The church

I have been thinking about church for a number of years now. Part of my thinking has been a concern for where the church is today; a lack of connection with the wider society. Also from a dissatisfaction with my own church life or involvement. The church, as in local expressions, seems to have become a very complicated entity and lost it's impetus as a revolutionary movement, instead evolving into an institution. The church often seems to side with conservatism and the middle classes. It is very 'worship' oriented, internal focused. I should say this is from a New Zealand perspective only.

If you belong to the evangelical wing, then more than likely you will be middle class, white Anglo-Saxon. Your friends will be mostly from within Christian circles. You will work hard and aspire to the usual consumerist objects. Those from Pentecostals churches might be more 'cross-cultural', working class to middle class but still mix amongst Christian friends. Church life in both groups will focus on 'worship' times and how to live a more victorious life for God. Mainstream churches will be a mixture but mostly middle class to wealthy people; some will be 'liberal', some evangelical and some 'socially active' believers.

In most of these churches there is a strong emphasis on 'building one up in the faith'. Outreach on the whole seems to be getting people into church on a Sunday or to a special church programme. So programmes and buildings seem to take on a special priority. Most churches will have paid professionals leading them and naturally they are aware that their performance is based on 'bums on seats', so they will ultimately gear things around their local gathering to the exclusion of the "kingdom of God' approach. As mentioned in a previous post ' Sharing your faith. Living your life' is the norm.

Shape of church
That's my unscientific look at the church today. What do I think the church should be today?
I think the NT talks about different types of 'churches': the local body of believers meeting in a home (Rom 16:5), a number of local churches referred to as a city or region church (Acts 9:31) and the 'world' wide or universal church (Acts 20:28) (Col 1:18). What I'm thinking about is the local expression of church. What did it look like?

The Greek word for "church" is ekklesia, which means an assembly. In Acts 19:39, 41, it is used for a large group of townspeople. But among Christians, the word ekklesia came to have a special meaning: all who believe in Jesus Christ.

If we view the church as a group of believers meeting together then we can say, that one first must belong to Christ (born again, saved, redeemed by the blood etc). Does that mean that only 'saved' people can belong to the church? Yes to the universal church because it is the 'body of our Lord'. But the local church is not so proscribed.

The church is described in several ways: the people of God, the family of God, the bride of Christ. We are a building, a temple and a body. Jesus described us as sheep, a field of grain and a vineyard. Each analogy describes a different aspect of the church.

Many of Jesus’ parables of the kingdom describe the church, too. Like a mustard seed, the church started small and yet has grown quite large (Matthew 13:31-32). The church is like a field in which weeds are scattered among the wheat (vv. 24-30). It is like a fishnet that catches bad fish as well as good (vv. 47-50). The church is like a vineyard in which some people work a long time and others only a short time (Matthew 20:1-16). The church is like servants who were given money to invest for the master, and some produce more fruit than others (Matthew 25:14-30).

Jesus described himself as a shepherd, and his disciples as sheep (Matthew 26:31); his mission was to seek lost sheep (Matthew 18:11-14). He described his people as sheep that must be fed and cared for (John 21:15-17). Paul and Peter used the same analogy, saying that church leaders should be shepherds of the flock (Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5:2).

"You are…God’s building," Paul says (1 Corinthians 3:9). The foundation is Jesus Christ (v. 11), and people are the building built on it. Peter said that we are all "living stones...being built into a spiritual house" (1 Peter 2:5). As we are built together, we "become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit" (Ephesians 2:22). We are the temple of God, the temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 3:17; 6:19). Although God may be worshiped in any place, the church has worship as one of its purposes.

We are "the people of God," 1 Peter 2:10 tells us. We are what the people of Israel were supposed to be: "a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God" (v. 9; see Exodus 19:6). We belong to God, because Christ purchased us with his blood (Revelation 5:9). We are his children, and his family (Ephesians 3:15). As his people, we are given a great inheritance, and in response we are to try to please him and bring praise to his name.

Scripture also calls us the bride of Christ—a phrase that suggests his love for us, and a tremendous change within ourselves, that we might have such a close relationship with the Son of God. In some of his parables, people are invited to attend the wedding banquet, but in this analogy, we are invited to be the bride.

"Let us rejoice and be glad and give him glory! For the wedding of the Lamb has come, and his bride has made herself ready" (Revelation 19:7). How do we become ready for this? It is a gift: "Fine linen, bright and clean, was given her to wear" (v. 8). Christ cleanses us "by the washing with water through the word" (Ephesians 5:26). He presents the church to himself, having made her radiant, spotless, holy and righteous (v. 27). He is working in us.

