I apologize for the delay in daily posts. I have been extremley busy and unable to fit in time for my 11th passion in life "blogging!" Thanks for checking each day to see if anything new had been posted! I appreciate all of your responses as we continue to grow in knowledge and in truth!
So let me start out with a frustration this week. I am about tired of hearing poeple call themselves "Christians" and not knowing if they are born again! Not knowing where they would spend eternity if they were to die tonight! Jesus said you are either for me or against me! Shouldn't we be more defined in our faith and our Father and where He is leading us? So many walking around wondering spiritually? Hoping that the decision they made to follow Jesus Christ will really end up with spending eternity with Him! Let me know what you think...the phone lines are now open!
Way of the Pastor,
Joe
Yeah,
ReplyDeleteInteresting analogy (in my opinion).
Marriage is supposed to picture Christ's relationship with His bride, the church. Divorce really messes kids up. (When I say messes up, I mean that it causes deep hurts and pain.) On the same turn, churches that divorce themselves from their husband, Jesus Christ, find that their children are equally hurt. Many of these are the folks walking around saying that the church is full of hypocrits or that the most hateful people they've met are the "christians" that they've known. When I hear things like that I just want to say, "Who hurt you? What did they do? I'm sorry."
I've kind of gotten stuck on a thought lately. We see Jesus heal a lot more people than he saved in the gospels. It just makes me think that we should be addressing people's hurts at times rather than going straight for the conscience. I'm not saying to change the message, but rather to let God's spiritual healing testify to His love along side the message that we preach.
Love you guys.
And Joe. Hope I didn't guilt you. I don't update my blog half as regularly as you do, and I'm probably not nearly as busy as you are. Pastoring is super demanding. My life, not so much.
Ben aka Sandra D
Actually I don't think we need more concrete language, I think that is part of the problem actually. We use language like 'born again' to create an us and them dichotomy like sacred and secular. It is not about knowing, it is about constantly being. Let me jump tracks for a second: I see a lot of Christians doing things that really aren't good for the spiritual health of others and I know that they are responsible for their own actions, but I think as a Church we have a responsibility too. When we have this, 'oh they are already saved' attitude then we tend to treat them differently and not be as concerned for their souls. I think this contributes to the enemies attacks on the body of Christ and why we have such a poor public track record of actually living close to what we preach.
ReplyDeleteSo, to jump back on the subject, if we were to blur those lines. Not in the sense of ourselves having confidence, but in the sense of how we treat others. They we are more likely going to pray harder for others, even love them more and when they do fall have more mercy on them to restore them to Christ. I dislike language of exclusion, like born again, saved, etc. simply because it creates barriers for the relationships that should be a normal part of the Christian walk - with both Christians and non-Christians alike.
The other problem I have with firming up the langauge is that it really only reflects the experience of a minority of Christians. Many traditions do a great job of introducing children to Christ and make no emphasis on a single moment of conversion. The tendancy in the 'born again' world is to look down on this, but both the 'born agani' world and the majority of Christiandom have about the same success rate of seeing folks really come into relationship with God (which is of course the true mark of if you are a Christian).
So while I can talk that langauge, it is what I became a Christian in, I don't really like it and I tend to not use it. I opt to treat everyone the same, living as Christ before them and praying for them and sharing my walk with my testimony (which is my life not just the story of how I became a Christian). Would I say some of them are in and some out, sure but really I can't say for sure because only God knows the hearts of these folks. But I do my best to be faithful to the gospel and know that God is the only one who saves.
One of Freedom,
ReplyDeleteThanks for posting, but come on! Jesus used the same words with Nicodemus...unless a man be born again! So what are you really saying? Was Jesus drawing a line...you better believe it! I was not talking about how we treat others who are saved or not saved! I was simply talking about 100% knowing if one is yes I will say it proudly, "born again!" The whole emergant idea of throwing out these terms, words, phrases that Jesus used is for the birds! Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever! Now if we have been using those words like "born again" every since Jesus used them, who are we to change the word so we don't offend people or make the gospel watered down or "blurred?" Well just something to think about? Have a great weekend!
Way of the Pastor,
Joe
The word "Christian" doesn't mean what it really should anymore. That is why there is so much confusion and frustration.
ReplyDeleteWas Timothy McVeigh an American? By birth, yes. By citizenship, yes. By deed, no.
