Follower of Jesus

I want to make following Jesus simple.  Not simple in the sense that anyone can do it or that the narrow road/gate is made wide.  Simple in the sense that the essence of the faith is emphasized well beyond the rules, regulations, and expectations.

For so many people, Christianity isn’t an option because of the exectation that someone completely change the way they live.  While in some cases that may be necessary, it’s not always the case.  And so Followers of Jesus need to be careful not to cast such a wide net.

I use the term “Follower of Jesus” instead of “Christian” intentionally.  One reason – and perhaps a little selfishly – is that in Portland the term “Christian” carries so much baggage.  In this town, the extremes define the faith for those who are not Christians (ex: Recently Followers of Christ Church in Oregon City was back in the news because yet another child died [18 from this church have died in the last 5 years].  The excuse given in each case is that church members refuse modern medical treatment, opting for faith healing instead.  The very public court cases leave many Portlanders assuming that all Christians are wackos who kill their kids…and then we try to talk about Abraham and Isaac…).  But I also talk about “Followers of Jesus” because it gives a better picture of what Christians should be doing and better gets at the “heart” of the faith.  While it’s true that we are saved by faith and our actions have absolutely no bearing on our eternity, it is equally true that actions are a necessary part of the life of a Follower.  Christianity is more than something we believe…it’s a lifestyle.  “Follower of Jesus” better communicates the belief-lifestyle connection than does “Christian.”

Filed under: Bible Study, Christian Living, Christianity, Discipleship, Philosophy

Discipleship

The whole concept of disicpleship has been a growing interest and theme for me the past year.  I’m beginning to think that discipleship is really where it’s at when it comes to the Christian life.  Here are a few thoughts:

Ecclesiastes 12:13 says, “Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the duty of man.”  I’ve always seen this as the seminal verse regarding man’s relationship to God.  We are created beings (rather than eternal), created for God’s purposes.  When it comes down to it, everything we do is intended to be for the glory and benefit of God alone.  We benefit from our relationship with God, but to be consistent with Scripture, our top priority is obedience to the Creator.  Even Psalm 1 talks about this when it says “Happy is the man/person … who delights in the Law of the LORD and meditates upon it day and night” (Ps 1:1-2).  ”Happy” is a legitimate translation of the Hebrew and does a better job emphasizing the wisdom nature of the Psalms.  In the Hebrew mind, the Psalms are intended to a guide that instructs God’s people how to get the most out of and enjoy to the fullest extent life, including our relationship with God.  Therefore, we were created in order obey God’s commands, thereby enjoying the closest/best relationship with God we possibly can.

Relationships require mutual respect and submission.  In 1 Peter, husbands and wives are commanded to mutually submit to one another.  Taken literally, mutual submission is absent; but taken within its historical and cultural context, mutual submission comes out loud and clear.  According to the Bible, the only way a marriage can be fully enjoyed by both spouses is if they each submit to one another.  In Ephesians 5, Paul equates the marriage relationship to the relationship between the church and believers to Jesus.  This also emphasizes a posture of submission to God.

At it’s most elementary level, a disciple is a student.  But not just any student; a disciple is someone who strives to mimmic every aspect of their teacher’s life.  The goal of a disciple is to – in many ways – take on the very appearance of their teacher.  In Matthew 28:19, Jesus commissions his disciples to make other disciples.  When we look at the entire picture of what the Christian life is supposed to “look” like, we have very little choice but to conclude that God wants his people to become disciples – students, embodiments – of his son, Jesus.  As disciples, we publicly declare Jesus’ lordship over our lives since everything we do is a direct result of the faith we profess.  We are submitting to God’s will and Law.  And by nature, the concept of disciple assumes a personal relationship with the teacher – in this case Jesus.

The book of Matthew has a well-embedded discipleship theme.  It also has the feel of being rather Jewish in its structure and story-telling.  Throughout this gospel are numerous OT references and several calls to “follow him.”  It relies heavily on knowledge of Jewish traditions and culture.  Coincidentally, the Biblical concept of discipleship originates in the OT, with Elijah and Elisha acting as the OT epitomes of what it means to be a disciple.

There are a few things I want to define this new church plant that I’ll be working to establish:

1. I want people to learn the Bible.  Not in the legalistic sense of “Read the Bible or else” kind of way.  But when people come to our Bible studies or future gatherings, I want them to walk out with a deeper fascination and respect for the richness of what is contained within Scripture.  They may not believe what written in it, but they’ll recognize that there is something different about this book, something that makes it more than just a collection of ancient near eastern fairy tales.
2. I want people to grow as disciples.  I want the members of our group to realize that being a Christian is more than just something you think or believe, it’s an entire lifestyle.  That’s why I prefer to talk about myself as a “Follower of Jesus” rather than a Christian.  This isn’t just the “true religion,” it’s the best way to live; and the way we live is always rooted in our worldview/philosophy/spirituality.

Filed under: Bible Study, Christian Living, Christianity, Church, Church Planting, Discipleship, Faith, Ministry, Philosophy

Worldview & Church Planting, Pt. 4 (Final)

Current trends in church planting heavily utilize the ideas of “missional” and “incarnational.”  These terms are frequently employed as a framework for everything a church plant does.  But much like the variety of definitions of “missional,” there are just as wide a variety of applications for the term.  This leads me to the second question: What does a church plant rooted in a Reformed world and life view “look” like? That is to say, what would such a church plant do?  What ministries would they create or get involved in?