What should be the main purpose of the church? Again I see different functions of the church; traditionally the church has seen it's role as a gathering for "worship" and teaching. When we look at the NT we can see certain practices that the local churches seem to do and we also can gain an idea from the overall focus of scripture.

Love
A central theme that pervades scripture and seems to be foundational to any church is "love"! The church is a place where we can love one another: "Love one another," Jesus tells his disciples (John 13:34). When Jesus says "one another," he is not referring to our duty to love all human beings. Rather, he is referring specifically to the need for disciples to love other disciples — it must be a mutual love. And this love is an identifying characteristic of Jesus' disciples (v. 35).

Mutual love does not express itself in accidental meetings at the grocery store and sporting events. Jesus' command presupposes that his disciples are meeting with one another on a regular basis. Christians should have regular fellowship with other Christians. "Do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers," Paul wrote (Galatians 6:10). To obey this command, it is essential that we know who the family of believers is. We need to see them, and we need to see their needs.

But also this love will have an outward look too. We are to love God and to love our neighbour as ourselves. Our neighbour is not just within the church but in the world. "God so loved the world..."

Mission
Mission is the next most important foundational function of the church. The church in essence is missionary at it's very core; its reason for existence (The Christian faith is intrinsically missionary. It regards the “reign of God” which has come in Jesus Christ as intended for all humanity. This dimension of the Christian faith is not an optional extra: Christianity is missionary by its very nature, or it denies its very raison d’etre).. It starts with God's concern for the nations in the OT and for the poor, marginalised and alien peoples. The commission given to Abraham to be a 'blessing to the nations' and Jesus command to 'go into all the world..' (Luke 1:7) At the beginning of the book of Acts we see this command and at the end of the gospels; it is central.

In the letters of the NT again we see living and sharing our faith as pivotal to what the church was about. When the church wasn't moving out to the 'world' then persecution drove them out and the gospel spread through out the region.

Now lets look at the form of church,what do we do in church. Acts 2 has a wonderful description for guidance in doing church.

42They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. 43Everyone was filled with awe, and many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles. 44All the believers were together and had everything in common. 45Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need. 46Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, 47praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.

Teaching, fellowship, breaking of bread and prayer are things that the early believers were engaged in when they met together. Where did they do these; in homes and at the temple courts, which means they didn't have a purpose built complex. They had an effect on their own members and the wider community because these activities were based on love and mission. There was leadership within the local and area churches, the apostles seemed to have leadership, elders and deacons are mentioned but we are not told much about any other form within the church.

There was certainly little emphasis on buildings, structure or form. When you read the NT there is emphasis on correct thinking and correct living (orthodoxy and orthopraxis), both within the community and in the wider community. Even the act of sharing in the Lords Supper was to have a witness to unbelievers.

The other point worth noting is that from the early beginnings there was conflict within the church, which in a sad way brings some comfort to us in the age of church splits! Which reminds me not to look at the church with 'rose tinted glasses'!
This reminds me about ‘the honeymoon’ stage after a wedding... Many of us have exhibited this same naïveté regarding the events of Acts 2. We are tempted to think of the first church in Acts 2 in the same way we think of Adam and Eve in Genesis 2. We are tempted to think of the church as perfect, pristine, and untouched by sin and later corruption. The difference between Genesis 2 and Acts 2 is that Genesis 2 comes before the fall of man; Acts 2 comes after the fall. The church in Acts is not perfect; it is simply pursuing the right things.

The right thing is not the size of the church but the health of the church. If a church is healthy, it will naturally grow. But if it is not healthy, no matter how many people come, it will be in danger until they are able to get healthy. Here’s the principle: focus on health and growth will come.
So how does a church stay healthy? It stays healthy by operating on Biblical priorities. Those priorities are set out in Acts 2 as seen above.

What is your escape route?

I have often read 1 Corin 10: 13 as saying that God will not allow me to be tempted beyond a certain point; at that moment he will rescue me. So keeping me from sin. Over the years I have also come to realise that somehow it doesn't seem to work out like that. Why? Because I have constantly acted out my sinful thoughts, I have sinned before God and man. Doing that which I know God does not approve.

Now on a second reading of that verse I see something I missed.

"No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to all people; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, that you may be able to endure it."

What does the Bible really say? That when you become entangled in sin that at some point, before it is too late, God will provide an escape route so you don't have to commit that sin. The point is though that YOU must TAKE that escape, you must say yes thank you God I'm finished with this sinning and I'm out of here. You will overcome, and panting exhausted you will fall down on the grass and gasp to get your breath back and whisper "Thank you God , Oh thank you God."

