'Our father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name, Thy kingdom come, thy will be done...'
How many times have I prayed that prayer? How many times have I considered what I am saying? Am I asking that God should hear my prayer and grant my request? Have I considered that I am asking not that God will satisfy a desire of mine, but that the will of the creator of the universe be done? How strange is that?
God did not seek my help in creating the universe. He did not ask for my advice when he made the heavens nor the earth. Why did Jesus teach us a prayer that would include the request that the will of the Father be done?
Perhaps Jesus was trying to impress upon man our uniqueness among all of creation: free will.
So, why do we pray that the will of the father be done? Because we stand as a singular impediment to the fulfillment of that will being realized. So what is the will of the Father? Do we seek to discover what that might be? Or are we so consumed with our own will that we try to impose that which we desire upon God as his will for us?
Jesus taught us so much more than a simple prayer which we so quickly recite from memory without hesitation and more sadly without thought. He taught us the secret of life: finding contentment in our role in the fulfillment of God's will.
Recently I was listening to an Apologetics.com episode entitled 'Thus sayeth the Lord'. One of the apologeticists, Lindsey Brooks, commented that the key difference between the bible and any other self help book is that while a book like Jim Cramer's 'Mad Money' might attempt to change our manner of thinking on investing: the bible goes beyond simply changing a singular view and transforms the entire scope of our being. I read 'Mad Money' and I have to begin to synthesize what it says and change my view of investing. The bible, on the other hand, is read and it goes so far beyond changing my view or focus on a particular subject. It seeks to transform my outlook on each and every facet of my life. It goes beyond how I look outward, it forces me to look into the mirror that reflects my soul.
I sat recently in the Sunday school class of Art and Annette Foster at Nashville First Church of the Nazarene and the lesson being taught was dealing with the glory of God. Associate Pastor Dale Benson's sermon had been drawn from Philippians 4. Annette, in presenting her summary of the book of Philippians had written several summary points on the white board. One word stood out, contentment.
Why would Paul say that word? Is he not aware that he himself wrote that 'I am to press on toward the goal before me'. Pressing on and being content, come on Paul, surely the two concepts are dichotomous and cannot both be my goal. Unless the goal I press toward cannot be something which I can attain within my own abilities.
A goal I cannot obtain? What a silly goal. I would never encourage an athlete to set a goal that they cannot attain. What would be the purpose in that? A goal should be obtainable. That is what I learned and what I teach. But, there is something I forget, the words that were spoken by Jesus as he prayed in the garden, 'Not my will, but your will.' As Jesus cried out in anguish from his knees in the garden, he returned to the simplicity of the prayer he taught us, to the fulfillment not of our will, but God's.
Our prayer should be that we conform to the will of God. That God will send His spirit not to accompany us but to indwell us. Not to influence us but to consume us. We must subject ourselves to the proposition that God's will is greater than ours and in His will being satisfied, ours will be made whole.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Thursday, February 14, 2008
1 Peter 3:15 -- Apologetics vs Ministries
During a recent Sunday School session, we were dealing with the verse 1 Peter 3:15. Specifically the portion that speaks of always being ready to give a defense of the faith for anyone who asks.
The statement we were dealing with was the interpretation of the word "apologia" -- or more accurately, whether a rational defense was what was being required. The example drawn up was not dissimilar to a discussion on here previously -- reaching people through other methods such as dealing with emotional or physical needs.
Personally, I am a firm believer in the discipline of apologetics. However, it can never be a complete response. I think sometimes we confuse theology or doctrine with ministry. I think what many point out about reaching the lost, feeding the hungry, or providing shelter for the sheep is the fulfillment of the ministry of the church. We should not confuse the discussions of doctrines with the ministries of the church.
When a person with needs presented themselves to Christ, he did not share parables or question their hearts. Instead he met their needs. The woman with the "issue of blood", the lame man lowered through the roof, the blind man, the demon possessed man all had their needs fulfilled before Christ even spoke to them. He did not share the doctrines -- he shared the gospel, his very presence. Those are two very different approaches.
If we don't first deal with the needs of those who are in need, then why should our doctrines even be of a concern to them? Pat Williams in his book "How To Be Like Jesus" gave some excellent advice on how to be like Jesus. First, we must be good listeners so that we can hear the worlds problems. Then we must be willing to help the person in having their needs met. Then, our witness has a basis. Without that basis, our theology and doctrines are irrelevant to them. Our theology is only important in that context in being the motivator behind our actions. It is the motivation that separates us from how the world would try to meet that goal. Jesus lived his theology, we are challenged to do the same.
So, back to 1 Peter 3:15 -- what about the person that asks? If they ask, then I believe we are commanded to give a rational, respectful, relevant explanation for the faith that is within us. The question is, do they ask for help, or an explanation. We should be prepared to meet both questions.
So, we should live out our faith in a simple manner. It should not be so mysterious that they will not see it (or witness it). It should be a simple life of love for God and our fellow man. That should be based on a maturing theology that takes us from the understanding of the need in our life, to be able to share the hope that is within us. A simple faith and a maturing theology should be our goal.
__________________
The statement we were dealing with was the interpretation of the word "apologia" -- or more accurately, whether a rational defense was what was being required. The example drawn up was not dissimilar to a discussion on here previously -- reaching people through other methods such as dealing with emotional or physical needs.
Personally, I am a firm believer in the discipline of apologetics. However, it can never be a complete response. I think sometimes we confuse theology or doctrine with ministry. I think what many point out about reaching the lost, feeding the hungry, or providing shelter for the sheep is the fulfillment of the ministry of the church. We should not confuse the discussions of doctrines with the ministries of the church.
When a person with needs presented themselves to Christ, he did not share parables or question their hearts. Instead he met their needs. The woman with the "issue of blood", the lame man lowered through the roof, the blind man, the demon possessed man all had their needs fulfilled before Christ even spoke to them. He did not share the doctrines -- he shared the gospel, his very presence. Those are two very different approaches.
If we don't first deal with the needs of those who are in need, then why should our doctrines even be of a concern to them? Pat Williams in his book "How To Be Like Jesus" gave some excellent advice on how to be like Jesus. First, we must be good listeners so that we can hear the worlds problems. Then we must be willing to help the person in having their needs met. Then, our witness has a basis. Without that basis, our theology and doctrines are irrelevant to them. Our theology is only important in that context in being the motivator behind our actions. It is the motivation that separates us from how the world would try to meet that goal. Jesus lived his theology, we are challenged to do the same.
So, back to 1 Peter 3:15 -- what about the person that asks? If they ask, then I believe we are commanded to give a rational, respectful, relevant explanation for the faith that is within us. The question is, do they ask for help, or an explanation. We should be prepared to meet both questions.
So, we should live out our faith in a simple manner. It should not be so mysterious that they will not see it (or witness it). It should be a simple life of love for God and our fellow man. That should be based on a maturing theology that takes us from the understanding of the need in our life, to be able to share the hope that is within us. A simple faith and a maturing theology should be our goal.
__________________
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)