Jeff Ling

These are actual conditions…
Fear of Chickens : Alektorophobia
Fear of Bald People: Peladophobia
Fear of the Pope: Papaphobia
Fear of walking: Ambulophobia
Fear of Heaven: Ouranophobia

These are irrational fears. Rational fears make more sense – keeps me from jumping off of tall buildings or trying out snake handling. Holy fear makes the most sense of all for it liberates rather than enslaves. Proverbs 1:7 – “Fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge. Only fools despise wisdom and discipline.”

Sadly, I find myself playing the fool way to often. What a waste of time and energy. In His love I’m free. In His true path I am liberated. The fear of the Lord is the fear I need.

Scripture

“And he saw that they were making headway painfully, for the wind was against them. And about the fourth watch of the night he came to them, walking on the sea. He meant to pass by them…”
(Mark 6:48 ESV)

Observation

“It’s hard to remember that Jesus did not come to make us safe, but rather to make us disciples, citizens of God’s new age, a kingdom of surprise.”—Stanley Hauerwas, Duke University

The compassion of Jesus is on magnificent display here in Mark 6. There’s the powerful statement that Jesus saw the multitudes, noted their lost condition and felt deep compassion for them. There is the amazing demonstration of power in the feeding of the five thousand. Then there is the statement “…and he intended to pass by them.”

Compassion? Jesus sees the struggle his disciples are experiencing, the fear as strong as the waves, the weariness of their arms giving way under the strain of rowing against the storm. The passage even states that he could see they were in “serious trouble!”

And he intended to pass by them.

That statement can get lost amidst the walk on the water, the invitation for Peter to step onto the waves (Matt.14) and the stilling of the storm. It’s a statement that, if you think about it, makes you wonder where in the world his compassion went.

Application

Could it be that there are times when the compassionate thing for Jesus to do is to keep an eye on us while we struggle?

“All you need to remember is that God will never let you down; he’ll never let you be pushed past your limit; he’ll always be there to help you come through it.” – 1 Cor. 10:13 (The Message)

The inescapable inference is that 1) he will allow you to be pushed or tested and 2) there is a limit he will let you be pushed to. Why? As Stanley Hauerwas said above, God is outfitting us for something greater than our safety, something more profound than simply having a personal “storm sitter.” God is about the business of making us like his Son and turning us loose to partner with him in his activity in the world. Part of that preparation is the furnace of affliction, temptation, suffering and struggle. There is a facet of Christ-like strength that comes not from munching on manna but wrestling with the waves.

Compassion can be letting you struggle but know this, he never takes his eye off you, he knows the limits, and he is the Master of the waves.

Prayer

Lord, sometimes I wonder about Your compassion. I feel lost and forgotten. I think the waves might take me down. Remind me that in these times to You are not far from me and You even use these moments to chisel at that hardness of my heart and reveal Jesus in me. Thank you Lord. I will trust you. In Jesus name, Amen.

There is a story of a Hasidic rabbi, renowned for his piety. He was unexpectedly confronted one day by one of his devoted youthful disciples. In a burst of feeling, theyound disciple exlaimed, “My master, I love you!”
The ancient teacher looked up from his books and asked his fervent disciple, “Do you know what hurts me?”

The young man was puzzled. Composing himself, he stuttered, “I don’t understand your question Rabbi. I am trying to tell you how much you mean to me, and you confuse me with questions?”

Replied the Rabbi, “My son, if you do not know what hurts me, how can you truly love me?”

Two guys, one I know personally and one I don’t, have blogged a bit on the issues facing how the church reaches, engages and ministers to young adults.

Ben Lemery I know from the ordaining body I’m part of, Messenger Fellowship. Ben lives in Santa Cruz, California and blogs at Bl:Ben Lemery .  Tyler Braun blogs at Man of Depravity – I haven’t had the privilege of meeting him but I do recommend his blog along with Ben’s. Both of these guys blogged a response to the article that appeared recently in the New York Times called: What Is It About 20-Somethings? by Robin Marantz Henig. Links to both their posts follow:

Ben Lemery: Rethinking How We Reach 20-Somethings

“If the article is true and young adults seem to take longer maturing, then I have to wonder what that means for organizations that are actively reaching out to this age group, such as churches and campus ministries. If young adults change jobs on an average of seven times, it certainly clarifies why so many do not feel an obligation to stay in their current churches on a long term basis.

