Master 217: The bread of life

In my last blog entry (Master 216) I posed a number of questions, among them: What is the gospel? What is the kingdom of God? What is the goal of discipleship? What does (or should) a mature Christian look like? What is the purpose of the church? What is Jesus' easy yoke? What does it mean to love God and love people? To these we might add: What is God's intention, desire, and purpose for human beings? And--the question I'll reflect on in this entry--what is eternal life? If someone who had just started reading the Bible were to come to you and ask, "What does the Bible mean when it talks about eternal life? What is eternal life?" how would you answer?

The idiom of 'life' or 'eternal life' has an especially prominent place in the writings of the Apostle John. Here are a few places where it turns up in the early part of his gospel, though we'll be focusing on his treatment of it in chapter six. Speaking of Jesus, the incarnate Word of God, John writes, "In Him was life, and the life was the light of men." (1:4) In what is probably the most famous single verse from the Bible, Jesus tells Nicodemus, "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life." (3:16) While passing through Samaria, Jesus asked a woman for a drink. She was puzzled that a Jewish rabbi would ask a Samaritan woman for a drink. In response to her puzzlement, He said, "If you knew the gift of God, and who it is who says to you, 'Give Me a drink,' you would have asked Him, and He would have given you living water." (4:10) He went on to explain, "Everyone who drinks of this [ordinary] water shall thirst again; but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall become in him a well of water springing up to eternal life." (4:13-14) When the Jewish leaders began to criticize and persecute Jesus, He told them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life." (5:24)

You may have noticed that "believing" is also a recurring theme in these verses. It would take another blog entry to begin to treat that topic. The overarching question that I want to raise, here, is "What is eternal life?" Clearly it's a pretty important idea. Do you have any idea what it means? Well we're going to look at that here, but we'll approach that question in a rather round-about way, beginning with a story that is familiar to most people who have grown up in church. It is the story of the feeding of the five thousand.

--

"After these things Jesus went away to the other side of the Sea of Galilee (or Tiberias). And a great multitude was following Him, because they were seeing the signs which He was performing on those who were sick. And Jesus went up on the mountain, and there He sat with His disciples.

"Now the Passover, the feast of the Jews, was at hand. Jesus therefore lifting up His eyes, and seeing that a great multitude was coming to Him, said to Philip, 'Where are we to buy bread, that these may eat?' And this He was saying to test him; for He Himself knew what He was intending to do.

"Philip answered Him, 'Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them, for everyone to receive a little.'

"One of His disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, said to Him, 'There is a lad here who has five barley loaves and two fish, but what are these for so many people?'

"Jesus said, 'Have the people sit down.' Now there was much grass in the place. So the men sat down, in number about five thousand. Jesus therefore took the loaves; and having given thanks, He distributed to those who were seated; likewise also of the fish as much as they wanted.

"And when they were willed, He said to His disciples, 'Gather up the leftover fragments that nothing may be lost.' And so they gathered them up and filled twelve baskets with fragments from the five barley loaves, which were left over by those who had eaten.

"When therefore the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, 'This is of a truth the Prophet who is to come into the world.'" (6:1-14)

--

If you heard this story growing up in Sunday school, your teacher probably encouraged you, at this point, to trust God to take care of your needs. I don't want to downplay that message. It is true--Jesus demonstrates by this miracle and throughout his ministry that He has the power to take care of our needs. He also repeatedly manifests compassion and loving concern for people. But there is way more going on in this passage and so I want to invite you to learn more from what Jesus says and does here.

Here is a question to get our reflection started: What is the proper response to the miracle that Jesus performs here? One fitting response: we should trust in God to take care of our needs. That's a good answer. But now let's dig deeper. Some people, when they find out that God is able to meet their needs, respond by bringing Him a laundry list of their desires and wants. There are many people who preach and teach that if you only have enough faith, God will give you all the money and possessions and comforts that you want. And people believe this and pursue God in this way. Is that the proper response? Notice what the people in the crowd did:

"When therefore the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, 'This is of a truth the Prophet who is to come into the world.' Jesus therefore perceiving that they were intending to come and take Him by force, to make Him king, withdrew again to the mountain by Himself alone." (6:14-15)

Keep in mind that the people of Israel, during this time, were eagerly awaiting the arrival of the Messiah, who, many thought, would overthrow the Roman Empire and restore Israel to a place of significant political power and authority. It was not uncommon for revolutionary leaders to arrive in various parts and begin to gather a following. The pressures and expectations that the people placed on supposed miracle-workers and powerful leaders were very high. Now Jesus had come to earth for a specific purpose and we see, here, how He becomes concerned that His plan and purpose will be eclipsed by the expectations of the people. That's why He withdraws.

