The social gospel

Jesus lived at the time when the Roman Empire was the superpower.  The Romans had built magnificent cities, building and roads. 

 At our annual Missions Conference this past weekend we were reminded how the gospel spread via these roads.  Roads were the “social media” and “social platform” of the first few centuries AD.  People chatted on the roads; roads interlinked towns; roads were used for business and for travelling together (strength in numbers); roads were one of the main public social spaces; roads were very social; roads ideally suited the spread of the gospel of Jesus.  Ordinary people spoke about Jesus to others on these roads and shared the gospel in the various towns these roads lead to.  It was ordinary, everyday, organic evangelism. 

New churches, as a direct consequence, were planted all along these Roman roads.

What are our equivalents of the “Roman road” system?  What are the public social spaces open to us in which we can naturally talk about Jesus?

Is it perhaps:

Chatting to other parents at your child's birthday party?
A Mixed Martial Arts class?
The golf course?
Facebook?
An open home as you invite newcomers to tea after a church service?
A hiking club?
A blog?
A regular morning walk with a neighbour to keep fit?
A college social?
Coffee at Vida e cafe?

Covenant baptism: Why we baptise some babies and some adults

Why do we baptise some babies and some adults at our church?  Baptizing babies seems to be quite a controversial practise these days and often the baptizers are accused of flouting biblical principles for the sake of unbiblical tradition.  Convinced Baptists argue that we should only be baptising believing adults because there are, they maintain, only explicit biblical examples of believers’ baptism in the New Testament and because, they maintain, baptism is reserved only for those that have expressed faith in Jesus.

I would like to challenge both those assertions.

The Church of England in South Africa is certainly not opposed to baptising believers, and regards that practise as biblical and indeed mandatory.  Article 27 of our statement of faith reads:

Baptism is a sign of the faith we profess and a mark that differentiates Christian persons from those who are unbaptized; and it is also a sign of regeneration or new birth by which, as by an instrument, those who receive baptism rightly are grafted into the Church, the promises of forgiveness of sin and of our adoption to be the sons of God are visibly signified and sealed, and faith is confirmed and grace increased by virtue of prayer to God.  The baptism of young children is under all circumstances to be retained in the Church as a practice fully agreeable with the institution of Christ.

Four fifths of the above article refers to the baptism of believers, but as the article confirms, we also hold that it is biblical for (believing) parents to baptize their small children as a sign and seal of the new covenant, in continuation of the sign and seal of circumcision under the old covenant.

The question we must ask then is what was circumcision all about?

In Genesis God made a covenant with Abraham to bless families from the entire world.  The covenant sign would be the circumcision of all the males in Abraham’s household, including the butler, the domestic help and the children (Genesis 17:9-14).  Abraham’s descendents were to keep the sign by circumcising all male babies.  Foreigners who wanted to be part of Israel and serve Israel’s God also needed to be circumcised.

 Circumcision, for the male children, was therefore applied to those who had not yet expressed their faith in God.  This may seem to be at odds with our natural evangelical inclination to see faith as a prerequisite to almost everything, but Paul explains the reasoning in Romans 4:11 when he refers to circumcision as a “sign” and a “seal”.  As a sign circumcision marked out the covenant people and illustrated that salvation involves the shedding of blood.  As a seal circumcision was a visible pledge from God to honour his covenant for those who expressed faith in him.  The seal is simply a visible pledge from God that when the conditions of the covenant are met, the blessings he promised would apply.

Under the new covenant this principle remains true, as Peter implied when he told the Jewish crowd that the gospel promise was for them and their children (Acts 2:39).  The covenant sign is no longer circumcision as the shedding of blood has already taken place, but the sign is now baptism which pictures the washing away of sin (cf. Colossians 2:11-22).  So baptism continues to function as a sign and a seal of a family’s faith in God and thus in the New Testament we have examples of whole families being baptised when a parent becomes a Christian (cf. Acts 16:30-31, 33).  When men and women in the New Testament turned to Jesus they were baptized (believer’s baptism) and children present were also baptised as a visible pledge from God that he would fulfil his covenant promises when the child in the future fulfilled the covenant conditions or obligations.

Covenant baptism (both believers’ and infant) must therefore be understood as visible pledges or observable reminders or sacrament from God to us (like the Lord’s Supper), not pledges from us to God, of the gospel promise that all who trust is Jesus will be accounted righteous.

John Calvin wrote, “Since God imparted circumcision, the sign of repentance and faith, to infants, it should not seem absurd that they are now made partakers of baptisms unless men choose to act against an institution of God…For it is most evident that the covenant, which the Lord once made with Abraham, is not less applicable to Christians now than it was anciently to the Jewish people, and, therefore, that word has no less reference to Christians than to Jews. (Institutes 4.16.20, 6)

Why then do we baptise believers’ children and new adult believers?  Because God’s covenant, the framework within which he operates, has not changed.

Ps We do not view baptism as a salvation issue and are very happy to enjoy fellowship with those who hold to  different views on baptism.

Guardian angels and spirit helpers

There is a website where you can find out what the name of your guardian angel is.  It apparently depends on which day of the week you were born. My guardian is  apparently St. Sealtiel, who allegedly “stands before God, with incenser in hand in unceasing adoration of the Most Holy Trinity. As the Archangel of contemplation and worship, his angelic purity transforms the love and worship which we mortals give to God.”  Another world class psychic says, “From the moment of birth our heavenly father assigns Angels to us.  They awaken our consciousness to the presence of the divine that already exist in each and every human being (our soul).”