God wont force us out of committing sin but he offers us ways out, escape routes if only we take them.

Prov 4: 23 says "Watch over (or guard) your heart with all diligence, for from it flow the springs of life." It is out of the heart that our thoughts arise and can so easily take control and lead us into sin. Heb 12: 1 "lay aside every encumbrance and the sin that so easily entangles us.."

We are actively involved in sinning and in resisting that sin but we must take due diligence of our lives. What have we invested in, what is preoccupying our thoughts?

"Fix your eyes upon Jesus", "walk in a manner worthy of your calling' and "He that is within you is mightier than he that is without."

People of Faith

Generalisations
Following on from the last discussion, about not making generalisations about people. I would like to talk about Christian (And Western) thinking about people of other faiths, especially Muslim peoples.

Over the last few years I have received many emails and articles with information on Islam, usually telling us the 'true nature' of Islam. Most often it comes via a Christian source. Either the information shows how violent Islam is, or how inferior to Christianity it is. How Christians have nothing in common with Islam especially, when using the Arabic word "Allah" for God. Finally how Islam is quickly taking over the Western (nee Christian) world.

Often these articles are written by and sent by Christian folk who love God and have a real burden to reach the world for Christ. Their motivation is pure and honourable.

The facts that are in these articles are often correct and the historical stories are usually well documented, if however coming from a biased western, christian point of view.

Violent Religion
Many Christians point out that Islam is a violent religion. I have often counted this by saying that most Muslims round the world are just your average family person and when you get to know a Muslim they often are like you and me. I still believe this, however a recent article said that this notion is not valid because as with the Nazi's, when good people do nothing and stand on the sidelines while others participate in violent acts, then these people will triumph. This is true when good people do nothing then evil triumphs. People need to stand up against those people, groups or nations that promote violence over peace, war over dialogue, force over love.

Islam came out of a violent history and it did spread in the early days through conquest and forcible conversion. Today however Islam is spreading more by birth and immigration than war. Although I realise that in some African places there are some stories coming out that Muslim groups are trying force an Islamisation on their country.

Islam is not the only religion that has used force, unfortunately Christianity doesn't have a great track record; think about the Crusades, Inquisitions, Reformation and colonial days. Today Islam is associated with terrorist groups; Sept 11, London bombings, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran and Palestine. These are true places of ever increasing levels of violence and lack of respect for the value in human life. What is happening today in the name of Islam must be dealt with by the world, by Muslim people especially, by other means apart from the gun.

The article I have just read says that fanatics have taken over Islam, like they did in Germany, Russia and China, that the only group we should be concerned about are the terrorist. "As for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts; the fanatics who threaten our way of life". It says that because moderate Muslims are not standing up then, "Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence. Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up, because like my friend from Germany , they will awaken one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun".

Now this might be true in essence but how will we ever be able to reach Muslims if all we do is concentrate on the fanatics. How will there be dialogue with Muslims if all we see is a person wanting to take over the world. Instead of seeing Islam as a violent religion (because that automatically makes followers violent people) we need to see them as people loved by God, people that Christ came to save from sin to reconcile to God. We can't be blind to the fanatics and just stand by while people are butchered by terrorist, we need to encourage all Muslims to own the problems within Islam and to claim Islam back for them. We need to stand against those in the west who preach war above bridge-building. We, the ordinary 'Jo public' can't have much effect on the terrorist, they almost become irrelevant to us. Our point of contact is with the Muslim we live next too, see on our streets invite into our homes.

Counterfeit Religion!
Other articles talk about how wrong Islam is, built on a lie, so inferior to Christianity. They like to belittle Islam, showing all the mistakes and inconsistencies, and with the ultimate humiliation those practising Islam. One writer had just engaged an Imam in dialogue and felt he had won the argument, he was so proud that he had made the Imam 'look like a naughty school-boy caught doing wrong' and at the end 'you could have heard a pin drop as the Imam held his head down in shame'. He might have won the argument but I doubt that he won his soul. We might have all the answers and prove that the Quran is incorrect, an impostor, having stolen text from the Bible etc. If we come into a room and say your faith is wrong, your prophet is not really inspired, what effect will that have on the believer? Try looking at this from a Christian stand point. How do we feel when a Muslim says that what you believe is wrong, the Bible has been corrupted and is inferior to the Quran. That Jesus is not God just a prophet. We don't like it, we feel that the most important part of our life has been trampled on and that the person saying these things could never be our true friend.

Instead of throwing stones at Islam we need to build bridges so we can talk and make Friends and love them unconditionally - like God does. If we are firm in our own faith then we don't need to pull theirs apart but find points in common to open dialogue. Use the Quran in our conversations, learn about their faith in a non-judgemental way without giving away anything of our own believes.