Notice, the people were not in the position of doubting Jesus' power or ability. They were not among those who thought that He was demon-possessed or a raving lunatic. These people liked what they saw in Jesus. They had followed Him for some time--even out into the wilderness. They were clearly very enthusiastic about and committed to this new rabbi. And yet, for all their fervor, they had missed something. Jesus was not at all pleased with their response. "But weren't they trusting Jesus to take care of their needs?" one might ask. It would seem so. They trusted Jesus so much that they wanted to make Him king. That's a lot of trust. But, like I said, they seem to have missed something. Jesus didn't want them to respond in that way.

--

So let's consider again, What is the proper response to the miracle that Jesus performed here? How should the people have responded? How should you and I respond?

After Jesus withdraws, the disciples take a boat and begin to cross to the other side of the sea. Here we get the record of the terrible storm that struck and of Jesus' miraculous walking on water. We won't look at that text now. The next day, we are told, the people begin to search for Jesus. They know that He did not leave with His disciples but, in the morning, they are not able to find Him. After much searching, they finally find Him on the other side of the sea, in Capernaum. "And when they found Him on the other side of the sea, they said to Him, 'Rabbi, when did you get here?'" (6:25)

Notice that Jesus does not answer their question but enters into an extended discourse.

"Jesus answered them and said, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves, and were filled. Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man shall give to you, for on Him the Father, even God, has set His seal.'

"They said therefore to Him, 'What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?'

"Jesus answered and said to them, 'This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.'

"They said therefore to Him, 'What then do You do for a sign, that we may see, and believe You? What work do You perform? Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, "He gave them bread out of heaven to eat."'

"Jesus therefore said to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread out of heaven, but it is My Father who gives you the true bread out of heaven. For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world.'" (6:26-33)

--

Here, again, Jesus rebukes the people for the character of their response to His miracle. They have come to Him because they ate the loaves and were filled. All they are interested in, it seems, is that He would continue to provide for their physical needs. But Jesus challenges them to pursue the food that leads to eternal life with the same passion that they pursue the food that sustains their biological existence.

There's an important point that needs to be made here. Is natural food and physical sustenance important? Some people will look at teachings like this and conclude that Jesus wants to draw a sharp distinction between the physical and spiritual. They conclude that whatever is related to our physical needs is unimportant and that all that matters is the spiritual. But this is a mis-reading, I think, of this text. Why does Jesus tell the people that they should not be concerned with their physical sustenance? Is it because physical sustenance is not important? No, the people should not be concerned with their physical sustenance because they should be already trusting God to take care of that for them. Jesus does think that our physical sustenance is important. But it is precisely because God is looking out for that that we do not have to. So the problem with focusing on our physical needs is not that our physical needs are not important. The problem with focusing on our physical needs is that it distracts us from focusing on other (spiritual) concerns and God has already provided for our physical needs anyway.

Having set aside that issue, let's now turn to Jesus' statement: "[Work] for the food which endures to eternal life". What does that mean? What is eternal life? What is Jesus asking the people to focus on (and, so, what is the proper response to Jesus' miracle)?

Unfortunately, I think, "eternal life" tends to conjure images of something that is very remote and distant. Images of heaven, sublimity, perfection. In some cases, eternal worship services, harps and fluffy clouds. All of these are almost completely unhelpful for getting at what Jesus is saying. So let me suggest a different route. To get at what eternal life is and is like, let's consider what some other kinds of life are like.

So, think about this: What is college life? What images come to mind when you think of college life? Large lecture halls, midterms and final exams, libraries, all-nighters, parties, fraternities, sororities, pranks, dances, clubs, college towns, coffee shops, study groups, picking majors, changing majors, trying to graduate, the cafeteria. What is college life like? What are some of its characteristics? Accumulating loans, trying to get along with roommates, buying groceries, being responsible for rent, summer road-trips, sports events, school spirit, theater, music, internships, service projects, registering for classes, trying to fill course requirements, crashing courses, tutoring, meeting with professors, counseling, dormitories, RA's, rules, fees. The list, I'm sure, could go on and on. And these are just a smattering of images. They don't even begin to address the feelings that are associated with such a life: homesickness, trying to fit in, breaking up with boyfriends or girlfriends, entering into new dating relationships, the anxiety that comes with financial problems, trying to maintain scholarships and grade-point averages. All of these are bits and pieces of college life.

