Category: Gospel Advocate

Mind Your Business

On By Jovan PayesIn 1 Peter, Articles, Christian Ethics, Christian Leadership, Church Leadership, General Letters, Gospel Advocate, Johannine Literature, Luke, Mark, New Testament, Peter's Letters, Publications, Published

Reprinted with permission from the June 2018 issue of Gospel Advocate Magazine. Slightly revised edition.

I am not a fan of church politics, but I know they exist. Sometimes it reminds me of walking through the streets when I was a kid. You always had to have enough “friends” with you; you had to make sure you were stronger than the “other guy” and never get caught walking alone, especially in an alleyway. It saddens me to admit that “brotherhood alleyways” do exist. It appears in the form of the public shaming of preachers or schools; it appears in certain back channels where preachers or churches are undermined every step of the way due to a difference of opinions. In a word, brethren, we get consumed with the actions of others, and we seek to control them. We can’t seem to mind our own business and be about our Father’s business to love our community with the gospel.

It seems appropriate to begin this discussion with a brief look at the conjoined issue of ego. Jesus always found a way to check the egos of His disciples when they interfered with the priorities of the kingdom of God. Three examples from Mark 9–10 are helpful to point this out. In Mark 9:33–37, the Lord had to refocus the whispers and debate among the Twelve regarding who was “great” in the kingdom of God. Greatness is measured by service, not by wielding power (cf. Luke 22:24–28). In Mark 9:38–41, Jesus corrected the disciples’ sense of managerial entitlement when they failed to stop a “nameless” disciple’s ministry. What matters is Jesus’ authority, not that of the disciples.

A little later, in Mark 10:13–16, the disciples impose their opinion on when Jesus was ready to provide ministry. Jesus undoes their harm by demonstrating that the kingdom of God is to be at the disposal of the vulnerable. I would argue that the actions of the disciples probably emerged from a good place, but these moments should remind us that personal ego often gets in our way of manifesting the kingdom of God. I truly believe the church is the place where our egos are supposed to die (Rom 6:1-10), but sadly they often resurrect.

We need to hear afresh the challenge from three letters: Jude, 1 Peter, and 3 John. At the heart of our church politics problems is that we have, at times, misapplied what it means to “contend for the faith” (Jude 3), become meddlers (1 Pet 4:15), and have failed to curb our egos (3 John 9).

Contending for the Faith

Many an article, sermon, blog, and petition have been published under the premise to “contend for the faith” (Jude 3). This is a very honorable goal. But at times the methods we use “to contend” lack Christian substance. The verb “to contend” (epagōnízomai) may be taken to mean, “to contend about a thing, as a combatant”[1] and give some legitimacy to a “war-time” church culture; but the metaphor should be taken in its natural direction. It may refer to “the intense effort” of an athlete to overcome the challenges of a sporting contest.[2] In this case, “to contend” is about self-discipline in the face of exertion, continuing the struggle for the sake of the faith.

Jude is the voice of reason the church needs to hear today. A careful reading of Jude does not support a “Cry ‘Havoc!,’ and let slip the [spiritual] dogs of war” agenda to demoralize and humiliate our brothers when we disagree theologically. In fact, Jesus warned that such tactics would endanger us with the fire of Gehenna (Matt 5:22). Instead, Jude writes that a proper response to the perversion of the gospel and subversion of Christ’s authority (v. 4) is to stay faithful to the content of the faith (v. 3), to trust in God’s Word, to trust the Lord will judge false teachers (vv. 5–9, 14–16), to trust that such people will self-destruct (vv. 10–13) and to maintain a Spirit-centered culture of grace, mercy, love, and redemption within the church (vv. 17–23)—all while affirming a distinction exists between the faithful and the ungodly false teachers and their corruption of the gospel itself (v. 12).

Jude does not shy away from revealing the errors of false teachers and the dangerous consequences that flow from their influence. The effort Jude speaks of is not to be spent on attacking the defectors, but instead, the exertion must be spent within our own souls, within our own congregations. We must resist the temptation to enable an ungodly inhospitable war-time church culture. With precision, Jude makes this little letter a rich description of the inhospitable environment the false teachers created in the church by their influence (vv. 12-13): they hinder love and community, they consume what others need, they withhold what is needed for life, and create a disappointing chaotic and unreliable spiritual incubator for the people of God. That is not what Jesus has called us to be.

Jude does not authorize intrusive efforts to “defend the faith.” Some among us have thought for quite some time that if they publicize an error long enough; generate enough brotherhood support; vilify the names of brethren or institutions; act like church “newscasters,” showing us the cold fronts of error among us; guide us through “connect the dots fellowship”; or act like church “J. Edgar Hoovers,” then we have contended for the faith. We have been so wrong. In truth, Jude’s brief message is bent on moving Christians to “exert effort” in embracing God’s wisdom, God’s sovereignty, and the Christian call to continue to be a fellowship of grace and mercy, love and forgiveness while affirming a distinction between ungodly false teachers and their corruption of the gospel itself (Jude 12). Those are quite different responses.

Jude concludes his letter by saying,

“But you, beloved, building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ that leads to eternal life. And have mercy on those who doubt; save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh” (vv. 20–23).

This is the work of contending. Today, we need to learn that many times the best way to deal with false teaching is to focus on the work of our local congregation, be patient with our brethren, and be gracious to those struggling rather than entering into a shouting match, in other words, staying busy with our own work and minding our own business.

Meddlers and Bullies

Meddlers. In 1 Peter, the apostle Peter addresses a number of Christian churches undergoing a forceful front of localized persecution of “shaming” in the northern provinces of Asia Minor (1:1; 2:12; 3:13; 4:4). Peter reminds them to respond to such shame-based threats by providing a kind and respectful verbal response, explaining their hope in Jesus as Lord (3:14–15). He further exhorts them to refrain from “clashes” with the community due to punishable crimes (murder, thievery, evil-doing, meddling; 4:15). Indeed, the only clash that will glorify God is when Christians are unjustly persecution for the name of Christ (4:16).

We need to give thought to Peter’s word, “meddler” (ESV, NIV). It is listed among the four offenses Christians must avoid. English translations show the difficulty of rendering this compound word (allotri + episkopos), the New Revised Standard Version has “mischief-maker”; the New King James Version, “busy-body”; and New American Standard Bible, “troublesome-meddler.” Quite possibly, Peter coined this word because it is found nowhere in Greek literature before him. At the core, the “meddler” is someone who apparently takes or seizes control of the affairs of others. Peter condemns Christians controlling others “tactlessly and without social graces.”[3] Too many times Christians think their duty is to control the choices of our neighbors. I suspect it is because we seek the right outcome of godliness. This, however, becomes a “no win” scenario. The local church is a fertile field for this temptation. Many cultish tactics have been used in the name of “discipling” our brethren. Pulpits are used not only to “persuade men” but to “meddle” in the affairs of our members. Elders cross the line separating overseeing and control. But those with more daring egos can emerge to be “the overseer” of brotherhood affairs with ungodly force and shame to establish control. Peter reminds us to “mind our own business.”

Bullies. In 3 John, the aged apostle John writes to Gaius an embattled faithful Christian leader, who is part of the collateral damage of a church bully named Diotrephes. The church setting was desperate, requiring his own personal touch (vv. 10, 13–14). The issue? False teaching? Nope. The tension was about control over mission work (vv. 5–8). Traveling preachers were part of early church culture. Over a period of time, John had commended several to this church for support, anticipating their needs would be supplied to reach the next leg of their journey. Instead, he found a polarizing church culture had matured, manifesting in Diotrephes and Gaius.