The idea can be applied to the post-Christian society that the United States is quickly transitioning into. People are "Christians" simply because of their socio-geographical status happens to be a place where Christianity is the major culturally acceptable religion. Their grandmother took them to church when they were a kid, they “celebrate” Christmas & Easter, and when they experience a life crisis, they say a prayer asking for Jesus to take the wheel. Add all those characteristics up and that is why, when asked, most people consider themselves Christians.
In sociology, this is referred to as social branding with the use of boundary markers. You see a person with a tie-dyed t-shirt, long hair, a peace symbol hanging from their neck, giving you a 2 finger wave as they hop into their VW Van, and most minds automatically label them as a “Hippie”. You just used social boundary markers to determine what/who the person is…when they very well could have been a right-wing, NRA card-carrying, home-school educated adult going to a Retro Disco Party at their missionary Baptist church.
That was all boundary markers. The good news is that boundary markers work when they are used as a guide in creating social identities. The bad news is when one uses boundary marker without question.
McManus puts it this way that at Mosaic, they don’t ask people what they believe...because they have realized that 21st Century American belief rarely gives light to a person’s heart. The question they pose to people is what do they care about? Robold would ask, what makes you pound the table with passion, what keeps you up at night? That is how you find a person’s heart…that is how you begin to test the soil to see if it’s fertile, thorny, or rocky.
I have stopped asking people if they are a Christian…even if they go to church. Haven’t asked those questions for five years. Likewise, I haven’t called myself a “Christian” for 5 years. I refer to myself as a Christ Follower.
And “born-again”? C’mon, you might as well ask people if they have been washed in the blood! Remember the Larry Norman skit, Joe? Jesus used that term in the Gospels only once and we feel like that is the only way we should ask people about their faith journey…and we implicitly expect people to know what we are talking about? When did Jesus ask Peter if he was born-again? What about Nathaniel? What about Mary? What about the woman at the well? The point is Jesus didn’t have trademark statements like Donald Trump or Paris Hilton. If he did, then my submission for Jesus’ trademark statement is this: “Follow Me.” And that is why I call myself a Christ Follower.
Love Always,
Neil
All very well said my firend, However, when Jesus was sitting with the disciples at the last supper he didn't dance around trying to find their hearts...he knew their hearts! He used words like this is my flesh...eat it! THis is my blood...drink it! He didn't worry or form fancy ways to say things without offending or oops...I probably shouldn't say that it might confuse the disciples!
ReplyDeleteWay of the Pastor,
Joe
All I am saying is that when people come to us with questions...we have many examples of Jesus, "not just one," giving answers using terminology that was humorous, offensive, confusing, and at time disturbing! I don't think there is a list we shouldn't use...according to Acts 1:8 we don't even need to worry about it! Good night...signing off for now!
ReplyDeleteTo the bat cave....
Joe
Sorry,
ReplyDeleteWhat I said before had very little to do with what you said. Must have had that stuck in my craw. Thank you for free for all Friday. :)
1) I agree that we need to define what a Christian is very accurately. While "born again" is only used once, the idea of being born again is captured in the ideas of "regenerated," "a new creature," "born of the Spirit," the "new man" etc. In fact, the concept is interwoven throughout the New Testament. We need to keep a tight theological definition of what this means becasue every saved person must be born of God in the sense God reveals it. We want to teach the fundamental aspects of being a believer very accurately to people so people can examine themselves to see if they are approved. We don't want to preach a fuzzy message that gives false converts the idea that they might be saved. In fact, since the natural man has a natural tendency to delude Himself into thinking he or she is saved, they don't need any help from fuzzy preaching. (Note on this: if a person doesn't know what it means to be born of God, regenerated, Spiritually born, etc, I have to aks: what IS their church teaching? Shouldn't every church have a place to teach essential doctrines to new believers whether they be children or adult converts? They can't handle the meat of the word if they haven't grown strong on the milk of the word. And secondly, if they don't know, then it can only help to teach them what it means because if they aren't born of the Spirit (whether it happened before they can remember or later in life), they haven't been saved, and they can't be living in the power of the Holy Spirit.)