Another example: What is married life? Maybe you have a friend that you knew while he was single. He's since gotten married and you happen to meet up with him one day and you ask, "So how's married life?" What kind of answer do you expect to hear? Unfortunately, I think, for many people, "married life" has certain bad connotations. It's associated with a loss of freedom and independence. One is now tied down. There are new requirements for financial management. One's schedule has to be coordinated with someone else's. But, of course, it's not all bad. Many couples will attest to the joy that comes from living together and sharing with one another. Their relationship has grown and deepened. There is a new freedom and intimacy that they enjoy with one another. Bad or good--these are some of the characteristics that we often associate with married life.

Another example: What is celebrity life? Or we might say, "What is the celebrity lifestyle like?" We're told that it's full of glamor and excitement. Celebrities move in the circles of the most elite and sophisticated. Such lives are characterized by higher and more refined tastes. We may imagine fashionable parties, quiet (or loud) exchanges about the latest gossip. Celebrities have a lot of money and other forms of capital that they can use to various purposes. We may imagine them living in great comfort and luxury. On the flip side, celebrities may be some of the loneliest people. They have very little privacy and are constantly being exposed to public scrutiny. There is a constant pressure to perform and to measure up to the standards of people's expectations. The financial costs of maintaining the celebrity lifestyle may actually be very high so that many are actually forced to live beyond their means and carry with themselves constant worries about the state of their finances.

You can come up with all sorts of other examples: the rock-and-roll life, family life, street life, suburban life, military life, country life, political life. Each of these will conjure a different set of images and associations. With this all in mind, let's return to our main question: What is eternal life? We know what it's like to live the college life, the married life, or the celebrity life, but what is it like to live the eternal life? What are the characteristics and images that you associate with eternal life?

Here, I fear, many people will simply draw a blank. Or the only images that they have will be of heaven, pearly gates, streets of gold, harps, and fluffy clouds. How can we rectify this problem? Part of the trouble is that we're not really given a clear description of eternal life at any single point in the New Testament. John comes the closest in chapter 17 where He records Jesus praying to the Father: "And this is eternal life, that they may know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent." (17:3) But that doesn't give us a whole lot to go on. So how can we find out what eternal life is like.

Well here's one clue that I invite you to consider: Eternal life is the kind of life that Jesus had (and has). So if you want to find out what it's like to live the eternal life, look to Jesus. If you want to find out what college life is like, it's pretty clear where you should go to find out. If you want to find out what married life is like, call one of the couples that you know. If you want to find out what (one version of) celebrity life is like, check out the grocery store magazine stand. If you want to find out what eternal life is like look at Jesus. Hopefully now it's obvious why there is no single verse that tells us what eternal life is. All four gospels are one continuous presentation of what eternal life is. So when we take this approach, what characteristics do we find in Jesus? What is eternal life like? Here are some things to consider. Jesus was a man of incredible confidence. He didn't suffer from low self-esteem. He didn't feel the need to please people. He understood who He was, what His purpose was, and not even Satan could shake Him or raise doubts in His mind. At the same time, He was a man of incredible humility. He wasn't arrogant or haughty. In fact, he was able to get along with just about anyone. He spent time with tax collectors and prostitutes. He ate in the homes of well-to-do Jewish citizens. He had no trouble interacting with the elites of Jewish society. He spent time with Samaritans and Gentiles. He was comfortable with children, with the elderly, with the sick and diseased. Everywhere he went, he was able to get along with anybody who was willing to spend time with Him. And if people didn't like Him, that didn't phase Him. He was gracious even when faced with harsh criticism. He was never anxious. While the disciples were frantically trying to keep their boat from sinking during a storm, he was taking a nap. He wasn't afraid of the temple guards or the Roman soldiers. He was a man of deep feelings and great love and compassion. Jesus wasn't afraid to be moved emotionally. He cried when He learned that Lazarus had died and He wept over the city (Jerusalem) that He loved so much. He was a man of incredible compassion. He was ready to give and to sacrifice, even when it cost Him a lot. He was a man of great wisdom. He knew how to read people. He understood people's hurts and pains. He didn't use this ability to take advantage of anyone; rather, He used it to help them. He was courageous. He didn't back down from a fight. He came to the aid of the weak and powerless. All-in-all, He was a man of incredible goodness. There was no hypocrisy in Him. He had nothing to hide. His love was genuine.