Maybe Diotrephes began this journey with a proper concern for church autonomy in matters of missions or with a desire to serve the church. The only motive explicitly given in this letter is that he “likes to put himself first” and his rejection of apostolic authority (3 John 9). The outcome, however, was wickedness, suppression, and subterfuge. He created an inhospitable and volatile church culture where suspicion reigns and alternative opinions are silenced and ousted (v. 10). It was all a bit like an Orwellian 1984 dystopia. Diotrephes was the “thought police.” He thrust his voice into areas beyond his authority, and in order to do so, he imposed his opinion by force and manipulation.

There is no question that ego became a problem, and behind that lay sin. Diotrephes became a mission-killing church bully because he chose self over the kingdom of God. He chose “preeminence” (KJV, ASV), “to be first” (NET), “to be in charge” (ISV), “to be number one” (Plain English NT), “to have first place” (FHV), “to be first in everything” (Phillips). Third John shows us the damage rendered by elders and preachers who dominate others like an “intolerant general” when something is not done their way. A church bully by any other name would still reek of wickedness. Brethren, we need to humble our pride and “mind our own business.”

Conclusion

I’ll be honest. Sometimes I feel like an outsider, even after being a part of the church for now over twenty years. But I have seen church bulletins as subtle tools for shaming congregational members and even preachers from outside of the congregation. I’ve known preacher friends receiving a copy of a brotherhood “journal” with a post-it note attached as a “friendly” reminder of how “misguided” they are for their views. Brotherhood magazines have been leveraged to do excessive numbers of exposés about this school or that preacher rather than teaching what the Bible says. For what purpose? To establish unity? None of this brings unity; instead, such actions seem designed to permanently polarize. Church, we can, and must, do better (John 13:35). Part of the solution is to be about our “local work” and to “mind our own business” (Romans 14:4).

Endnotes

  1. W. E. Vine, Merrill F. Unger, and William White, Jr., Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and Testament Words (Nashville: Nelson, 1985), 2:125.
  2. E. Stauffer, s. v. “agōn,” Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), 1:134-40. [In addition: BDAG 356, “The primary semantic component in the use of this verb in Jd 3 is the effort expended by the subject in a noble cause.” It gives “expression” to the Greco-Roman “ideal of dedication.”]
  3. Thomas R. Schreiner, 1, 2 Peter, Jude (Nashville: B&H, 2003), 224-25.

Jovan Payes preaches for the Highland Church of Christ in Bakersfield, California.

To subscribe to Gospel Advocate, click here.

The Word of God among the Denominations

On By Jovan PayesIn Articles, Gospel Advocate, Hebrew Bible, Introduction, New Testament, Old Testament, Publications, Published, Revelation, Theology1 Comment

Reprinted with permission from the February 2018 issue of Gospel Advocate Magazine.

20180124_150851.jpg

Hebrews affirms, “For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart” (4:12 ESV). This is part of a warning in Hebrews, which affirms that Christians who defect from God will fail to meet their rest as their Israelite counterparts did (vv. 1-11). God holds his people —and His creation— accountable by His presence (“sight”) in the word of God (Hebrews 4:13). This is a raw incontrovertible truth.

This passage makes no caveats; it makes no attempt to remedy a distinction between God’s word and God’s presence. They are both manifested at the same time. God is involved with real life (time and space) with Israel and with Christians. God makes promises and keeps his word regarding their “rest,” and God holds His people and creation accountable to His word. God is Lord of heaven and earth and everything in between, and He holds it together by the power residing in Jesus (Hebrews 1:3; Colossians 1:17). The word of God is connected not only to the authority of God but also to His nature and how He reveals Himself to the world.

Let me say the above in a differently. Our God, who is beyond time and space (God’s transcendence), enters our earthly “realm” bound by time and space (God’s immanence) with His divinity and authority (sovereignty) intact; furthermore, God enters into relationship with His creation (Abraham, Israel, Christians) by revealing Himself in creation and in His word. God is active both in creation and in His word. Creation reveals God’s existence and hints at elements of His attributes (natural theology), but it is His word that reveals God and His “will” so that humanity can enter into covenant with God. The word of God was both proclaimed orally through particular spokesmen (patriarchs, prophets, kings, apostles), but the prophetic word was not only through oracles but also in written communiqués embedded with the same divine authority (2 Peter 1:16–21). These writings reveal the mind of God (1 Corinthians 2:11–16), His purposes and mystery (Ephesians 3:1–6), His involvement in human events (Acts 17:26–27), and the righteousness by which He will bring justice to the world (Acts 17:30–31).

To say it bluntly, the Bible is the word of God set in a permanent written form. Paul declared, “all scripture is breathed out by God” (2 Timothy 3:16). The Scripture bears the character of God and is no “dead” codebook, for it transforms every “man of God” into a competent, equipped servant (2 Timothy 3:17). The profitability of all Scripture is due to its quality as “God’s breath.” There is no pecking order between the spoken or written word of God. The inspired written word is as inerrant as God’s character. There is no source outside of the Holy Spirit-given Scripture that speaks God’s transforming work since it is the depository of the gospel’s message. What the word of God promises, God will do; what God proclaims, God’s holds His creation accountable to (1 Thessalonians 2:13).

The above may seem to belabor the point, but as anticipated by the title of this piece, we will sketch how the word of God is handled among Liberal (Modern) and Neoorthodox influences. It is essential for the church to reflect on these twentieth-century influences because dialogue is healthy, truth has nothing from which to hide, and any redefinition of biblical Christianity must be given due consideration (Galatians 1:6-7).

The following historical sketches will probably not satisfy everyone, but they will be enough to see their direction and how they redefine significant elements of historic Christian beliefs and their tendency to subvert scriptural authority.

Liberalism/Modernism

The word “liberal” is a very loaded word. It is often used with contempt to show disapproval of someone else thought to be progressive (instrumental music, expanded role of women, etc.). But this is not the historic sense of the word. Liberalism emerged in the late nineteenth century through the interplay of many players, thinkers, and philosophical trends. The influence of Liberalism, or Modernism, is seen in three levels: (1) revelation is not the final answer to reality, (2) naturalism is the key to reality and religion, and (3) since the Christian documents are built on ancient myths and superstitions, the historic supernatural claims of Christianity is immaterial. To be a “Christian” is a matter of experience and the “essence” of its teaching.

Liberalism, as an intellectual revolution, is a child of the Age of Reason (the Enlightenment). The “Age” saw the elevation of human reason over the institutional “church,” which wielded divine revelation. It was “the church” that dictated to the people what to believe about reality. Divine revelation was the final answer to determining truth and what really happened in the past. This was displaced with rationalism, scientific history (criticism), and naturalism as final answers to genuine and authentic history and truth. In essence, as Stanley Grenz and Roger Olsen point out, the maxim “I believe in order that I may understand” was turned to “I believe what I can understand.”[1] Faith was overturned by a reason informed by modern findings — thus, this point of view is called “Modernism.”

Everything that was received as genuine knowledge, now, was shaped by the natural world. This was further supported by what is called “the principle of analogy,” popularized by the liberal theologian Ernst Troelsch (1865–1923), which argued that the present is the best way to understand the past. The consequence was detrimental in the extreme on the trustworthiness of Scripture. The supernatural elements interwoven in Scripture are, by definition, myths and superstitions. This meant that there are no miracles, no supernatural interventions by God, and no resurrection of Jesus Christ. Thus, many new schools of “criticism” emerged to study Scripture with mixed results.

