The other night we were talking about church and it seems so
I think this needs to be defined trans-culturally, that is, definable for any culture on this planet, or, as Paul would say, "or is God the God of North Americans only? Is he not the God of poor Chinese or South American Indians also? Yes, of these others also, since God is one." It also has to be definable for every age since the church began on Pentecost. This saves us from the trap of thinking church is only what we see in our cultural, generational context.
Simply put, I think "church" is a group of people who have been saved, who gather after working in the harvest for the week, meet to strengthen, encourage and teach one another in Christ, orient those new in Christ and get back into the harvest. The context of the harvest, that is the Great Commission, Acts 1:8 and John 15 are everything. I think this applies to every time and every culture. Our science of music and worship, our science of child care, our Western rituals have not existed for all times and even now, they do not exist for many cultures. Ironically, it seems that the more simple and essential the church, like in China, the more effective and vibrant the power of what it does to the individual and making of disciples.
So someone asked, what about doing something for the poor. Personally, I'm for that and I'll click "like" on face book. If we were in the 3rd world, as an example, the poor would be all around us. They would be the people in our field of vision who we were reaching for Christ. You wouldn't have to drive out of the suburbs. We wouldn't have to indulge in missionary tourism, whether to the inner city or the 3rd world, to visit the poor and needy and then feel good about our good deed and ponder the experience later in the land of milk and honey. We have taken on definitions of "church" and "mission" that hurt us because of our view of the harvest.
The poor and needy are all around us. I understand the need for compassion to the poor, but somehow using them to overlook my responsibility to those I am supposed to reach next to me and lead a missional life for Christ hurts me and my love for Christ. We've given money to the unbelievers across the street (no tax credit there) when they were deeply hurting financially and their marriage was on the rocks. Does anyone really believe, in this economy, that you have to take a trip to the inner city to find someone to show compassion to, who is needy? All we have to do is what any person in any culture has ever had to do, love our neighbors, get to know them and see the need that the Lord shows us. God has prepared good works for us to walk in. We don't have to travel far to find them. Paul told Titus that Christ's people were to be ready to do good for those around them. It is essential, basic outreach 101 for any Christian in any culture or any time.
What about God's power? I personally believe that many of the sign gifts were for the time of Acts. I don't see anybody walking around whose shadow can cure you. But who doesn't believe that all that power, the healings and miracles are still in God's power to do as needed to reach the lost? So why don't we see them? They accompany reaching the lost, working in the harvest, the biblical, essential making of disciples. Why should God use His power for our amusement, to build "our" church? God shows His power for His glory to support His work, not ours. We might see more of His power if we were deeply involved in His harvest around us.
I'm not trying to be edgy or harsh, but only stating the obvious. Church is a group of people set free by Christ trying to set more people free, supporting each other in the love of Christ to make Him known. We don't need videos to do this or a worship band. We don't need self righteousness or isolation. We need to all be in love with Christ and compassionate to the spiritually dying around us. That works in any country in any time.
No comments:
Post a Comment