This may be a problem for the current members but it could be an excellent opportunity to help steer these aspiring visionaries onto potential paths of adventure to help them “find their identity.” That may sound a little psychobabblish but hear me out.”

Read more…

Tyler Braun: 20-Somethings and Emerging Adulthood

“People debate whether this funk 20-somethings in today’s culture find themselves in is really a new life stage that has developed or whether they just need to have some more motivation for life. But the reality is that this is where people like me and my friends find ourselves: searching for the marrow of life.

The implications for the church are many, but the biggest is that the traditional church approach to have a college ministry that leads into a marriage ministry no longer applies. In fact, I don’t think we have fully realized how to effectively minister to people in their 20s who find themselves going through this struggle.”

Read more…

Just had to repost some of the material from Tullian Tchividjian’s post via the Gospel Coalition blog. Excellent!

“Most churches would agree that any segregation arising from racial or economic bigotry runs contrary to the nature of the gospel and should not be tolerated. But there’s another kind of segregation, perhaps more subtle, that many churches today have unapologetically embraced.

Following the lead of the advertising world, many churches and worship services target specific age groups to the exclusion of others. They forget that, according to the Bible, the church is an all-age community, and instead they organize themselves around distinctives dividing the generations: Busters, Boomers, Millennials, Generations X, Y, and Z. Many churches offer a traditional service for the tribe who prefer older music and a contemporary service for the tribe who prefer newer music. The truth is, however, that if the only type of music you employ in a worship service is old, you inadvertently communicate that God was more active in the past than he is in the present. On the other hand, if the only type of music you employ in a worship service is new, you inadvertently communicate that God is more active in the present than he was in the past.

The only way to musically communicate God’s timeless activity in the life of the church is to blend the best of the past with the best of the present. In other words, we must remember in our worship that while “contemporary only” people operate with their heads fixed frontwards, never looking over their shoulder at the stock from which they have come, and “traditional only” people operate with their heads on backwards, romanticizing about the past and always wanting to go back, the Church, in contrast from both extremes, is called upon to be a people with swiveling heads: learning from the past, living in the present, and looking to the future. That’s the only way to avoid in worship what C.S. Lewis called “chronological snobbery.”

You see, when we separate people according to something as trivial as musical preferences, we evidence a fundamental failure to comprehend the heart of the gospel. We’re not only feeding toxic tribalism; we’re also saying the gospel can’t successfully bring these two different groups together. It’s a declaration of doubt about the unifying power of God’s gospel. Generational appeal in worship is an admission that the gospel is powerless to join together what man has separated.

Building the church on stylistic preferences or age appeal (whether old or young) is just as contrary to the reconciling effect of the gospel as building it on class, race, or gender distinctions. In a recent interview J. I. Packer said, “If worship services are so fixed that what’s being offered fits the expectations, the hopes, even the prejudices, of any one of these groups as opposed to the others, I don’t believe the worship style glorifies God.” One of the leading ways the church can testify to God’s unifying power before our segregated world is to establish and maintain congregations and worship services that transcend cultural barriers, including age and musical styles.”

This article was triggered by a couple of things. First, Trevin Wax released a post on his blog entitled  “Steak on a Paper Plate: A Reflection on Worship”.  In it, Trevin questioned the forms of our worship and whether or not those forms (i.e. paper plates) were appropriate for celebrating and acknowledging the glory of God.  It was a great analogy and a fresh one for a discussion that has been going on for quite some time.  Content and form, style and substance. One statement by Trevin especially caught my eye:

But in worship today, there is a tendency toward casualness. The emphasis on feeling God’s closeness in worship may short-circuit the possibility of being transformed by a glimpse of the Transcendent One. There’s hardly any room for feeling awe in worship, and I can’t help but think that part of our problem is the form. (emphasis mine)

Reading Trevin’s article reminded me of some other things I had read in my studies, particularly arguments put forward by Marva J. Dawn, Michael Horton, Robert Webber and others. A work by Dr. Allen P. Ross is what I feature here and base my comments on.  In his book: Recalling the Hope of Glory, Dr. Ross discusses the danger of our worship becoming “imbalanced if not deformed.” How does that happen? By ignoring what he refers to as the “four basic senses of the human spirit as it responds to God.”