This naturally led to an embrace of “the essence of Christianity” so long as reason and experience allowed. “Liberals” are open to the modern findings from the natural world, open to a religious humanism and science —in particularly embracing Darwinian evolution as the process by which God created. If God exists, He could only be revealed through religious “experience.” It was also immaterial if the events of Scripture happened or not because religion is a condition of the heart. Yet, the apostle Paul makes it abundantly clear that if the resurrection event has not occurred, both our preaching and faith are in vain and we are still in our sins (1 Corinthians 15:14, 17).

Another arm of Liberalism is the demythologizing of the New Testament pioneered by the “Form Critic” Rudolf Bultmann (1884–1976). Bultmann argued that historic person of Jesus is built on untrustworthy sources. The New Testament is Christian propaganda shrouded in the imagery of the Greek myths and Roman legends. As such, they are not relevant for faith nor spiritual truth claims. It is the symbolism that matters. Today, one only need to watch the latest “history” programming to find modern theological liberals interviewed. Theological liberalism has significant questions that need to be answered, but it brings Christianity to a logical dead end.

Neoorthodoxy

The Swiss theologian Karl Barth (1886–1968) ignited a movement when he published his commentary on Romans in 1919. It charted a new theological direction away from Liberalism/Modernism. Barth (pronounced “bart”) was not fond of the misnomer “neoorthodoxy,” but his strand of thinking regarding the meaning of “revelation” and “the word of God” would rival the prevailing traditional belief held historically by the church. As a consequence, many regard Barth as one of the great theologians and the father of modern theology.

Orthodoxy affirms the teaching of historic Christian truth based on Scripture. This includes, for example, the following concepts: the inerrant inspiration of scripture, the triune Godhead, the deity and virgin birth of Christ, the historic creation and fall of humanity, the bodily resurrection and ascension of Christ, the return and final judgment. Barth argued, on the other hand, that “revealed truth” was not written, but was the outcome of an encounter (an experience) with God. Thus, instead of scripture as being the objective word of God, Barth argued for a subjective experience with God initiated by reading the Bible.

Barth was offering a completely different course of thought altogether. “Revelation” does not appear in the form of propositional truths. Arguing book, chapter, verse, or appeals to the very words of scripture is insufficient to reveal God. Revelation (the word of God), it is argued, is an “event” in which God acts in history (God’s immanence). Barth even argued that revelation is not found in natural theology (Acts 17; Psalm 19; Romans 1) but, instead, in events like the call of Abraham, the exodus, and the resurrection. Millard Erickson is spot on when he classifies Neoorthodoxy as an illumination theory divorced from an objective standard.[2]

Although Neoorthodoxy is not a unified movement, there are three interconnected witnesses (modes/forms) that shape its view on revelation.[3] First, Jesus is the word of God in the truest sense, for He reveals God in the event of His incarnation, life, ministry, death and resurrection. This is true revelation, the very gospel. Second, Scripture points to Jesus but it is a flawed human (read “errant”) attempt to provide a witness to divine revelation. It is instrumentally God’s word but not properly. Third, the proclamation within the faith community —Barth preferred “community” to church— is likewise instrumentally God’s word. The Bible, then, only becomes God’s word when God uses it to reveal Jesus Christ in the encounter, contrary to 2 Timothy 3:16.

In fact, Neo-orthodoxy is quite a popular approach to handling the Word of God, even among churches of Christ. A popular theological branch of this movement is “Canonical Criticism,” popularized by the late American scholar Brevard Childs (1923–2007). It seeks to broadly bypass much of the liberal destructive criticism of the twentieth century by accepting the texts of Scripture as literary units. Nevertheless, this point of view struggles, as did Barth’s, to embrace the Bible as a very human (errant) book while appealing to its authority for theological thought as if they were inerrant. They seek, in the words of one sympathetic Abilene Christian University professor, to “articulate a doctrine of Scripture that recognizes human flaws in it.”[4] Treating the Bible as an inerrant text is simply a form of bibliolatry.

Keeping the Faith

Today, the phrase “Word of God” means different things to different believers, and that includes preachers. Liberalism ultimately rejects a supernatural Christian faith, and is at home with amputating its historic claims of a resurrected ascended Lord Jesus, in exchange for a subjective diluted Christianity. Neoorthodoxy, on the other hand, embraces a supernatural Christian faith, but it rejects the supernatural origin, inerrancy, and authority of the Scriptures which undergird its claims. The Word of God has always been a manifestation of God’s presence in our lives, in His proclamation, and in His Scripture without pecking order. Let us join Paul who declares, “Let God be true though every one were a liar” (Romans 3:4).

Notes

  1. Stanley J. Grenz and Roger E. Olsen, 20th Century Theology (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1992), 17.
  2. Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 3rd ed. (Grand Rapids, Baker Academic, 2013), 220–21.
  3. Karl Barth, Evangelical Theology: An Introduction, trans. G. Foley (New York: Holt, 1963), 26–36.
  4. Christopher Hutson, “Scripture as the Human Word of God: Why Faith Contradicts Inerrancy,” Lexington Theological Quarterly 44.1 (2011): 210–21. Hutson serves as a professor of ministry and missions at Abilene Christian University.

To subscribe to Gospel Advocate, click here.

The Gospel of Luke

On By Jovan PayesIn Articles, Gospel, Gospel Advocate, Introduction, Jesus Studies, Luke, New Testament, New Testament Canon

Reprinted with permission from the July 2017 issue of Gospel Advocate Magazine.

20170626_144252.jpgThe Gospel of Luke, like Matthew, Mark, and John, provides a narrative of Jesus that dramatically emphasizes the story and significance of His life and ministry, His rejection and crucifixion, and His resurrection and exaltation. Yet, despite bearing strong similarities with the other inspired accounts, Luke’s approach expands our understanding of Jesus and the working out of God’s plan to bring salvation into the Jewish and Gentile world.

In fact, Luke is the first book of a two-volume set. Luke and Acts are joined at the proverbial hip by their prologues styled in the manner of ancient historical accounts (Luke 1:1-4; Acts 1:1-3). If one is to truly appreciate Luke, one must understand that the ministry of Jesus is but a beginning —a prelude— to the establishment and expansion of the church. Luke is the only Gospel Account that has a sequel (i.e., Acts). Said another way, in relation to Acts, Luke is a prequel. From this broad perspective, then, we can see that Luke purposefully expanded the stories of Jesus’ ministry to include more genuine details, to provide unique emphases, and to show that the ascension was not the end of the redemption story but that it was to be continued by the church.

The Prologue and Purpose

When one pauses to appreciate how each gospel accounts begins, Luke’s prologue to “book one” is set with a series of unique features. In Luke 1:1-4, the inspired text reads in such a way that the reader should see early on that this account is framed along different lines than previous accounts:

Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught. (ESV)

This one sentence in the Greek outlines very clearly the overarching concern of Luke’s gospel account, and it does so in a formal way consistent with ancient Greek historians and medical writers according to Graham N. Stanton in his classic work, The Gospels and Jesus.[1]

Here, Luke acknowledged the presence of other narratives preexisting his own account (Gk. diégesin). Despite their existence, it appeared to be the right time to provide his own inspired account. Luke told us explicitly that his gospel is in keeping with three aspects of early Christian testimony: (1) these preexisting accounts, (2) earliest eyewitness testimony, and (3) those who served to deliver the Word to the world. To be clear, Matthew, Mark, and John demonstrate to have the same concerns, but regarding emphasis, Luke’s account is the clearest. And this feature is most likely due to the sort of audience he seeks to reach —that is, people like Theophilus who are interested in the certainty of the events of Jesus’ life and ministry, death and resurrection, and the progress of those who followed Him afterward.

