The Gift of Living Missionally: Worship

As Christians we want to share the love of God with people. Not only do we do so because God commands us to share his message, but because we have personally experienced his love (we know God has forgiven us and has accepted us as his children), but also because the love of God for sinners has been poured into our hearts. That is, we truly love people and want them to experience God's forgiveness.

The Bible says, "But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8). Serving others and sharing the gift of God's love with them is the mission of the Church. We call this missional living. However, missions will not last forever. Why? Because missions is not the goal, only the means to the goal: the worship of God. And this is the real reason for why we want to reach out to people and witness to God's love. We know that people will be better off when they come to know God personally and know his plans for their lives. This is why the gift of missions is worship: the glory, good pleasure, praise and worship of God by his creatures.

Helping sinners find the cross and understand the reason for Christ’s death and resurrection (missional living) is not the goal. The worship of God by sinners is. To serve the poor, feed the hungry, educate the masses, and heal humanity’s pain is not the goal. The worship of God by those who are set free is. The enjoyment of the good things in life and the good pleasures of life is not the goal of our existence. The worship of God’s children who acknowledge that all good gifts come from him is.

As we enjoy another Christmas season let us be on the lookout for the opportunities God will give us to share the gift of his Son with people. As we develop relationships with others and spend time with folks may they see in us the peace and hope that flood our hearts because we have placed our confidence in God. And may we be ready, and willing, to point people to the Savior so that they too might experience God's hope, peace and forgiveness. May we not tire of living missionally so that people can come to know God, worship Him, and become followers of Jesus.
Por Su Gracia y Poder

"Dad, that's not right": Parents, Kids do Listen to Us

A few days ago I was reminded again that our kids listen to us more than we realize. Our family was traveling to Miami and began singing a few Christian songs. One of the songs we sang was “Trust and Obey.” The refrain says: “Trust and obey, for there's no other way to be happy in Jesus, but to trust and obey.” My daughter interjected, “Dad, that’s not right. We don’t have to obey in order to be saved.” She surprised me because she repeated what I’ve said many times. Now the song is talking about fellowship and service, and in this regards, it reflects proper doctrine. Our greatest joy in the Christian life is found in our fellowship with Christ as we live obediently to his words. That’s pure theology. But, she was also right in stating that we are not saved “because we obey.” Initial salvation, or being justified(=declared not guilty) is not the result of what we do but what has been done. I believe that salvation is by grace, not works. Salvation will produce some kind of work, in varying degrees, but obedience doesn’t save us, nor will it keep us saved.

Of course, I did take the opportunity to once again stress not only “grace” as a significant word for the Christian faith, but also “obedience,” which is how we honor God, show our love for God, show that we are disciples of Christ, and is a requirement for the rewards we will receive in return for our obedience in heaven at the judgment seat of Christ (2 Cor. 5:10). The book of Acts does say that “many of the priests were becoming obedient to the faith” (Acts 6:7), but the mention of “disciples” that were increasing in numbers in the same verse leads us to affirm that what the phrase means is that priests were becoming convinced that Jesus was the Messiah and were now following him. Paul in Romans 1:5 speaks of “the obedience of faith.” This phrase has various possible meanings. Among the various alternatives given, the grammatical phrase can refer to 1) “the faith,” as in the content of the Christian message. Or, it can mean 2) the obedience which is the same as our faith and vice a versa. Others also believe it can mean 3)the obedience produced (even required) by our faith. Even if this last interpretation is accepted, obedience is the result of a saving relationship with Christ, and not the requirement for salvation, at least not initial salvation or justification.

Should we “trust and obey”? Yes, most definitely. We are saved and secure, however, because of the promise we have in Christ: “he who believes has eternal life” (John 6:47; see John 20:30-31; Galatians 2:16). To believe in Christ is to be convinced or have the inward certainty that what God says about his Son Jesus Christ to justify me and save me is true. I must personally come to faith in Christ to have my sins forgiven (See Acts 16:31).