What are those four basic senses?

The Intellectual Sense. This relates to our fundamental need of understanding what we do and the reasons for it. We have a huge responsibility as worship leaders to prepare carefully and present with clarity. Dr. Ross suggests that the effect of understanding is two-fold:  First, it keeps the acts of worship safe from the stagnation of routine and or the infusion of superstition.  Secondly,  it helps to ensure that the worship experience does not come untethered from the everyday of living.

The Aesthetic Sense. We were created in the context of beauty and have the capacity for creating beautiful, although flawed, offerings. The wide variety of artistic expressions that exist should serve the purpose  not only of adding color to the world as a measure of common grace but extol and magnify the glory of God before the world. The fact is that there is very little creating that goes on in most worship settings. We often allot people the role of marginally involved observers who may sing a few songs (when not just watching the band) and little else. Ross points to the fact that worship is intended to be a dramatic reenactment of the gospel each week that invites people to participate by song, symbol, prayer, gestures, responses, etc..  This serves not only to draw the heart of the worshipper to God but into a deeper sense of community by shared acts of praise.

The Corporate Sense. Ross stresses that “ private worship or personal devotions, which are essential for the spiritual life, must lead into and find full expression in the assembly of the righteous, for private meditations must benefit others. “  In other words, our individual experience of worship is intended to fuel the worship of the community and help it take flight. It is a sad reality that multitudes of worship leaders look into the eyes of empty people each week; people who are relying on the band, the music, the charisma of the leader, to drag them from the grip of empty devotional lives into a momentary experience that caters more to the needs of people than magnifying the glory of God. Am I suggesting that our worship times should not bring comfort and encouragement to those attending? Certainly not. What I do mean to say is that if we help our people to understand the responsibility of bringing to the corporate worship a heart overflowing from private worship, we would see a greater depth of God-centered worship and less of a need to be pumped or propped up.

The Moral Sense. Frankly, I was disappointed that Dr. Ross used the word moral to describe this. I do understand his point: worship that is genuine should lead to transformed living. Our ethic should reflect the righteousness of the One whose face we behold. That said, I would have preferred the term the transcendent sense. My reason for this is that I firmly believe that our goal should not be to become more moral or ethical. I don’t believe that our goal in worship should be the transformation of people into a more virtuous morality. Where that has been emphasized, legalism tends to rule the day. Our deepest need is to be touched by the transcendent display of His holiness as we worship Him. When we worship “in the beauty of holiness” and behold “as in a mirror, the glory of God.” We find that the holiness we long for and the hatred of sin we experience is the genuine transformative work of the Spirit in our lives. Worship births love and love is the motivation we need to live out of.  I think Dr. Ross would agree with that and I certainly agree with his assessment of what happens when Holy God is not the focal point of our worship:

“Worship must develop this sense otherwise the intellectual sense will become arrogance, the aesthetic sense will be entertainment, and the corporate sense an unguided assembly.“

I don’t think any other statement captures so perfectly the dangers we face today if not humbled by God’s holiness. It is no secret that the reformed that have an emphasis on the intellectual sense are often found to be arrogant, that everyone from the seekers to the charismatics often fall head long into the lure of entertainment, and that emergents and house churches take the form of unguided assemblies in the name of community.

The question I face is the same one that Ralph Martin asks at the end of his masterful treatment of worship in The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (Edited by Geoffrey W. Bromiley):

“What is the pattern of worship that best conveys the richness of divine grace, faithfully interprets the gospel in our modern world and helpfully consolidates the body of Christ?”

Unless we are asking all of those questions then the warning of Dr. Ross concerning entertainment, arrogance and unguided assemblies is what we will contend with.