Luke’s Author and Audience

Two more unique feature of Luke is seen in both its author and its recipient, and this speaks to Luke’s heavy emphasis on providing a closely followed and orderly account. Luke, a physician by profession (Col 4:14), is the only known gentile author in Scripture period. That alone is a spectacular fulfillment of the end goal of the gospel to reach the Jews first, and then to the Gentiles (Rom 1:16; Acts 1:8, 13:46-48). Accordingly, Luke became a participant in the work of the Apostle Paul at some point before entering the province of Macedonia (Acts 16:10). Luke includes himself in many of the journeys of Paul, marking them with the terms “we” and “our” or “us” (Acts 16:10-17, 20:5-15, 21:1-18, 27:1-37, 28:1-16).

These “we” sections tell us something very rich about Luke. He is not just an author. Luke was a collaborator and eyewitness of the continuing story of the redemption in the church, who then investigated the origins and narratives regarding Jesus by interacting with eyewitnesses and early teaching of the Word. Luke was a Gentile convert who joined Paul’s missionary fellow workers, and now offered an inspired history of the full gospel story. For this reason, Luke bears many similarities with Matthew and Mark, gospel accounts based upon eyewitness testimony. And, the book of Luke shows that his missionary itinerary screeches to a halt in Jerusalem when Paul is arrested in the Temple and after meeting with James the brother of Jesus (Acts 21:17). It is within reason to point out that Luke had over two years in the Judean region to collect eyewitness accounts while Paul is detained in Caesarea, Philippi, until Paul appealed to Caesar (Acts 21:1-26:32). 

Moreover, unlike Matthew, Mark, and John, Luke names the immediate recipient of his two-volume work, Theophilus (Acts 1:1; Luke 1:1). Many theories and speculations abound regarding the nature of the relationship Theophilus had with Christianity in general and Luke in particular. While his name means “lover of God” or “friend of God,” this was not uncommon in the ancient world, nor in the New Testament (cf. Diotrephes, “nourished by Zeus,” 3 John 9). So, it is not as reasonable as one might think to suggest it is a “code name” for a believer.

What helps our understanding of Theophilus’s connection to Luke is the way he was honored with the term “most excellent” (Gk. kratiste). The word is used four times in the New Testament and all by Luke (Luke 1:3; Acts 23:26, 24:2, 26:25). In Acts, it used when addressing the governors Felix and Festus respectively. In Luke 1:3, there is not enough evidence to suggest such a political status, but it points to, at minimum, the upper-class status of Theophilus and his social circle. This would not be the first time Christianity intersected this social sphere (Romans 16:1-2; Acts 13:1; Philippians 4:22). Thus, Luke’s audience is probably of the intellectual kind, and this fits with his stated purpose and the “better” Greek he used.

It is not surprising then, given Luke’s research and experience, his relationship to Theophilus, and his social circles, that Luke would “write an orderly account for you… that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught” (Luke 1:3-4). Luke promises that he is framing his account with an attention to detail —that is, with a strong historical emphasis.

Luke’s Unique Framework

Not a lot of disagreement exists concerning the general outline of Luke. The narrative is relatively straightforward. The following outline of Luke not only provides a survey of the book, but also points out the unique features of this gospel. The Gospel of Luke cannot be understood a part from an emphasis upon the intertwining of history and faith.

Book One: Prologue (1:1-4). As emphasized thus far, Luke begins with a prologue all its own. Like John 20:31, Luke 1:1-4 states the purpose of his Gospel. This is reinforced by Acts 1:1-3, which summarizes that Luke is but the beginning story of “all that Jesus began to do and teach.” There is more to the story of Jesus, and Luke provides a detailed account of it.

Birth Narratives of John and Jesus (1:5-2:52). It is not without significance that Luke provides interwoven birth and youth narratives of John the Baptist and Jesus of Nazareth. Matthew recounts elements of the nativity story during the period of Herod the Great as does Luke. Luke intertwines divine events surrounding John and his family, and Jesus and Mary, anchoring them to real life with the historical lead in “in the days of Herod, king of Judea” (Luke 1:5) and “in those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus” (2:1). Such passages like Mary’s magnificat (1:46-55) and the two stories of Jesus in the temple (2:22-52) are recorded only here.

Anticipating the Ministry of Jesus (3:1-4:13). Among the “time stamps” Luke employs, 3:1-2 is layered with seven political figures that suggest a window from 27 to 29 for the beginning of the ministries of John the Baptist and the Lord. The intertwining of their stories continue, as John is set up as the voice to anticipate the coming of the “salvation of God” —Jesus (v. 6). Jesus is again anchored to not just history but biblical history and creation itself, as His genealogy begins with his adoptive father’s lineage down to Adam, “the son of God” (3:38), the phrase Jesus would identify with (1:35, 4:3, 9, 41, 20:36, 22:70; Acts 9:20). These are significant unique elements of Luke.

Jesus Ministers in Galilee (4:14-9:50). If one were to read Mark, this section would have many similar events recorded, but Luke expands on them or gives them a fresh twist. One event that is of particular importance for its uniqueness is Jesus reading the Isaiah scroll (Luke 4:17-21; Isaiah 61) in the synagogue, during which He not only declared its fulfillment in Himself, but also revealed what His ministry would look like. It will be a series of reversals (blind see, captives free, etc.). Jesus’ concern for the disenfranchised is witnessed in all the Gospel Accounts, but Luke strongly emphasizes it.

Jesus Travels to Jerusalem (9:51-19:44). This section is often called the “central section” of Luke as it roughly covers ten of its twenty-four chapters. Jesus has “set his face to go to Jerusalem” in anticipation of being “taken up” (9:51). It is unique in that Luke is the only gospel account to record Jesus’ travel route on the eastern side of the Jordan River. It contains some of the most memorable events (rejection in Samaria, the seventy-two sent), parables (Good Samaritan, the Rich Fool, Prodigal Son, Rich Man and Lazarus), encounters (Mary and Martha), and sayings of our Lord (return of the unclean spirit, sign of Jonah). This section is bursting with teaching and events unique among the gospel accounts.

The Passion Week in Jerusalem (19:45-21:38). Here, Luke recounts a series of controversial events leading up to his betrayal and rejection. One immediately sees the unity between the way Matthew, Mark, and Luke chronicle the “passion week.” This includes the challenge of Jesus’ authority, paying taxes to Caesar, the resurrection, the question regarding the lordship of Christ, and the prediction of the destruction of the temple in AD 70. The section concludes with a summary statement.

From Shame to Exaltation (22:1-24:53). One of the unique elements in this section is the portrayal of the institution of the Lord’s Supper and the cup-bread-cup scenario. It is not that Luke makes a mistake here, but that it perhaps reflects the practice of having four cups employed during the Passover. Another unique feature of this section is in the resurrection appearances —in particular, on the road to Emmaus where two disciples find a Jesus “in hiding.” They recount this event along with their sense of a loss of hope until they connect the dots that this was Jesus. These are the details that provide a sense of uniqueness of Luke’s gospel.