Our children not only watch our behavior, but they also listen to what we believe about things, including our beliefs about God and his Word. I want my daughter to be committed to Christ and to want nothing more than to live obediently to God’s teachings because she loves him. But, I want her to be clear that salvation is not meritorious. It is always a grace gift for which she always ought to be thankful and obedient. “Trust and obey, for there's no other way to be happy in Jesus, but to trust and obey.”
Por Su Gracia y Poder

The Gay Community and the State of California

When the CA Supreme Court in May of this year struck down a 2000 ban on same-sex unions there was cheering in the gay community. On the other hand, those who disagreed with the Court simply went to work to put Proposition 8 on the ballot for November. The reaction from the gay community since the amendment passed had been, until only last week, vociferous, violent and intolerant.

Leaving behind any biblical argument against gay relationships and marriages, let’s consider other matters that warrant reflection. Help me with this. Does any group have the right to have the traditional meaning of marriage redefined? For example, if tomorrow three men or three ladies wanted to marry each other, should they be allowed to take the new definition of marriage, sought now by gays, one step further and allow for such marriages to be legalized? Consider this scenario. What if a group of people believed that nothing is wrong with having sex with minors, and enough of them got signatures to place the amendment on a ballot, should not the amendment be allowed so that people could enjoy their understanding of what in their opinion constitutes a marriage? Wouldn’t they be able to cry, “Equal Rights”! I think most of us would have a problem with defining “marriage” along any of the above two lines, even if those involved argued that they loved each other and should have the right to define marriage anyway they chose.

Let’s take this a step further. Taking the two illustrations above, if the traditional definition of marriage is redefined, why would anyone care to prohibit any person or any group their right to enter marriage any way they seem fit? In other words, on what basis would they declare such relationships wrong or not beneficial to society? The redefining of marriage as anything else except between one man and one woman could eventually have the above slippery slope effect on society. No one would have a moral ground upon which to stop a series of re-definitions of what constitutes marriages.

But, some might argue, “Hasn’t marriage been redefined in the past already?” If so, what’s the big deal? Yes, the redefinition of marriage to allow for recognition in the case of slaves and interracial couples did take place years ago. However, these redefinitions of marriage were based on social and ethnic distinctions, not gender. Marriage was still defined to be the union of a man and a woman, whether between slaves or among interracial couples.

If I understand the law, as it stands now in California, gay folks already enjoy legal recognition as “domestic partners” who have “the same rights, protections, and benefits” as married couples do (see California Family Code section 297.5). Why insist on changing the traditional meaning (reference) of a word which the majority of the people in a state wish not to change? Why the hostility and the violence?

At the same we are concerned about the often expressed, as well as reported on, homophobic actions of some, whether religious or not. Many have displayed inappropriate attitudes toward gay people. Those within the Christian community who have demonstrated hateful actions toward the gay community do not reflect the ways of Christ. Everyone is worthy of respect on the basis of having been created in God’s image.

Having said this, it is true that families are concerned about what it would do to parent and child relationships if gay couples do constitute legal marriages. Families of small children in elementary school, for example, are concerned that tolerant education which already exists in CA will be taken to a new level and may leave parents sitting in the dark as it pertains to attempts at re-educating children. Such examples were seen in October with “Coming Out Days” celebrated in elementary schools in the state without the knowledge of some parents, who only found out about the homosexual education through casual after school conversations with their kids.

Some now fear that the amendment will be overturned. Last week the Supreme Court of California said that they will take up the matter of the amendment in March of next year, putting into question the livelihood of the amendment. What implications would such action communicate to our country? Richard Land recently wrote, “If the California Supreme Court were to now attempt to nullify what the people have chosen to do through an expression of their sovereign will, they will have attempted to usurp the sovereignty of government “of the people, by the people and for the people” and to replace it with government “of the judges, by the judges and for the judges” (The Christian Post, Wed., Nov. 19, 2008, www.Christianpost.com).


How, then, should the gay community respond? First, those who believe that “marriage” is the union of one man and one woman should not be labeled bigots as if “tolerance” is a one-way street. Their beliefs should be respected. Second, those in the gay community should tolerate the traditional definition of marriage in order to be consistent with their own message of tolerance and should continue to work peacefully to persuade people to think differently. However, once the people have spoken, as they did on Nov. 4, the democratic process should be honored.