These are all characteristics of the kind of life that Jesus had. They are characteristics of eternal life. You might think it'd be fun to live the college life. You might want to avoid getting sucked into married life. You might long to experience the celebrity life. Are you interested in getting eternal life? Would you like to live a life characterized by that kind of boldness, courage, love, freedom, strength, and power? That's what Jesus is offering.

And once you realize that this is what Jesus is offering, it becomes so much clearer why He is disappointed with the people's reaction to His miracles. "Do not work for the food which perishes," He says, "but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man shall give to you, for on Him the Father, even God, has set His seal."

You see, all of the people in that crowd were living some kind of life. Maybe they were living the college life or the married life or the suburban life or the celebrity life. Whatever variation they were living, their lives all shared one common feature: they were all broken lives. Sure there are aspects of college life that are fun, but there's also a lot of stress and anxiety that comes with it too. And if you're partying a lot and caught up in that scene, then you're probably also dealing with the consequences of poor choices and messed up relationships. Those caught up in married life are dealing with the strife and conflict that inevitably attends that way of living. And everybody ought to know by now that celebrity life is not all that it's cracked up to be. Now all of these people recognize that Jesus is different. That's why they've followed Him. There's something about this man that's different. They feel comfortable around Him. They don't have to perform. He loves them and cares about them and comforts them. They know that there's something different about Him, but they don't understand what that is. And so the only thing on their minds, when they find out about His great power, is the thought that now their physical needs can be provided for. But Jesus isn't interested just in providing for their physical needs. He sees their brokenness and their hurts and He wants to deal with those needs.

"Do not work for the food which perishes." The idea is, "Don't work for the food that's going to just go away and leave you in the same needy position." Could Jesus feed the people day after day after day? Sure He could. But what would the result of that be. The people would live one more day in their broken condition. And then they would live one more day in their broken condition. They would have enough energy to chase after the same goals that would never satisfy. They would have the strength to chase after one more relationship that would never fulfill. That's not what Jesus was interested in. He didn't want to give them physical food so that they could continue living their broken lives. He wanted to give them a new life. He wanted to give them eternal life. "[Work] for the food which endures to eternal life."

Hopefully this helps to give you a picture of what eternal life is. Hopefully this will also give you a better sense of what the proper response to Jesus' miracle is. Of course there's more to this text and it's all worth carefully studying. Later, Jesus will declare, "I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me shall not hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst." (v. 35) He will also say, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves." (v. 53) That line certainly puzzled Jesus' original audience, but the actual point that He's making is quite straightforward. If you want physical, biological life, you have to eat food--you have to take it in and internalize it and incorporate it into your body. If you want eternal life--if you want the life that Jesus had--then you have to go to Jesus to get it. Jesus is the model and example. If you want His kind of life then you need to do what He did, you need to internalize His ways of living, you have to incorporate that into yourself. This involves studying and taking seriously His teachings--also being obedient to His instructions and commands. And as you do this, you'll find that you have the same kind of life that He had. You too will have eternal life.

--

God is in this place,
And that reality, seen and understood by the grace of God in Christ Jesus through the work of the Holy Spirit, makes all the difference in the world.

Master 216: Simple Church?

I recently began reading, with a group of leaders at my church, through a book by Thom S. Rainer and Eric Geiger, titled Simple Church: Returning to God's Process for Making Disciples. (Nashville: B&H Publishing Group, 2006.) The book has raised a number of questions for me about how best to approach discipleship and church administration. I've only read through the first three chapters, but here I will describe some of my initial reactions and make some comments that, I hope, will be helpful for those are interested in these topics but have not read the book.

Rainer and Geiger begin chapter one by emphasizing that they are not recommending a new program or church model. Behind this is the thought that church leaders are already too inundated with programs, models, and formulas for church development and growth. So what is the goal of this book? "This book will help you design a simple process of discipleship in your church. It will help you implement the model you have chosen. It will help you simplify." (3) They are not advocating for any particular program, method, or initiative. Rather, their goal is to help many different kinds of churches by helping them all to become more simple.