Conclusion

Luke, along with Acts, were probably published and sent to Theophilus around AD 70. Acts ends with Paul under house arrest for two years in Rome, awaiting his case to be heard by Caesar (Acts 28:30-31). This is a few years before his death, which is traditionally dated to the time of Nero (AD 54-68; Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 2.25.5). At the time of publication, we should picture Luke as a veteran evangelist, an experienced missionary who has researched the ancient origins of the faith. He was addressing those engaged by the story of Jesus who wish more details and certainty. His inspired record, then, is offered as a powerful demonstration of the historical basis of the claims of Christianity.

Endnotes

  1. Graham N. Stanton, The Gospel and Jesus, eds. Peter R. Ackroyd and Graham N. Stanton (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989), 83.

Jovan Payes preaches for the Highland Church of Christ in Bakersfield, California.

To subscribe to Gospel Advocate, click here.

The Public Reading of Scripture: Six Practical Suggestions

On By Jovan PayesIn Articles, Church Practices, Gospel Advocate, New Testament, Paul's Letters, Practical, Publications, Published, worship

Reprinted with permission from the March 2017 issue of Gospel Advocate Magazine.

A vital element to the worship assembly of the body of Christ in the first century was the reading aloud of the Scriptures (1 Timothy 4:13; Acts 13:15). Today, it is probably hard to imagine a time when God’s word was accessible only when assembled with God’s people; it was a communal experience. The proliferation of Bibles today has truly made reading Scripture an individualized practice; yet, this has not always been so. In fact, the meaning of “church” (ekklesia; “an assembly”) presumes a people gathered to hear, to commit to, and to act upon the Word of God (Matthew 16:18; Deuteronomy 4:10-11; 31:9-13). Thus, hearing God’s Word is part of who we are as “the church” (Acts 11:26; 14:27).

The church needs to elevate the importance of the Scripture reading assignment in our assembly (Act 13:15; 2 Corinthians 3:14). There is a tendency to be too casual about this assignment. Perhaps it is because we take literacy for granted, though the capacity to read words is not the same as understanding the words being read. In this connection, we may then take for granted that anyone can read the Scripture aloud to the church. In some societies, reading is still regarded as a technical skill, much as it was in Bible times.

If reading the Scriptures will make a child of God “complete, equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:17 ESV) when read for private devotion, then the same God-breathed writings read aloud will provide the same effect for the congregation. In the Scripture reading, God is speaking to His people. For this reason, the public reading of Scripture is a crucial element of the worship assembly and should not be taken casually or lightly.

A Note on the Context

In fact, Paul anchored to this very core principle when he wrote to Timothy to provide a strategy for the faithful to protect themselves from a departure from the faith, which will consist of Christians “devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons” (1 Timothy 4:1). The antidote against “irreverent, silly myths” (4:6-7) and any possible competitors to divine revelation is the healthy teaching from God (4:13). Public reading of Scripture inoculates against false teaching and invites faithful discipleship and commitment to God (Exodus 23:22; 24:7). It syncs us up with God.

Paul makes similar requests in other letters to the churches of the first century. When detailing the unveiling of the mystery of Christ, Paul anticipates and expects the church to share his understanding (Ephesians 3:4-6). After he writes on the supreme role of Christ in redemptive history, he expected the Colossian congregation to letter swap with Laodicea (Colossians 4:16). And, to the Thessalonians, he was quite strong when he placed “an oath before the Lord to have this letter read to all the brothers” (1 Thessalonians 5:27), for through the reading aloud of his letters they would be taught (2 Thessalonians 2:14-15). And in the final revelation of Jesus, the apocalyptic portrayal of divine victory through the gospel is framed as one that must be read aloud and safeguarded against addition and omission (Revelation 1:3; 22:16-19).

Reading Scripture aloud can bring the church into sync with God’s word. The more exposure, the better our biblical literacy; then, ideally, the healthier our churches will become. Let us switch gears, now, to provide practical suggestions for this powerful act of reading Scriptures aloud in our worship assembly.

Six Suggestions for Reading Scripture Aloud

There must be a spiritual gravitas connected to reading Scripture before the assembly. I had a mentor, Don W. Hinds, that would stop me when I misread a passage aloud. He would use the adage, “take heed how you read,” to instill in me the importance of properly reading the biblical text aloud. I would like to use this as a refrain as we consider some practical guideposts for reading the Scriptures aloud when the church is assembled for worship — although these suggestions can be applied in various settings of church life.

Furthermore, in many congregations, those who manage or arrange the various elements of the worship assembly (deacons, elders, etc) should seriously consider the points below as they select public readers of Scripture. We are worshipping God and engaging in spiritual and divine matters, we are not merely filling a roster. God’s word must be the centerpiece of our worship.

First, the reading should be met with a respect for proper pronunciation and performance. This is the “oral” spiritual heritage of God’s people, to hear and understand God’s word (Nehemiah 8:1-8). Not only should one practice to read clearly and distinctly, but some types of Scripture (genre) require an element of performance (cf. Psalms). For example, we should not read a psalm of lament (Psalms 51) as if it were a genealogy. Take heed how you read.

Second, we should consider the verbal skill set of those who will read before the assembly. The goal is to instill an understanding of God and to invite the church to obedience. There is no verse that prohibits individuals with speech problems from publicly reading Scripture. We should both be sensitive and inclusive. Fortunately, audio technology facilitates what requires loud speaking in other settings. Still, as long as the public reading reaches its goal then it has accomplished its purpose. Take heed who will read.

Third, the reading selection should be long enough to understand the message. This is especially true when the selection is independent from the sermon. Some congregations may design their readings to go through a book (Psalms) or a large section of Scripture (Major Prophets). Other times, they are connected to the sermon. The readings must be of sufficient length to provide context and understanding and should have a natural and intended connection to the worship service. All things being equal, we may ask, “why read from the Song of Solomon when the sermon is on the ‘second death’ of Revelation?” Take heed what you read.

Fourth, the readings must be the Scriptures free from alteration. From time to time some like to add a few impromptu thoughts in connection with the reading of the Scripture. The points may be very excellent, but they run the risk to be of another variety. It is important to keep to the task at hand, which is to read the assigned portion of Scripture. There are many reasons for this. The most significant reason is to elevate the word of God over the words of men. As Revelation 22:18-19 warns, the text must be read without omission and addition. Take heed that you read.

Fifth, the reading of Scripture must be purposeful. There should be communication before hand to prepare those who will read aloud in worship. Sometimes we can displace others when we lean upon “good readers” in a pinch. With a purposeful schedule, we can give enough notice so that our readers can prepare, become familiar with the text, and develop a comfort level. Preparation and practice are the best helps to reduce “stage fright.” Take heed before you read.

Sixth, the reader should not cause a distraction by what they wear. It is true that God seeks and looks at the heart (1 Samuel 16:7; Matthew 15:8), but one should dress for the spiritual occasion (Matthew 22:11-14). While attire may sometimes be a distraction, it is more important that the reader’s lifestyle should not be a distraction. If those who pray in assembly should have “holy hands” (1 Timothy 2:8), what of those who read Scripture. Paul told Timothy that he should be an example; this would make an additional influence when he would read aloud the Scriptures to the church (1 Timothy 4:12). Take heed by whom you read.