2) There is at least one grey area in the Bible that I know of. There seems to be such a thing as a believer who is living in sin (for a period of time). The interesting thing is that while scripture acknowledges such a person may exist, scripture also doesn't give that person any assurance of salvation. I think many times we are tempted to make that person feel included, but scripture teaches us to do the opposite. In some cases, God even says to send that evildoer out of our assembly until they repent. God doesn't give them any assurance and we shouldn't either. Rather we should call them to holy living. Teach them how to come boldly before God's throne to aquire Grace in the time of temptation (to overcome it). Then we can let God give them His assurance of salvation. Seriously, what would happen if we started disfellowshipping practicing adulterers, fornicators, homosexuals, etc who call themselves Christian UNTIL THEY REPENT - like the Bible instructs the church to do. (Incidentally, we do not look down on them, but rather we do not allow them to take part so that they understand that sin separated them from God before they believed and that if they are still living in rebellion to God then they still may be separated from God. If/when God gives them repentence we restore them to the assembly with no prejudice.)
3) We can't judge hearts and sometimes people do not articulate what they believe very well and so it can be dubious even to judge a person based on their profession of faith. None the less, it is legitimate to be concerned about people when there seems to be a disconnect in their profession or way of life. While we define the nature of a Christian very tightly as the Bible does, and while we have the leaders of the church judge a church-goer's actions in accord with Biblical discipline, we need to approach an individual's faith with grace "judging nothing before its time."
Anyway, that's how I think scripture balances it all out, but still there is the difficulty of putting those principles into practice in a way that is full of grace and truth. In fact, we can't do it without the Spirit of God. I pray that we are all seeking the fulness of God's Spirit in our lives and the full power of Christ's ressurection through the Holy Spirit.
Wrap up notes: while we should carefuly definie born again theologically, we need to be understanding enough to hear someone describe a reborn life without using that terminology. Someone who didn't necessarily have a cataclismic event could be born of God. The questions that come to mind are: Have they received the gift of the Holy Spirit? Do they acknowledge their sinfulness? Are they trusting Jesus to be their Lord (master, leader, teacher, king) and Savior? Are they becoming more like Christ?
When I come across a believer I ask for their testimony. Usually, I just want to hear another believer's testimony, but it also gives an opportunity to ask clarifying questions, to challenge a person if something seems off, and/or to care for a person because many times their testimony includes real pain right now.
Wow...very loaded answer there my friend! All I can say is that you need to check out Today's Tuesday with Todd podcast and call mein the morning...ha! Get ready for more of this same topic for Thrusday's Theology Throw-Down. What portion of scripture are you specifically talking about that is grey? And one last thing about the Holy Spirit...when do you receive the Holy Spirit? At conversion? (my belief) or after conversion? Let me know Ben or Sandra...what's going on with your many names? Identity crisis? Multiple personalities? Let's pray!
ReplyDeleteWay of the Pastor,
Joe
Joe,
ReplyDelete:)
Fun!
1) Scripture does not get specific about how much you can sin and still be a true beleiver. 1 John 1:8 "If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us." 1 John 3:8 "the one who practices sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. The Son of God appeared for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil." (Barnes notes in His commentary: "He that committeth sin - Habitually, willfully, characteristically.") So there's the paradox, when have we crossed the line from being a sinner saved by grace to a habitual sinner and child of the devil. I think the answer is found in the condition of our heart toward God, and only God can truly judge that, so that's the grey area I'm talking about. If you find yourself frequently stumbling into a given sin the question becomes: is this because I'm not truly saved or is it because I am not seeking God in my weakness to find grace to overcome my temptation. Honestly, the individual can't get an answer unless they start gaining victory over that sin, and even the victory could be coming because they have now been saved or that they have begun to resist the devil.
2) A person receives the Holy Spirit at conversion, but we can hinder our ability to walk in the Spirit by keeping unconfessed sin, by disobedience, by prayerlessness, etc. It is worth noting that Peter is filled with the Holy Spirit at Pentecost (Acts 2:4) and again in Acts 4:8, as is the rest of the Jerusalem church in Acts 4:31.
Joe said: "Thanks for posting, but come on! Jesus used the same words with Nicodemus...unless a man be born again! So what are you really saying? "
ReplyDeleteWell, you are not really treating that passage correctly here. Just because Jesus used this language, packed with a dual meaning that Nicodemus didn't even grasp, does not somehow make it a formula for evangelism. I am not for throwing out the language, but really trying to get at the baggage the language has. Born again has a lot of recent baggage brought on by the Evangelical movement (a la Billy Graham and others). It is a packed statement and implies a heck of a lot more than Jesus meant here (and doesn't imply what Jesus was really getting at). I think you would have to show a historical track of this term to claim that this was what we've used to name conversion since Christ - and I am sure you can't do that.