World Conquest
Lastly the articles talk about Islam taking over the world through immigration and birth rate. These articles look at what has been happening with birth numbers amongst immigrants how they are projected to expand while native Europeans are declining.

"The human habit is simply to project current trends into the future. Demographic realities are seldom kind to the predictions that result. The decision to have a child depends on innumerable personal considerations and larger, unaccountable societal factors that are in constant flux. Yet even knowing this, demographers themselves are often flummoxed. Projections of birthrates and population totals are often embarrassingly at odds with eventual reality." ( Martin Walker)

It is true Northern European birthrates have been declining alarmingly over the last number of years and Muslim peoples have been migrating to northern countries usually with higher birth rates. For those who cherish a romantic illusion of a time when Christendom reigned supreme, then this will be alarming.

But population figures do not always follow predictions, there is some inductions that certain European countries are showing a slight increase in birthrates and a country that has seen huge growth is now predicted to decline, that is China. Many experts also believe that immigrant populations will show a slowing of birth rates as they become second generation and more prosperous. So you cannot accurately project out figures and say this trend will continue.

Fear Verse Love

What do these attitude towards Muslims do to the average Christian person? I feel they create a sense of fear towards Muslims, a competitive attitude with Islam and a feeling off "I need to convert these Muslims so I can get rid of this 'evil' religion"! Let's keep Muslim out of our country because they are here to take over. Our religious freedom or special status will disappear.

This is in complete contradiction to the Biblical record and the motivation of the early followers of Christ. Paul says in 1 Thessalonians 2: 8 "We loved you dearly - so dearly that we gave you not only God's message, but our own lives too." and in Chap 1:3 "We continually remember before our God and Father your work produced by faith, your labour prompted by love, and your endurance inspired by hope in our Lord Jesus Christ".

Romans 10:1 "Brothers, my heart's desire and prayer to God for the Israelites (Muslims) is that they may be saved.
2 For I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge.
3 Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God's righteousness"
1 Cor 10:13 "And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love".
Paul based his ministry on love and also he spoke of an indebtedness to all people to preach the gospel. Jesus says that, "we are to love the Lord our God and to love our neighbour as ourselves"
Our neighbour is not just the person living next to our house but all who are without the gospel.

So if we come towards our Muslim brethren as people we want to love because God loves them then it must change our attitude. Muslims must not become an item on our agenda, a project. We will not win them to Christ by belittling their faith or systematically exposing their errors. We will struggle seeing them come to faith through door knocking or inviting them to church. Muslims come from a culture of relationships, family, honour, commitment and outward piety. If we want to see Muslims come to faith then we need to change in our attitude, motivation and worldview.

Attitude, Motivation and World-view
Our Attitude should be the beginning of change. We see the Muslim as a people loved by God and we love them too, they are valued as human beings, we see them as individuals all different. So we remove the stereotypes that have been circulated. They are not all terrorists, they don't all want to see me, an infidel, killed. Because I value them I want to build bridges towards them so I can live the gospel and talk the gospel with them. I do not fear them because they become my friends and come into my home and I into their homes. We learn from each other and share meals together.

My motivation is out of love and respect. It is not to change them, to make them leave their religion. It is to be their friend and my hope is that God's Holy Spirit would bring them to faith, but I will remain their friend even if they don't come to know Jesus.

My world view will change from a mono-culturist to a multi-culturist. I can learn from other cultures and faiths. That Islam is not the "other' out there but our neighbour. That I need to see that western is not always the best. To the Muslim, his world-view is very precious. It is his whole way of life. Jesus Christ desires to become the very center and core of that world-view. To the Christian who is entrusted with the task of introducing and stimulating that change, the task is awesome, challenging and sometimes frightening. But to those of us who have had the privilege of meeting transformed Muslims, the task is eminently worthwhile!

I want to build bridges of understanding, weave faith into life (live my faith. Share my life), and make the most of opportunities that God gives to me each day. What a difference it would make if every believer became friends with a Muslim and their family, invited them into their homes, played together and then pray together.

Lets not be frightened into taking notice of Muslims, lets welcome them into New Zealand and learn to love them.

Aotearoa as a New Zealander

Intolerance
It never stops amazing me how intolerant we Christians can be! I remember back to when I was first out working and was visiting relations up north, this extended family over the years had had a profound and positive effect on my young Christian life. Now this particular part of the family I was visiting astonished me when they started talking about Maori people. They were so offensive, racist and intolerant. But especially displayed a lack of Christian love or Christian character. Their behaviour seemed out of place with all I had held dear in my Christian journey so far. My own family had always had an inclusive approach and a very respectful way of talking about those of different ethnicity's.