Concluding Thoughts

The public reading of Scripture was an essential component of the first-century worship assembly. If in today’s time, the church seeks to be in conformity with the early worship practices of the New Testament church, then it will seek to incorporate this practice and develop those who will read. Moreover, the church will grow when she integrates the three-fold instruction given to Timothy: the public reading of Scripture, the exhortation, and the teaching (1 Timothy 4:13). In a day and time when so many church groups are seeking new and innovative methods to “enhance” worship, the age-tested and inspired method to read aloud God’s word must be in the forefront of our worship assemblies. Blessings to the reader, and blessings to the hearer.

Jovan Payes preaches for the Highland Church of Christ in Bakersfield, Calif.

To subscribe to Gospel Advocate, click here.

The Widows church of Christ

On By Jovan PayesIn 1 Timothy, Articles, Christian Leadership, Church Leadership, Ecclesiology, Gospel Advocate, Kingdom Ethics, Leadership Ethics, New Testament, Paul's Letters, Publications, Women Studies

Reprinted from the December 2015 issue of Gospel Advocate Magazine.

20180131_133232

When I was a younger preacher looking for opportunities to preach and teach, I helped a congregation which was, to my surprise, exclusively comprised of widows. The “Widows church of Christ” (as I shall call them) taught me a great deal about fidelity to God’s Word in the face of a temptation to do otherwise.

It had never crossed my mind that I would stumble upon an all woman congregation. My assumption that there would always be mix-gender congregations was completely shattered. I’m glad.

My first reaction, I must admit, was arrogant. “Poor brethren, you have no leaders.” I had forgotten that still they had the Lord, the Apostolic Word. They had different talents and skills to be used on behalf of the Lord (1 Cor 12; Rom 12). They still gathered in His name, communed at the table of the Lord, gave of their financial means, offered the fruit of their lips. They were still the blood-bought body of Christ (Eph 1:22-23; Col 1:18; Acts 20:28). They still had the responsibility to bring the gospel to the world (Mark 16:15-16; Matt 28:18-20).

I Asked a Question

I asked a sister why they invited male preachers to teach and preach when they could minister the word to themselves. After all, Scripture shows that Christian women prophesied and prayed in New Testament times (1 Cor 11:5; Acts 22:8-9), taught the Word of God accurately (Acts 18:26), and brought people to salvation (2 Tim 1:5; 3:14-15). Christian women also served one another in many diverse ways (1 Tim 5:2; Tit 2:3-5; Acts 9:36-43).

Too, Christian women were patrons, fellow workers for the truth, and “house church” hostesses (Rom 16:1-16), demonstrating that there is not a ministry our sisters cannot participate in (Acts 8). There are many sisters in the Lord mentioned throughout the New Testament as servants of God, evangelistic collaborators, and financiers. To say it in another way, Christian women can minister the gospel to the world without hindrance.

She responded, “Because the men are to lead prayers and preach God’s Word in the assembly.” She further explained, “We do have our own Bible study together as sisters during the week, but on Sundays we plan for visitors. We respect God’s plan for the worship assembly.”

This was a reference to 1 Tim 2:8-15, and the Apostle Paul’s instructions for prayers and teaching in the public assembly. In fact, the phrase, “in every place” (en panti topō 2:8) is a New Testament shorthand for “in every place of assembly.” In the assembly, Paul emphasizes “the preservation of male and female distinctions” by providing a “distinctive sphere” for Christian men and women to operate within.

In this setting, Christian “males” (Grk. andras) are to lead prayers on behalf of the body of Christ (2:8), provided they have a lifestyle consistent with godliness. Christian women are to “likewise” demonstrate godliness when assembled for prayer (2:9-10). Paul, then, adds the command that in the assembly Christian women “must learn in silence in full submission” (2:11). This does not suggest that she should check her brain in at the pew, nor is this a term that requires absolute silence. It simply explains her participation in the assembly as peaceful (2:2).

Paul goes on to explain, however, that a sister’s participation in the assembly is limited (2:12). He affirms, “I do not permit a woman” (1) “to teach” nor (2) “to have authority over a man.” Instead, she is “to be in silence” as an active learner (2:11). This instruction is explained (2:13 “for”) to be connected to the order of creation and the order of the fall along with its consequences (Gen 2-3), and a reminder of her demanding ministry towards her own godliness, her family and household (12-15).

Expanding the Role of Women

Although there is considerable literature centered on expanding the role of Christians sisters in the assembly beyond the above biblical dimensions, it was refreshing to see a group of sisters in Christ concerned with God’s guidelines for the worship assembly – even though they could have worshipped God among themselves.

It was a few years earlier that I had received a letter from a congregation where their elders unanimously offered “a position statement on the expanded role of women” in the congregation where they had oversight. They acknowledged that the “congregation’s thinking on this subject has been evolving for the past several years.” The letter outlines several roles where their sisters had evolved including teaching and co-teaching co-ed adult Bible classes, and Scripture reading in Sunday morning worship.

They further expressed their “intention to, in the near future, begin using women to serve the communion emblems, preside at the communion table and lead public prayers during the regular worship services.” They had not, at that moment, any intention to have “women as elders” and “women as pulpit ministers.”

One of the arguments used to sidestep the words of the Apostle Paul is that the text reads, “I do not permit”; hence, this verse does not represent “God’s law.” Far from it. The argument goes, that since he is “addressing a specific time and place with his statement” then Paul has no concern for providing “a law for all time.”

The question then becomes if the injunction by the Apostle is only valid when addressing the situation Paul is speaking to, and has no permanent place as God’s law for the church, then what about the other logical appendages to his argument? Is quietness a situational matter? Are the issues of holiness, modesty, self-control, learning in quietness merely situational and hence not of any permanent value because Paul writes, “I desire” (2:8) and “I do not permit” (2:12)? Or is it only the prohibitions which are situational (“I do not permit”)? If so, the positive statements in this text demand our sister’s presence in the assembly to be embraced with godliness, modesty and learning in quietness and submission. Or are these situational as well and therefore not God’s law?

The fact of the matter is that Paul ties this entire argument for the when the church assembles “in every place” to the events of creation, the order in which the first humans were made, and the admission of Eve being deceived. The weakness is not in Paul’s argumentation, nor in his use of “I.” The weakness lies with a hermeneutic which circumvents the natural reading of the passage.

Concluding Thoughts

My brief stint with the good sister at The Widows church of Christ was a powerful reminder that we can be faithful to God’s inspired texts regarding our gender roles in the assembly. My good sister showed me that faithfulness in the face of a difficult and complicated ministry was possible. Furthermore, they did not sell their building and go elsewhere; instead, they remained in the town, “because,” as she concluded, “the Lord’s body needs to be here.” God bless our sisters who are convicted to maintain their godly roles in the assembly and participate in so many amazing and unsung ministries.

Jovan Payes preaches for the Highland Church of Christ in Bakersfield, Calif.

To subscribe to Gospel Advocate, click here.

Leaving a Street Gang for Christ

On By Jovan PayesIn Articles, Autobiographic, autotheography, Conversion, Discipleship, Gospel, Gospel Advocate, Spiritual Formation, Spiritual Growth3 Comments
20180131_130404

Reprinted from the April 2015 issue of Gospel Advocate Magazine.

Paul writes, “Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect” (Romans 12:2 ESV). It has been my experience that I am often unaware of the transforming process of the gospel until I see the contrast of who I used to be and who I am now. The transformation Paul speaks of reflects a fundamental change in character, and such change does not happen except by a “renewal” of the mind over a consistent and indeterminate period of time.