They describe what they call the "simple revolution." "Simple is in. Complexity is out." (8) They draw examples from technology, business, marketing, and interior design to illustrate how simplicity translates into greater effectiveness and success in these various areas. Based on the research that they've conducted (and are presenting in this book) simple churches are also experiencing this.

"[I]n general, simple churches are growing and vibrant. Churches with a simple process for reaching and maturing people are expanding the kingdom. Church leaders who have designed a simple biblical process to make disciples are effectively advancing the movement of the gospel. Simple churches are making a big impact. / Conversely, complex churches are struggling and anemic. Churches without a process or with a complicated process for making disciples are floundering. As a whole, cluttered and complex churches are not alive. Our research shows that these churches are not growing. Unfortunately, the overprogrammed and busy church is the norm." (14)

--

Let me step away, for a moment, from summarizing what they are saying to draw your attention to an important aspect of their message. Rainer and Geiger have recognized what many people have recognized about many American churches: they are not healthy or growing. Rainer and Geiger have diagnosed the problem. The problem is complexity. They are offering a solution. The solution is simplicity.

Now, the question that I want to ask: Is it really the case that complexity and overprogramming are the real problems that stands behind the ineffectiveness of so many churches? Is it truly the root of the problem, or is it just another (albeit significant) symptom?

I'll expand on this point later, but to state it briefly: I think that the more basic problem that faces ineffective churches is a basic unclarity about what the purpose of the church is and what the goal of discipleship and life in Christ are. This basic unclarity leads both to complexity and overprogramming. It also leads to generally ineffective churches.

Now, if I am right in my diagnosis--if I am right in thinking that complexity is not the fundamental problem and simplicity is not the fundamental solution for our churches--does that mean that Rainer and Geiger's book and research are worthless? Actually, no. They have identified a real correlation that exists between complexity and ineffectiveness, between simplicity and growth/vibrancy. Their recommendations should be carefully considered and taken very seriously. However, one should also keep in mind that they have captured, at best, only part of the solution.

They have set their book up in such a way that they do not advocate for one program rather than another, for one method rather than another. Their point is just that whatever method or program your church uses, it can benefit from becoming more simple and streamlined. They have set their book up to work with lots of different programs. But notice that, as a consequence, their book offers no help in assessing whether your church's method or program is good or bad. If your church has a good program, their book will help to make it simpler and, so, more effective. If your church has a bad program, their book will help to make it simpler and, so, in some sense, more effective.

People who are thinking of using this book, then, must keep this important point in mind. Rainer and Geiger's book leaves a lot of important questions unanswered. Only if a church answers those questions well, can it use Rainer and Geiger's insights to full advantage.

Okay, that detour took more than a moment, but now let's return to summarizing chapter one.

--

In advocating for simpler church designs, Rainer and Geiger not only appeal to examples of effective simplicity in our own day. They also point to the example of Jesus. They point out that the Jewish religious scene was extremely cluttered and complicated. As an example, they point out that the religious leaders in the first century had developed a system of 613 laws that stood in extremely complicated relationships to one another and to the people who tried to apply them. But Jesus, in Matthew 22:37-40, summed up the entire law, capturing its spirit and essence, in just two commands.

They point out that Jesus, like all rabbis, had what (in that culture) was referred to as a "yoke" of teaching. "His yoke was His instructions, His content, and His message. Many rabbis put yokes of teaching on the people that were impossible and legalistic. ... Jesus stepped onto the scene and said to a crowd one day: 'Come to Me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, because I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.' (Matthew 11:28-30)" (18)

Rainer and Geiger then make reference to Mark 11 where Jesus cleanses the temple. They remark, "His behavior in the temple gives us amazing insight into the heart of God. Jesus is adamantly opposed to anything that gets in the way of people encountering Him. He quoted from Isaiah that day saying, "Is it not written, 'My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations'? But you have made it 'a den of thieves'!" (Mark 11:17) / Many of our churches have become cluttered. So cluttered that people have a difficult time encountering the simple and powerful message of Christ. So cluttered that many people are busy doing church instead of being the church. / What about your church?" (19)