Unfortunately I came to discover that this intolerant and racist attitude was all to common amongst many of my Christian friends and relatives. I struggled to reconcile this attitude with the message of reaching out to people with the gospel. How can you say with words that God loves the world and that the 'great commission' commissions us to take the gospel to all the world when one denigrates those of a different background to us!

I also discovered that often Christians in New Zealand had no problem showing compassion to those from distant lands but not towards their fellow NZ'ers of Maori (or Asian) descent! It became obvious to me that it wasn't necessarily that these folks were racist but just had an intolerance towards people who were different and who seem to be at the bottom of our social structure. They had accepted the stereotypes that the news media betrayed; that Maori were responsible for most of our crime, therefore you can't trust them. Maori were responsible for most violent crime therefore we had to fear them. Maori were bludgers of the welfare state therefore they were lazy. These images were projected onto everyone who stood out to be Maori or had a brown skin.

How can you have an unconditional love for a people when you don't trust them, or denigrate them? So if they aren't racist then what generates this antagonism towards Maori? Is it connected to the issues of ethnicity and the 'Waitangi Treaty'. These are issues which New Zealanders are struggling with and the outcomes will have ramifications on how we treat others coming here who are different because of culture, colour or religion.

Where do we belong?
New Zealanders of European ancestry who are second or third generation NZ'ers I believe have a struggle trying to decide who they are as a 'people'. The problem is that we have a mixture of ancestral heritage. As an example in my family; we have a German surname but we have just as equal amount of English, French, Irish ancestors as well. So where do i come from (my tupuna)? I am not really German, or English, actually I really can't say that I'm European, I don't have a sense of connection, I don't feel that I belong there. I live on the edge of Polynesia but I'm not a Polynesian. I could claim the German side of my heritage because that is where my name came from and I must admit that I do look back to Germany as having a slightly stronger claim on my past. But this is based not on anything scientific but how I feel. However this is looking back not answering the question of who I am now! I don't really feel I am connected to Germany now or geographically. I live in the pacific close to Polynesian a bit further from Asia and close to Australia. I am a New Zealander, whoever that is.

I think until we can accept who we are as a nation, as an ethnicity, we will struggle with gaining a mature outlook to 'others who are different', accepting migrants from different backgrounds. Maybe the problem we have towards Maori is that they seem to be able to stand tall as Maori people; they feel they are Maori even if they have mixed ancestral backgrounds. Ethnicity is not a fact it is a feeling, it's me being happy with who I am as a people, being proud of my tribal canoe. Connecting with the geographical anchorage of where I live now. It would be nice if one day I can say I'm a New Zealander from Aotearoa. I believe we all should be "tangata whenua", although with special place to those original four canoes.

The Waitangi Treaty is possibly another factor that causes some New Zealanders to feel aggrieved and to feel that Maori are 'getting another hand-out'. I struggle myself with the Treaty claims, I have no problem with settling past injustices, giving back land that was illegally taken, but when the claims start trying to settle 'customary rights' then I feel a little uncomfortable. We live in an entirely different society today, no longer a British colony, no longer a Polynesian people, nor a prominently English people. We are a mixture of different backgrounds, the Maori of today are very different from their ancestors so we need to be careful that we don't create laws that divide us on a subjective classification of ethnicity.

Colour blind
It is very easy to glibly go on to say that we are all one race, colour or culture, they don't matter we should be colour blind. We can quote scripture that says there is no more Greek, slave, male or female" etc "we are all one in Christ". That is right in as far as our relationship with God goes. We all stand before our heavenly Father as 'sinners saved by grace'.

When we say this within the context of race or culture then it usually comes from those within the dominant culture with it's structures firmly in place and with a culture that isn't disadvantaged. Those on the 'outside' feel they need an identity to give them a sense of significance or prevent their official invisibility and consequent discrimination. Although they want to be part of this new culture they also value where they have come from. We need to embrace unity in diversity, allowing people to be different to be Maori, German, black or white but accepting common values that have been shaped within this New Zealand culture. We need to be certain what our common values are and articulate them loudly so everyone is aware of them.

Because we are not a Christian nation we need be careful in how we express values that come out of our Christian heritage. We don't need to be ashamed of that Christian heritage and we should strive to keep truly Biblical values within our culture but outside that we should be flexible in what we proscribe for others who share different backgrounds.

I should say that these are thoughts getting typed out, not completely formed yet, so am open to a different slant on the above. Will continue on with the next blog on how we respond to people of other faiths especially Muslims.