My story is of one foolish soul who was transformed by the gospel. I am afraid that at times I feel that I carry the memories of another man. Nevertheless, I was what I was, and I am what I am; may God be glorified by this thorn-riddled soul only to the extent that I find closure in my weaknesses and glory in His strength (2 Corinthians 12:7-10).

Before you are the beginnings of a hoodlum who was transformed by Christ, and that hoodlum (spoiler alert) was me. This is how I tell it.

The Transformation

One day in the summer of 1996, I was sitting on a rest stop at the corner of 24th and Mission streets in San Francisco, Calif. The intersection is a major hub in the Mission District, a major Latino district. Amidst the sounds of cars and bus traffic, the commotion of people talking and shopping, and bullhorn preachers shouting aloud, I came to a personal decision that would change my life forever.

At the time, I was a member of a local gang. I used drugs and alcohol. I was a high school drop out. I tried drug dealing. I was a thief. I was violent. The picture is rather rough, and the only reason I believe it is because I still have most of the memories.

That day I just wanted to relax. I was tired of it all. I saw girls calling home informing their families that they were never coming home (prostitution). I saw children in waves seeking to join our gang because they had created enemies in their own neighborhoods. I realized that I was just exhausted by the lunacy of it all.

I found myself at a fork in the road. What I wanted was an afternoon of drinking with my friends. What happened is that I realized that I had created a life full of potential dangers that forced me to think of ways to handle them. “If I go to the park,” I was thinking, “there is a good chance that along the way I would face the potential of retaliation.” At this point, I was not afraid of dealing with the problem. It was just that I was tired of the problem.

My mind raced with other options. I could take the 14 Mission (a bus) toward downtown, headed toward Pier 39. I had spent quite a bit of time there as a younger child, breakdancing for tourists with my big “brother” Rick (technically my cousin) on Fisherman’s Wharf. That thought quickly faded with the reality that I would pass through rival neighborhoods with those who would hurt me simply because of the color of my clothes (this is gang-banger logic). Again, I just wanted to relax.

I turned my attention southward, toward Daly City, a suburb of San Francisco. The broken record continued, “I just want to relax.” The last time I was on that bus route, some friends and I were shot at. In all fairness, we instigated it; still, I felt no need to travel alone just to prove a point. So I canceled that plan. It really dawned on me how much destruction and danger surrounded me because of my choices.

I said to myself, “go home and go out tonight.” I counseled myself, “make sure no one follows you.” I have gone to people’s homes banging on their doors in order to elicit a fight, so it was not beyond the possibility that I could be followed at some point. It was a life of paranoia. It was at this point when my heart uttered the words that would change my life forever: “I just want to go to heaven.” Those words made so much sense to me.

At some point, I found a Bible under my bed. It was inexplicable. I had no idea I even possessed a Bible! I began to search and read through the Bible with the feeling that I was getting closer to God. I look back at this moment much like I do when I read the conversion story of Cornelius in Acts 10 – yet in my sins, reaching for God, searching for His words to save me.

Left: Jovan after a street fight (photo taken by SFPD). Right: Jovan during a medical mission campaign in Panama, Central America.

Many Hands

A few months later, Rick was visiting home while on leave from the Army. I didn’t know he had been baptized into Christ earlier in the year by his superior officer. He approached me in our living room with these words: “Jovan, I found the church.” I sarcastically responded, “Yeah, you found a church, great.” I was thinking in terms of the city cathedrals like St. Paul’s Catholic Church, which was down the street, or Mission Delores, or even the Cathedral of St. Mary of the Assumption. Pick a saint, we Catholics had a cathedral for them.

Rick said, “No, I found the church that you can read about in the Bible.” This intrigued me, and I asked him to tell me more. By this time, I had read most of the New Testament, and I was already trying to be “Christian.” We proceeded to talk for a few months, and a couple of days after Christmas 1996 I was convicted by the gospel. I realized I needed to follow through with my change of heart, so I was immersed in water for the remission of my sins. I was added to the redeemed (Acts 2:47).

Civic Center church of Christ (a Google Street View of the old building): Home of The College of Evangelists, the birth place of Contending for the Faith. The people who met here established the Oceanview church of Christ in Pacifica, CA.

By and by, as we say, I became a member of the Civic Center Church of Christ in San Francisco. This is where my education in the gospel would lead me to face a series of challenging events and point me down the path to prepare myself for ministry. Much like the eunuch from Ethiopia (Acts 8), I had a wonderful mentor in Donald W. Hinds. If ever I had a father in the gospel, it was him; if ever there was a troubled child in the gospel, it was me. Don received me as Christ receives us all (Romans 15:7). I am forever indebted to his influence on my life, along with his son, David Hinds; together, they planted God’s Word in my heart, watered it, and in due season it bore fruit (2 Timothy 2:2; Amos 7:14-15; Psalm 1).

The truth is, I had no aspirations of preaching. Don had another thought altogether. Don sat me down every chance he could to teach me something new – well, new to me – during our Sunday lunch break between services. From studying the Bible to inspiring me to teach the gospel to believing in me to preach the gospel, it was in a very real way a tangible experience much like Paul and Timothy. Brethren, hands-on mentoring transforms young people.

One Wednesday afternoon I faced the consequences of leaving the gang life behind. I was confronted with the decision to return to the street life I had left behind. I was surrounded by my former “associates” with an ultimatum. My conviction to Christ led me to be beaten and left lying in a driveway in some small street in the Mission. I remember telling my family that I had left the gangs behind. I remember attending Wednesday night Bible study that very night, telling my friend and mentor Don, “I sowed to the flesh, and I hope I reaped its final harvest.”

My wife has also been a transformative figure in my life. On March 3, 2001, I assumed the challenge of being the head of my own household; actually, I believe Cindy Tuggle accepted the challenge of being my wife. I would love to say that I have been the best husband ever, but I can only say that I have been a better man and husband because we have overcome so much together. The reason for our success has been trusting in God’s transforming Word to take what we have made of our lives and reform it to His glory. Today after 14 years of marriage, we are blessed with three children – something I never thought possible.

Pressing Forward

I have made many mistakes along the way, so it is hard for me to speak of transformation. God’s grace continues to inspire me to renew my mind and transform. This much is certain, transformation through the gospel is possible – no matter who you are, no matter where you have been, no matter what you have done, there is a place for you in the kingdom of God. I was a knuckle-headed thug from the streets of San Francisco who became a Christian, and through the grace of God a husband, a father, a preacher, and at times a mentor. Pray for me that I may:

“know him and the power of his resurrection, and [that I] may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, that by any means possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead” (Philippians 3:10-11).

Jovan Payes preaches for the Highland Church of Christ in Bakersfield, Calif.

To subscribe to Gospel Advocate, click here.

Why Balance Still Resonates Today

On By Jovan PayesIn Balance, Book Reviews, Christian Leadership, Church Leadership, Freed-Hardeman University, Gospel Advocate, Ira North, Leadership, Leadership Ethics1 Comment
51WDYSYSX1L

Ira North, Balance: A Tried and Tested Formula for Church Growth (Nashville: Gospel Advocate, 1983), paperback, 156 pages.

In the academic Spring of 2004, I was enrolled in Freed-Hardeman University’s Masters in New Testament program. I took a course entitled, “The Education Program of the Church.” One of my favorite experiences was reading the book, Balance: A Tried and Tested Formula for Church Growth, written by Ira North (1922-1984).