Rainer and Geiger close the first chapter by emphasizing that, in order to be effective, pastors and church leaders need to stay focused on the big picture. Failing to keep the big picture in view leads to the multiplication of projects and activities that are moving in all sorts of different directions, conflicting with each other, and not coordinated by a unifying purpose. "To have a simple church, leaders must ensure that everything their church does fits together to produce life change. They must design a simple process that pulls everything together, a simple process that moves people towards spiritual maturity." (26)

Simple church leaders, they say, are designers. "To have a simple church, you must design a simple discipleship process. This process must be clear. It must move people toward maturity. It must be integrated fully into your church, and you must get rid of the clutter around it." (26)

--

Now I do worry that my critical remarks will convey the impression that I do not like this book or think that it is fundamentally misguided. That is not actually the case. But the book (intentionally) does not address itself to a number of important points that any church, seeking to apply its insights, must take up on their own. These important points, because they are what I am most interested, will be what I focus on here.

One more remark along these lines. I have emphasized that the authors intentionally avoid answering certain key questions about discipleship and the purpose of the church. And I'm willing to grant that that is not, in itself, a problem. However, this fact does pose a grave danger for unwary readers and, especially, long time Christians. The danger is that many readers will assume that the answers to these key questions are just obvious and can be taken for granted. The fact that the Rainer and Geiger do not address themselves to these questions may just solidify, in the reader's mind, the impression that the answers are obvious. I will try to point out, here, that the answers are not obvious. And my suggestion, ultimately, is that it is a fundamental unclarity about the answers to just these questions that is really responsible for both the complexity and ineffectiveness of most churches.

Having laid my cards on the table, more or less, let me now turn to look at what are some of these unresolved issues and unanswered questions. Think to yourself, for a moment, when you read my summary and the passages that I quoted, did you see any unresolved issues or unanswered questions?

Consider the following paragraph, quoted above, from p. 14. "[I]n general, simple churches are growing and vibrant. Churches with a simple process for reaching and maturing people are expanding the kingdom. Church leaders who have designed a simple biblical process to make disciples are effectively advancing the movement of the gospel. Simple churches are making a big impact." Especially if you've grown up in the church, this passage may not sound odd to you at all. But when I read it, a host of questions come to mind. What does it mean to say that a church is growing and vibrant? What are the criteria that a church must meet to count as "growing" or "vibrant"? Rainer and Geiger imply that the goal of the church is to expand the kingdom [of God]. Their remark reveals some underlying assumptions: (1) that everybody (or, at least, all church leaders) knows what the kingdom of God is and (2) that everybody agrees that the goal of the church is to expand that kingdom. In fact, I think that both of those assumptions are false. Any church that wants to apply Rainer and Geiger's insights needs to thoughtfully consider (and not just take for granted) what the kingdom of God is. They need to carefully consider what the purpose of the church is. Rainer and Geiger talk about reaching and maturing people. But they don't say anything about how to do that and they don't say what a mature person is or looks like. I fear that an awful lot of churches would say that they are strongly committed to maturing people while being deeply confused about what a mature person actually is or looks like. If you don't know where the destination is, it's awfully hard to get there.

Again, is it a bad thing that Rainer and Geiger don't answer these questions? No. It's fine if they want to focus just on simplicity. It's fine for them to do that because they are not designing a church. But if you are designing a church or helping out in the leadership of the church, then you need to focus on more than simplicity. You need to think about what the purpose of the church is, what discipleship is, what the goal of discipleship is, what the kingdom of God is, what a mature Christian looks like. You need to think about these things in light of Scripture. And you need to not assume that these answers are obvious.

Now, some will worry that, in making all of this fuss about these questions and issues, I am making things more complicated than they need to be. Some might try to argue that all of these issues about purpose and discipleship and kingdom actually just are distractions from the simple message of Jesus. Some of these people might point, as Rainer and Geiger do, to Matthew 22:37-40. Here's how that text appears:

"And one of them, a lawyer, asked [Jesus] a question, testing Him, "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?" And He said to him, " 'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.' This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like it, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets." (22:35-40)

There is the simple and powerful message of Jesus. (See the quotation from p. 19, above.) Right there. In black and white (or red and white). Love God and love people. Surely there's no need to become more complicated than that.