Biblically, there are many arguments that can be established for rejecting a homosexual lifestyle. However, individual homosexuals should not be rejected. While many of us believe that the clamor of the gay community is really a plea for special rights, both sides of the issue are free to use the democratic process to advance their own agenda. What we ask of both sides is that the manner of persuasion adopted be peaceful and tolerant of individuals, and follow the chains of democracy our country has in place.

The World God Has Opened Up

I began reading a book the other day which asked a simple but penetrating question: “How do we see the world immediately around us? Do we see it as a place of mission which God is already opening up for us or do we see it as a place of immense threat – as the enemy to be overcome?” (Robinson & Smith, Invading Secular Space, 34). As in many areas of life this question brings out our perspective on sharing Christ into the forefront.

Jesus told his disciples to open their eyes (wake up) and see the fields that were ripe for harvest (John 4:35). Instead of hesitating to start spiritual conversations, or to take risks to enter into friendships, to speak about God, to speak of what God is doing, or of the people of God, or of activities concerning God in which we’re involved, why not open our mouths and let the words fall where they may. If it is true that God opened the heart of Lydia so she would believe (Acts 16:14), that those who were appointed to eternal life came to faith (Acts 13:48), that God added daily to the church those who were to be saved (Acts 2:47), if Paul knew that God through the grace of prayer would lead him to share (explain) with boldness the gospel (Eph. 6:19), why then are we not more bold, more open, more risk-taking, more believing, more willing to simply trust, obey and follow the path set before us?

Think with me. Is not society yearning for something to believe in? (In spite of the attacks from the New Atheism.) Are not many of the shelves at Barnes & Nobles filled with books on spirituality? Has not the skeptic, atheist world of modernity been “swallowed” up by the belief in one, belief in all, belief in anything, something, world of Postmodernity? Are not college and university Religion 101 and Philosophy 101 classes full with students searching, asking, questioning, rejecting, seeking, longing?

So, what’s the problem? Could it be we think the world is shut up in unbelief? That people will not respond to our spiritual probing? Is it fear? Could it be that we believe that the enemy can keep shut the hearts of those whose heart God wants to open? Furthermore, do we ignore that people are longing for acceptance and for community, or as some would say, for the opportunity “to belong before” they “believe”?

So, again, what’s the problem? I think that our perspective on spiritual reality is off track. Jesus died to bring sinners into a right relationship with God and to grant them eternal life. According to the verses quoted above God is actively calling people to himself (see John 6:65). If this is true, then what are needed are believers who understand and embrace their DNA, uh, that is, their mDNA, or their missionary DNA (core purpose, task). The church, if it is anything, must be a missionary church, or missional (if you want to be edgy) in its perspective on people. It must be willing to seek the lost (sorry if you don’t like the word), invade secular space, get in the mire, and enter darkness so that the light of the gospel has an opportunity to beam into the lostness.

God has gone before us. He doesn’t want anyone to perish, but desires that all come to salvation, deliverance, spiritual health, fullness of life. If this is what he wants, then this means that he is going ahead of us (you) preparing the hearts of your friends, family members, neighbors, co-workers, fellow students, enemies, skeptics, atheists, deists, spiritualists, cultural opposites, etc. The final question is: will we believe the empty threat of the enemy, or will we believe the purposes of God to involve us in missions? Will we obey, enter, and stand in awe of the world God has opened up for us?
Por Su Gracia y Poder

The Presidential Elections of 2008

"All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing" (Edmund Burke). I hope that each of you who can vote will do so tomorrow. The elections of this year may very well be the most important of our life time. We will vote to put into the Office of President either Barack Obama or John McCain. There are obvious differences among the two, and there is a sea of experience that divides them, among many other constrasts that could be listed. Each of us will vote our conscious on Tuesday morning and play the part of a good citizen. Whoever is president Wednesday morning (if this in fact is determined) will govern our great country for the next 4 years. May we find peace in the result of the election - whatever this may be - and never forget the One in whom we are to trust and the One who alone knows the end from the beginning - the Lord Almighty. "Some trust in chariots and some in horses, but we trust in the name of the LORD our God" (Pslam 20:7).

"Just Walk Across the Room"

An uncle sitting alone after the funeral service for his deceased nephew. Tennis players sitting around afer practice. A Christian lady trying to find her way in a new church. And only a few steps from where I stood in each case and an attempt at friendship. I started a conversation, planted a seed.

