modern technology that were not applicable to the biblical day but on topics which were equally applicable to the biblical day, but the bible takes no stance on.
An interesting topic is education. It is held as a sacred truth in many churches that Christian education is really the only legitimate choice for education.
You can see the great frustration and exasperation growing on people if you even suggest that the local public school might have some benefits to students (i.e. interacting with people of other faiths, interacting with people of different income levels, and in a few communities possibly higher quality education for some students).
The whole point is not if Christian education or public education is superior in general. The whole argument is worthless since public education varies wildly and Christian education varies wildly. The point is the horror with which many in the Church view the idea of considering the possibility that public education in some areas may have benefits.
To me it is a travesty that many churches take such a strong view on something which the bible takes no position on. While members in these churches can ask questions freely if we have any obligation to attempt to help the poor in other countries and no one bats an eye.
Often such lack of concern for the bible is phrased in the terms of are we really being helpful or just hurting the poor. The question is asked and then the answers is "we don't know" and then the solution is "we will not help the poor."
It is a great shame how the church in the current day often has great concern for things the bible has no concern for and the church has no concern for some of the most major ethical concerns of the bible.
Thursday, August 29, 2013
Good Biblical Hermeneutics
I always view that good biblical hermeneutics need to be very simple. Scripture has many complex things to say but most of the teachings of the bible are very simple.
Often it is easy to become to cleaver when we read the bible. It is easy to second guess God's wisdom.
Can that text really mean that? Was that simply a cultural context and not really the teaching of scripture? Many questions of this nature hide an element of unbelief.
We do not want to trust that God knows better than we do. It is often easy to not like the will of God. It seems our path seems more pleasant at times than God's path.
The reality is that God's plan is to make us happy in himself. The law serves to protect human happiness not attack it.
A sophisticated hermeneutical approach is often intended to explain why the bible says things which offend our culture. The reality is we do not need to make the bible suitable to our culture rather we need to make our culture learn to understand why the bible says what it does and why the bibles teaching is loving.
Often it is easy to become to cleaver when we read the bible. It is easy to second guess God's wisdom.
Can that text really mean that? Was that simply a cultural context and not really the teaching of scripture? Many questions of this nature hide an element of unbelief.
We do not want to trust that God knows better than we do. It is often easy to not like the will of God. It seems our path seems more pleasant at times than God's path.
The reality is that God's plan is to make us happy in himself. The law serves to protect human happiness not attack it.
A sophisticated hermeneutical approach is often intended to explain why the bible says things which offend our culture. The reality is we do not need to make the bible suitable to our culture rather we need to make our culture learn to understand why the bible says what it does and why the bibles teaching is loving.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)