Notice these comments, by Rainer and Geiger, about this Scripture passage: "Think about the significance of that moment. He said all the Law (and He added the Prophets) is summed up in this simple and perfect phrase. He was not lowering the standard of the Law. He was not abolishing it. He was capturing all its spirit, all of its essence, in one statement. He said all of it hangs on this. He summed up 613 commands in two. Jesus took the complexity and the advancement of the Law and made it very simple." (17) Rainer and Geiger use this event as an example of Jesus' revolutionary simplicity. "Revolutionary" is key. Jesus was doing something that had never been done before. The only problem: People had done this before.

Jesus was not being revolutionary in this moment. He was not introducing something new. He was not saying something that people had never heard before. The first commandment, from Deuteronomy 6:5 was already widely recognized as the most important commandment in the Jewish tradition. It was recited regularly for just that reason. And many rabbis before Jesus had linked it with the second commandment (from Leviticus 19:18). In fact, in their original contexts, these two commandments functioned as summaries of the law. Jesus was not introducing anything new or revolutionary when he cited these as the two greatest commandments. The people were already familiar with this. And yet, Jesus criticized them repeatedly for their failure to love God and their failure to love one another.

Is it possible for a person who preaches, "Love God and love people," to fail to love God and love people. Of course it is. Unfortunately, many of us are far too familiar with people who have preached this message but not lived it out. So what is the solution? It won't help just to preach more about loving God and loving people. Do Rainer and Geiger offer a solution? No they don't. They're not trying to. Their goal is to help you (or your church) to take the solution you've already formulated and make it more simple and more effective. But the task of coming up with a solution is still up to you. You've still got to do the work of studying the Bible and figuring that out.

Again, this is the problem with being a sloppy reader, if you're looking through Simple Church. Rainer and Geiger will point out that many churches are so cluttered that "people have a difficult time encountering the simple and powerful message of Christ." But Rainer and Geiger don't tell you what that simple and powerful message of Christ is. They don't tell you how to help people encounter it. They'll tell you how to simplify your process for doing that, but they won't tell you what process to choose.

The same point applies to their reference to Jesus' "easy yoke." Most people, I think, are totally mystified about what Jesus is talking about in that passage? They don't know what Jesus means and they don't know how to apply what Jesus says to their lives. But if they don't understand that, then they won't know how to apply Rainer and Geiger's very valuable and important insights.

--

This blog post seems to have been dominated by critical and negative remarks. My hope is, for the interested reader, that it will spark you to start thinking about these questions. What is the gospel? What is the kingdom of God? What is the goal of discipleship? What does (or should) a mature Christian look like? What is the purpose of the church? What is Jesus' easy yoke? What does it mean to love God and love people? The funny thing is that the answers to these questions are actually pretty straightforward. So, in raising these questions, I am not suggesting that the truth is something deep or mysterious or difficult or just for the few initiate. Actually the answers to these questions are extremely straightforward--they are simple--and, more importantly, they lead to life, joy, wholeness, wellness, love, peace, and grace for those who take them seriously.

All the same, the answers are not obvious. And they may be especially hard to see for those of us who have grown up in the church--who have gotten used to a way of talking and thinking and acting. We've become comfortable with a certain set of answers and they are familiar to us. But if the church is not being effective, then maybe it's time to stretch ourselves and consider something different.

--

A closing meditation:

No one sets out to become an ineffective church. No one has the goal of becoming weak and frail and powerless. But the truth is that there are an awful lot of churches that are ineffective and that have become weak and frail and powerless. How do they get that way? How can they be fixed?

Here's an analogy that may be helpful for thinking about this. No one sets out to have a bad marriage. No one has the goal of being in a relationship that dead, full of strife, and unfulfilling. But the truth is that there are an awful lot of marriages that are bad and that have become dead, full of strife, and unfulfilling. How do they get that way? How can they be fixed?

There are no quick answers to fixing a broken marriage. There's no set formula. If a husband and wife are going to pull through the dark times, they'll have to do a lot of work. They'll need to think carefully about what marriage is, what their roles are as husband and wife, what they really care about, and how they are going to behave. Unfortunately, when many people get married, they don't make the mental shift that's required to live in this different kind of relationship. Instead, they each continue to have the thoughts, attitudes, feelings, desires, and motivations of a single person. And marriage is not the same thing as two single people living together. Add to this the ordinary kinds of stresses that individuals have to deal with and you have a recipe for estrangement and brokenness.