That said, sure Jesus drew a line - but I don't think it is the same line we as Evangelicals like to draw. What we do is more akin to what Jesus railed against the Pharisees for doing - creating an exclusivist community of elite (God's people) through spiritual affiliation and rejecting the world as unclean. Rather Jesus called clean what was unclean and delivered the excluded into a new community that had bounds as open as the arms of the Father. Our job is to call people to those arms, just like Jesus did. I just think some of the language (born again) we have chosen doesn't express that at all.
Frank
The reception of the Spirit is a fun one, deserving of its own throw-down. I come from Pentecostal stock which sees this completely differently than I see it now. I think it is easy to get lost in semantics here - when the important thing is that we need the Holy Spirit. Period. I guess this helps me frame what I am saying about the born again language - it isn't really that important. If that language helps your community understand the process of coming into relationship with God then awesome. If the language of baptism tied to the Spirit helps you to seek more of God's presence in your life and ministry then awesome. But I've seen both terms do the opposite - so I am wary of them. Jesus used language that is so tied to his context - so why do we living in modern Western industrial contexts think they are going to hold the same meaning? I'm not saying we compromise the core - we are calling folks to real relationship with God. But the language we do that with is not set in stone. If it were 'born again' as a phrase would be all over the place in Acts and the writings of the Church Fathers.
ReplyDeleteFrank
Nicodemus didn't get it at all.
ReplyDeleteOr
Nicodemus followed the analogy. Using Jesus' own analogy Nicodemus is saying: "but what you are saying is impossible for us." Then Jesus says, a person must be "born of water and Spirit." I've heard a compelling argument that this is an allusion to Ezekiel 36:25-27 "Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols. "Moreover, I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; and I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. "I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will be careful to observe My ordinances. This makes sense for at least two reasons (a) because this scripture details how God will transform people by cleasnsing their sins, and transforming their lives. God will do it! What a great responce to Nicodemus' objection that it is impossible. (b) Because later Jesus asks "are you a teacher in Israel and you do not understand these things?" Jesus' point seems to be that the scripture Nicodemus taught already contained what Jesus was saying. Jesus' implication is that Nicodemus should have understood it. So what Nicodemus didn't understand wasn't that the idea of being born again. What He didn't understand was how salvation could depend on something we couldn't do for ourselves. (By the way, I think we believe in the Lord Jesus and God gives us rebirth into eternal life. God operates Sovereignly in his election and we are chosing peoeple including how we respond to the Gospel. A great mystery!)
Frank
What do you think we mean by when we say "born again?"
What is Jesus really getting at in your opinion?
Who is being excluded that should be included?
Last: Being born again is beautiful because it is a promise of something more. At Pentecost Peter said, "repent and be baptized and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." Rebirth is the promise of God and it is wonderful, but it also divides because as Jesus goes on to explain to Nicodemus that the Son of God needs to be lifted up for the healing of the people (washing if you will), that beleif in Him is the dividing line for salvation (which then assumes that God will give Spiritual birth to those who believe in Jesus, and that those who are born of the Spirit will do good works in the Spirit of God (John 3:21). In other words our good works are done in the power of the Holy Spirit which is given to believers - the divine rebirth.)
So...
You can ask a person if they believe in Jesus, but when you ask if a person is born again it lets us know if you have truly believed on the name (God, The Word, Savior, Lord, King, the righteous one) of the Son of God because if God hasn't given the divine birth, then that person hasn't truly believed in the Biblical sense. Of course they need to understand what spiritual rebirth or regeneration or whatever your favorite term for it is. Once they understand it. Then they can ask themselves if there is evidence in their life that the Spirit of God dwells in me? As a result, they have even greater assurance in their salvation as they dwell on the Holy Spirit crying out within themselves "Abba, Father," or they find that the testimony of the Spirit is lacking and they can humbly seek what they lack from God.
In case we don't think it's helpful to use rebirth. Here's some other verses that reference the concept:
ReplyDeleteJohn 1:13
Titus 3:5
Gal 4:29
1 Peter 1:3,23
1 John 3:9
1 John 4:7
1 John 5:1,4,18
Gal 6:15
Col 3:10
Eph 4:24
And frankly it's not rocket science. See there's this Spirit we don't have. Then it is born into us so now we have a New Spirit. It's born, if you will. Then this New Spirit gives us new spiritual desires that conflict with our old desires. This Spirit has new ways to accomplish what it desires. And so on. If we can't explain that to people shame on us.