Judging from North’s accomplishments, it is reasonable to assume why his last contribution to congregational development was selected as mandatory reading for the class. After all, North came from a strong Restoration Heritage pedigree of church leaders, was an accomplished student (Ph.D. Louisina State University), a “known” preacher throughout the Nation, editor of the Gospel Advocate (1977-1982), and educator in Speech and Bible at David Lipscomb University for 18 years.[1]

Aside from the bright red sport-jacket that has become iconic Ira North, it is his relationship with the Madison church of Christ (Madison, TN) which has memorialized him among church leaders. From 1952 until his death in 1984, North worked with the Madison congregation and the effect of his collaboration was the development of the largest church of Christ in the world in 1984 (from about 400 to well over 4,000 members).[2]

Despite the fact that in 1959 North authored, You Can March for the Master, his most celebrated work is Balance; some might say, it is his ninth symphony. Surely, then, the experiences (the good, bad, and ugly) North pulls from, and articulates in meaningful aphorisms is worth the time and energy it takes to read through the book’s 156 pages.

10 Main Points to Explore

In order to have a strong congregation, North places a high premium on common sense. It is the most general of all the points in the book, but common sense is particularly emphasized in the maintenance of the balance of organization, never overly emphasizing one program to the exclusion of all the others. Ideally, when the teaching program is strong, the congregation is mission minded, and is diligent to provide benevolence, church machinery will be in a balance homeostasis. The church symmetrically pushes forward in each biblical emphasis.

Proper usage of time is vital to the well-being of a congregation in two ways: building use and worship time. North asserts that the church building usage should reflect the business would model – everyday and with regular hours. After all, North argues, the building was designed to be an avenue to serve Christ. More functional and meaninful use of the building is good stewardship of facilities, time, and money. Time management likewise applies to the worship period. “Dead air” should not exist, but instead the worship service ought to be well organized, streamlined, and spiritual. Whenever a congregation keeps its worship and Bible class time within the specified time mentioned in the bulletin or other public notices, then it is obvious that the church is focused upon being an asset to the spiritual development of its members and visitors, without being taxing on the individual time needs of each family. In six words: worship can be timely and spiritual.

Designing a broad program for the work of the church is vital to secure a well-rounded, inclusive labor “in the vineyard.” An approach to implementing scriptural programs should not isolate a few members to do the work of the church. The local work was never designed to run on the backs of a few people (Acts 6.1-4). Thus from the beginning of design, the Bible school curriculum, benevolent programs, and other endeavors for the church, a key component should be that any member of the congregation may participate and contribute their abilities to the cause of Christ (i.e., the vineyard). In other words, make it church policy that the work of the church be inclusive so that all may “enlist.”

The delegation of responsibility to qualified members of the congregation stimulates congregational mobilization. In other words, use “in house” abilities, or to use another slogan, “keep it in the family.” When brethren in a local congregation have responsibility in their hands for specific “church-related” tasks, it alleviates the entire burden from being on a small group of people. More work can be accomplish. Add to this the use of members qualified through their own particular skill sets (accounting, management, baking, encouragement, etc.), then two things are accomlished; The maximization of quality work and specialized work. Because members are in place to accomplish tasks they are familiar with, then personal ownership of the work of the church materializes and the need to serve the Lord is satiated. A true benefit to the congregation is to have members serving in ways they already have the “know how” for Christ.

Another staple for church growth, according to North, is to remain creative and willing to try new ways to help the congregation look for creative and Scriptural ways to fulfill biblical commands. For example, the building can be used as the hub of so many programs as the church develops benevolent programs and evangelistic outreach programs which puts the church in a positive light in the community. A congregation that is busy can generate interest and appreciation from the community, which may encourages people to consider the Gospel. North’s point is not to engender a “stay busy for busy sake” disposition, but instead to break the stagnant complacency found in many congregations. Sometimes a program sounds good on paper, but not in practice. However, whether the programs “work” or not, the church should try numerous biblical ways to serve Christ in the community.

Maintain a positive and optimistic attitude, because it raises a congregation’s atmosphere to higher spiritual altitudes. Since Christianity is a positive religion, it follows that those who subscribe to its teaching out to be so infused with its goodness that it flows over into the atmosphere of a congregation.  Joy, peace, thankfulness, and love are not the hidden fruits of the Spirit, instead they are those things which have become manifest, so these are emotions and blessings that we should expose to the world. It is true that Christains are people, and consequently it is not always the easiest thing to be “happy go lucky.” North feels it is better to be proactive in encouraging and fostering a congregational atmosphere to is positive and loving. This reinforces the attractiveness of the Christian religion, as set forth in the Scriptures (1 Pet. 4.10; Rom. 13.8-14), as being a vibrant and good force in the world.

It is absolutely necessary that the work of the church is inclusive(i.e., social, economical, and age demographic). An extension of designing the congregations programs for all groups in the church, North emphasizes that attention needs to be paid to each individual person in the church. This will make them feel as if they are a part of something and not left out. Members of the Madison congregation would shake hands with each other and with their visitors before each service. North affirms that a strong church needs to implement ways for personal contact and interaction that develops the feeling of mutual dependency among its members.

Evangelistically, North advocates that in order to grow, a congregation ought to search for the one. Whether it is VBS, a “Gospel Meeting,” or a regular service the evangelistic emphasis ought to be on the one, i.e., the individual person. This is echoes the Scriptural teachings of Jesus in the parables of the lost sheep, the lost coin, the lost son (Luke 15.1-32). One more person stimulates constant growth and encourages others to be evangelistic. To be successful, evangelism does not have to be by “the thousands and ten thousands”; it can be a simple and steady stream. There is no reason a whole congregation cannot do this. In order for a congregation to thrive it must continue to search for the one.

At all cost a congregation ought to “give diligence to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph. 4.3; emphasis added). Unity is one of the bedrocks of the Christian religion and must be established in order for true benefit to occur for the church. This affects the atmosphere and purposeful drive of the church in the work of the Lord. Attitudes needs to be set aside, personal ambition ought to be cast away, differences must be “handled with care,” and the goals of Christ must be realized. Members  must truly work together and respect the various roles they play in the congregation.

North advocates that in order to grow, a congregation ought to go all out. This seems to be an extension of the broad church program, the focus upon the individual, and keeping the unity of the church together. All ages ought to be considered for care. If any group in the church needs special attention, all must be done to secure a spiritually invigorating program to help those needs. The widows and the orphans are not the only ones who are “afflicted.” The church can help in those areas where God has desire for there to be help.

Concluding Thoughts

This brief reflection cannot emphasize sufficiently the various beneficial observations North has provided in Balance. North’s “common sense” advice is balanced, focused, and all encompassing; moreover, this common sense served him well while he ministered to the congregation in Madison, Tennessee for 32 years. It is desired that these reflections portray the power of the book in some fashion. All ten points have been thoroughly infused into each chapter and underline the point that there are many factors involved in church growth; it is not simply “a” single factor which is the key.

It is not our conviction that should these principles be employed in the life of a congregation that the church will grow by the thousands, but we believe it is better to say that a congregation that incorporates these principles will breed the right atmosphere for great things to be accomplished for the cause of Christ.

References

  1. Gospel Advocate 126 (1984), 124.
  2. Robert E. Hooper, “North, Ira Lutts (1922-1984),” Encyclopedia of the Stone-Campbell Movement, eds. Douglas A. Foster, et al. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2005), 569-70.