What does this have to do with the church? Well, the truth is that if our thinking about church stays at the level of evaluating some corporate entity, then we've missed the point. A healthy church is one that is composed of healthy Christians. And a healthy Christian is one who has a growing relationship with God. But just like marriage requires a change on the husband's and wife's part, so relationship with God requires a change on our part. The Bible uses the imagery of marriage to describe our relationship with God. But there's a problem with many of our relationships with God. Many of us don't act or behave like we're in a committed relationship. Our thoughts, attitudes, feelings, desires, and motivations are still those of a 'single' person. And if I'm still committed to being autonomous or getting my way or satisfying my desires, my relationship with God is going to be rocky at best.

Now one might think, isn't it just obvious that a relationship with God requires some measure of commitment? To which I might reply by asking, isn't it just obvious that a marriage relationship will require some measure of commitment? And yet so many marriages are broken and hurting. And so many relationships with God fall far short of what they should or could be.

What is the point of this meditation? Just that the obvious stuff is not at all obvious. What's required for a successful marriage and relationship with God are, in important respects, quite simple and obvious. But the fact that so many of our marriages and relationships with God are failing suggests that we are not cluing into the obvious. And the worst thing that we can do, in trying to find solutions to these problems, is to just assume that the answers are obvious.

So if you happen to pick up Simple Church, or if you just care about the growth and development of the Church, make sure that you're thinking carefully about these questions: What is the gospel? What is the kingdom of God? What is the goal of discipleship? What does (or should) a mature Christian look like? What is the purpose of the church? What is Jesus' easy yoke? What does it mean to love God and love people?

--

God is in this place,
And that reality, seen and understood by the grace of God in Christ Jesus through the work of the Holy Spirit, makes all the difference in the world.

Master 215: University Profile

So I've been at UCR for three years now. And throughout these three years, I've occasionally gotten questions from people about the place where I am studying. People find out that I'm enrolled at UCR and they ask simple questions like, "So how big is UCR?" or, "How many students attend UCR?" and I find, every time, that I have no clue whatsoever. Lately I've been saying, "I get asked that question so much that I ought to know, but I don't." So now I've finally done something about the situation and looked up the information. There's no guarantee that I'll remember it, but if anyone asks me, I can tell them, "Look at my blog site. The information is there."

In order to give some sense of comparison, I've also included information about APU (where I got my bachelor's degree) and UCLA (which is a large, well-known school in the area). Of course these statistics are not exhaustive, but they give some small impression of the character of the school that I currently attend.






















(People reading this on facebook may not be able to see the chart and should visit the blogspot site.)

A few comments:
(1) Of course, all this data should be read with a grain of salt. Don't go drawing far-reaching or decisive conclusions about these places just based on this small sampling of the total data.
(2) So UCR is a big place. Not as big as UCLA, but how many places can be as big as UCLA? I don't actually know whether that works as a rhetorical question. Anyhow, UCR is big.
(3) UCR, as I understand it, takes some measure of pride in the broad ethnic diversity of its student body.
(4) For being such a (comparatively) small school, APU has a fair number of international students.
(5) I'm not quite sure what to make of the claim that UCR covers 1200 acres. Maybe most of that is still orange groves or agricultural fields.
(6) APU may have the smallest number of library holdings, but their theological holdings definitely outstrip UCR's by a wide margin. It was great when the libraries were connected by LINK+ and I could order books from APU. Now I'm stuck with the Melvyl (intra-UC) network. But between the 10 campuses, I can usually get what I need.
(7) Hooray for APU for 12-to-1 student-to-faculty ratio! I'm still not quite sure how students elsewhere manage with lectures of 400+ students.
(8) One piece of information I didn't list in the chart: I checked the three websites today and APU lists 5 philosophy faculty, UCR lists 18, and UCLA lists 17. Keep in mind, of course, that APU is a liberal arts school and not a research institution.
(9) I've heard rumors that UCR did well, compared to UCLA on the National Research Council's Rankings of Graduate Programs for 2005-2006. That report was released at the end of September. It's controversial and I don't know much about it anyway, and am in no position to start drawing comparisons between UCR's and UCLA's philosophy departments anyway. Why even bring it up! That's not the point of this post anyway.

This is just to give those who are interested the tiniest glimpse into the place where I currently am studying philosophy. I love it here. It's wonderful. And hopefully, in a couple years, I'll be taking a degree and moving to my first job.

--

God is in this place,
And that reality, seen and understood by the grace of God in Christ Jesus through the work of the Holy Spirit, makes all the difference in the world.