Why walk across the room and spend time talking to people? Bill Hybels recently published a book called "Just Walk Across the Room". Hybels is known for his many books on evangelism. In this latest book he asks the question, "Are you using your steps wisely"? (19). He calculated that each of us travel about ten thousand steps each day which adds up to about 115,000 miles in one's lifetime. He writes the following: "Assume the average distance across most rooms is twenty feet -about ten steps. The question I hope to answer is this: What if ten steps - just one one-thousandth of your daily average - could actually impact eternity? If so, it might well change the way you walk" (19).

You'll have to read the book for yourself. But, the stories of people making a difference for eternity in the lives of others to whom they decided to simply walk across a room or a ball field to start a conversation, are amazing. One of the stories is about a Muslim man who shared with Hybels how he was approached by a follower of Christ during a business party. The Muslim as usual sat alone while others piled together and discussed whatever was on their mind. But one day things changed when someone was willing to step across the room.

Approaching people is always like stepping into the "Zone of the Unknown" says Hybels. For many people this zone is freightening. Hybel shares the following about the Christian who took the risk: "It's foreign territory, this zone. He had no clue what would happen when he stuck out his hand to the tall Muslim man. He knew nothing about where the conversation would go or if there would be any conversations at all. He was uncertain what this individual's reaction to him would be. But he was already committed. He had left his Circle of Comfort, he had walked by faith all the way across the room, and he had resolved in his heart, probably praying every step of the way, to enter into the Zone of the Unknown and see what God might do. (In my opinion, it's within this zone that God does his very best work.)" (23).

Hybel asks the question, "What if redirecting a person's forever really is as simple as walking across a room?" (22). I'm enjoying reading this book. It inspires me to continue seeking people and waiting patienty for them to respond. Why not try this approach to evangelism for yourself? I would love to hear your stories.
Por Su Gracia y Poder

More Food for Thought on Worship - Part II

Marva J. Dawn’s views on worship are reminiscent of other authors I have quoted before on the topic of worship, such as Vanhoozer and Piper. She writes: “We must therefore be constantly asking how our worship reveals God and what kind of people we are becoming, because the perspectives and understanding about God and the specific attitudes and habits of being that are created by all the elements of worship services affect how we think, speak, and act as we worship in the rest of life” (119).

For Marva, the question is not attractiveness but usefulness. She discusses this in relationship to liturgy. “We must not ask, Is this liturgy attractive? But always, What kind of character does this nurture? Does our liturgy focus on feelings rather than on God’s character, which evokes those feelings?” She adds, “If so, it will nurture a faith that depends on emotions rather than a faith that can cling to who God is in spite of human experiences of sorrow or estrangement” (249).

What about the relation between experience and worship? Should we seek to 'experience' worship? In discussing worship Leonard Sweet in his book Postmodern Pilgrims believes experience is indispensable for the postmodern generation. He affirms that "Postmoderns literally 'feel' their way through life. Want to create change? Give postmoderns a new experience they haven't had before" (43). It seems that Sweet stresses innovative art-forms and interactive preaching and images to “create” worship experiences, while Marva – although not against using those things – would argue to make sure that those experiences reflect God’s character and are not confused for experiencing God himself. It is looking upward and intensely to God, and obeying his word, that will ultimately bring about inward change in believers. Even Sweet agrees that "Experience is not the final arbiter of truth. Experience cannot be trusted except it has been transfigured by Scripture and Tradition. Besides, there comes a time when it's not time for experience, but for obedience" (46).

Marva J. Dawn invites us to ask how the way we worship God is faithful to scripture, and to further ask what kind of believer we are becoming as a result of how we worship God. Good thoughts for us to keep in mind as we worship daily and in our faith communities each week.

I close this week with a quote found in Dawn's book on the definition of worship written by William Temple: Worship is "The submission of all our nature to God. It is the quickening of the conscience by His holiness; the nourishment of the mind with His truth; the purifying of imagination by His beauty; the opening of the heart to His love; the surrender of will to His purpose - and all of this gathered up in adoration, the most selfless emotion of which our nature is capable" (Temple, Readings in St. John' Gospel, 68, quoted in Dawn, 80).