Beginning with the most general, one clear aspect of such a church plant would be missions.  I have already shown how Bavinck suggests that missions is an essential activity of the church in general, but especially in the context of a church plant, the essential nature of missions is emphasized.  Church plants by definition are intended to minister to those in the community who do not already have a relationship with Christ.  As such, the young congregation and each individual is placed in a position not unlike that of a missionary in relation to society.  This is the posture aspect that Stetzer and Halter each emphasize.

The second aspect is “incarnational.”  While missional is more akin to a particular mindset, incarnational deals with specific actions.  This is where we can actually speak of what a Reformed church plant “looks” like.

The Reformed church plant is first and foremost concerned with declaring the lordship of Christ over all creation.  Unfortunately, those individuals who do not profess a commitment to Christ, do not recognize this fundamental principle.  In most cases, the world must see God’s people living and the difference the Gospel has made in their lives.  Incarnational embodies just that – a living out of our faith as a daily, public declaration of Jesus’ lordship over us.

A church plant can do this in two ways: 1) through the manner that weekly services and Bible studies are conducted; and 2) through the conscious effort of the individuals living according to God’s torah [Instruction, guidance, law.  Torah is not relegated to just one part of Scripture, but is contained within all of Scripture.].  In both ways, Jesus is declared king.

There is very little that is actually “off-limits” for a Reformed church plant (or established congregation).  Because of the close relationship between “incarnational” and Christ’s lordship over all, the Christian and the church can be encouraged as they become involved in community groups that are not distinctly Christian as a means of reaching out to the community.  Naturally, there is wisdom and discernment to be practiced, but our churches and members can rest easy knowing that it is perfectly acceptable to volunteer and partner with local schools, shelters, Boys and Girls clubs, and various other non-profits.  I may even go so far as to suggest that the Christian has an obligation to engage in such activities for the benefit of all creation.

The Reformed world and life view enables and encourages God’s people to engage society with confidence that the Holy Spirit will work, the Gospel will be preached, the reign of Christ proclaimed, and the knowledge of the Lord spread throughout the world.

Filed under: Christian Living, Christianity, Church, Church Planting, Leadership, Ministry, Philosophy, Theology

Worldview & Church Planting, Pt. 3

NOTE: I mistakenly posted my paper out of order.  While you may have already read this section, you may have missed the previous section.  I have edited “Pt. 2″ to be the section of the paper that immediately precedes this section.  For clarity and comprehension, you may want to return to “Worldview & Church Planting, Pt. 2” to better follow what I have written here.  Thankyou.

—————————

The first question this paper is setting out to answer is: Can the Reformed world and life view accommodate these popular catch-phrases of contemporary evangelicalism? In other words, is the Reformed world and life view inherently opposed to “missional” and “incarnational” as defined above?  It seems to me that there is nothing inherently problematic about this, so long as “missional” and “incarnational” are taken together.

Anytime you begin talking about a Christian worldview – Reformed or otherwise – the fundamental question at stake is “How do we be in the world but not of the world?”  In John 17:14-18 Jesus prays,

I have given them your word and the world has hated them, for they are not of the world any more than I am of the world.  My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one.  They are not of the world, even as I am not of it.  Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth.  As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world.

There is little doubt about the truth of “being in the world but not of the world.”  But the debate over what exactly this means and the parameters of such a statement rages within the epistles themselves.  World view questions are at the heart of Paul’s letters to the Corinthians and Ephesians, as well as the letters of 1 & 2 Peter and James.  It seems to me that the recipients of these letters understood their roles as missionaries in their respective contexts, but struggled to realize how their actions affected their mission.

Filed under: Bible Study, Christianity, Church, Church Planting, Ministry, Philosophy, Theology

Worldview & Church Planting, Pt. 2

NOTE: This post has been significantly edited from the original posting.  I mistakenly posted the sections of my paper out of order and have since corrected the problem.  The material formerly found here can now be read in “Pt. 3″ while this post should be read first.

———————

The term “missional” has become a mainstay in contemporary church thought.  Especially in church planting, it is virtually impossible to avoid exposure or hearing this word used in conversation.  Unfortunately, the commonality of “missional” has also led to its growing ambiguity and uncertainty.  This over-exposure has led emergent church leader Alan Hirsch to admit that, as much as the emergent community strives to be missional, there is very little agreement as to what missional means [Hirsch, Alan.  "The Essence of a Missional Church."  Exponential Conference 2009, Orlando, 2009.].  J. Todd Billings expresses a similar concern when he writes:

Some use “missional” to describe a church that rejects treating the gospel like a commodity for spiritual consumers; others frame it as a strategy for marketing the church and stimulating church growth.  Some see the missional church as a refocusing on God’s action in the world rather than obsessing over our own needs; others see it as an opportunity to “meet people where they are” and reinvent the church for postmodern culture [Billings, J. Todd.  "Being Missional in the Reformed Tradition." (Perspectives 24.5 (2009): 3-5.), 3.].

Filed under: Bible Study, Christian Living, Church, Church Planting, Ministry, Philosophy, Theology