The Bible teaches that angels are created spiritual beings of high intelligence and able to speak to people (cf. Matthew 28:5).  They do not ordinarily have physical bodies and they cannot be seen unless God gives us the ability to see them (cf. 2 Kings 6:17).  Not only are angels sent by God to guard and protect us (cf. Hebrews 1:14, Psalm 91:11), but they also join with us in worshipping God (cf. Hebrews 12:22).  Angels appeared in bodily form to many people in the Bible.  Two angels – Michael and Gabriel – are the only angels identified in the Bible.

No guardian angels

The Bible teaches that angels although angels are powerful, they are not of infinite power.  Their power is used to aid us in our battle against the world, flesh and the devil carry out some of the commands of God.  The Bible does not teach that we each have a guardian angel or that we should in any way try to communicate with them or seek their guidance. 

Touched by an angel?

How should we respond to the Bible’s teaching on angels?  I think, we ought to acknowledge they exist and be encouraged that if we belong to God they can and do help us (cf. Acts 5:19-20).   On the other hand, we are warned not to receive false teaching from supposed angels.  Galatians 1:8 says, “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!”  The Apostle Paul may have been using hyperbola in that verse, but it is astounding to hear of the number people in South Africa who are into angel-religion and attend workshops on angels run by “spiritual facilitators”.  

More and more people are turning to “angels” for guidance, advice and help.  Instead of listening to the Bible, they are listening to facilitators, angels and shaman.   Instead of believing the gospel about Jesus, they believe the messages from “spirit helpers”.  Satan is also said to disguise himself as an angel of light (2 Corinthians 11:4).  One just has to consider the number of world religions and individual people who have heard messages from “angels” that have caused them to reject or ignore Jesus to see the truth of what the Bible says.   

Guidance

God has speaks to us through the Bible.  If you ever receive guidance from an angel or know someone who has, I would be highly suspicious and seek to practise a large dose of biblical discernment.  We should worship and listen to the One who the angels worship and listen to.

What’s lacking in the death of Jesus?

Suffering must be part of normal Christian living.  Any theology or type of Christianity that teaches that Christians should live the victorious life and not suffer is at best unbiblical and at worst extremely dangerous.
The Bible teaches that God is sovereign over all of life and at times appoints suffering in the lives of his people. 

The Apostle Paul was no stranger to suffering.  He saw suffering as a normal part of Christian living, in fact, he saw suffering as a gift from God.  He wrote in Philippians 1:29, “For it has been granted to you on behalf of Christ not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for him”.  Suffering is a gift that God gives to those found worthy enough to suffer “on behalf of Christ”.

Suffering a gift?

Why would God grant us to suffer on behalf of Christ?  Paul gives the answer in Colossians 1:24 which says, “Now I rejoice in what was suffered for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions, for the sake of his body, which is the church.” Paul (who we know suffered all kinds of hardships) says he makes up in his own body through suffering what is lacking in Christ’s suffering and death.  What is lacking?  Surely not the atoning value of Christ’s death!  Paul has just said in v20 that through his death on the cross Jesus reconciled all things to himself. Colossians 2:20 tells us that through the cross Jesus cancelled all the charges written against us.  Colossians 2:15 says that through the cross Jesus triumphed over evil powers.  The cross of Jesus does not lack in atoning power!

What’s lacking in the cross of Jesus?

What is lacking is that many people don’t read the Bible and don’t know Jesus.  They don’t see or know about the meaning or power or atoning value of Christ’s afflictions.  What’s lacking in Jesus’ sufferings is their “known-ness”, their “proximity”, their “know-ability” to your friends.   Your friends can’t see Jesus, but they can see you.  When you, as a follower of Jesus, persevere in trusting Jesus in the midst of suffering and hardship, Jesus is made more famous.  When you refuse to stop loving Jesus in the midst of tough times, Jesus is put on display and the power of his atoning death is "seen".

Recently someone in our church experienced a massive trial: a brain tumour.  This person’s immovable trust in Jesus despite tough circumstances made Jesus’ name more famous to us Christians and her non-Christian friends.

The Bible is soaked in suffering.  If your theology or your church teaches that suffering is not part of the Christian life or is the result of inadequate faith, you need to read the Bible more often.

God wants you to be happy (in him)

God does not want you to be sad and grumpy.  He wants you to be happy.   Or, as Psalm 67 says, God wants you to “be glad and sing for joy” (v4). 

Every single person desires to be happy.  We get married to be happy.  Many get divorced.  We buy furniture.  We sell furniture.  We do all kinds of things to be happy.  Wanting to be happy is not wrong; but wanting to find happiness in the wrong things is.

 Paul said it this way in Romans 1:25, “They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served created things rather than the Creator.”  We have tried to find happiness in created things rather than the Creator; we have loved the gifts rather than the Giver. 

 A few weeks ago my wife and I bought a cool lounge suite for our braai room.  It was our first furniture purchase.  I envisioned relaxing evening with a glass of red wine.  I imagined enjoying the soft seats while the fire blazed.  I pictured feelings of happiness and tranquillity.  Finally we had our suite.  Well, the dog messed (euphemism!) on the floor which I had to clean up and the fire would not burn because the wood was wet.  The steak turned out to be cardboard and the lounge suit was not quite what we had thought.  My happiness, sadly, went up the chimney.

 C S Lewis put it this way, “We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us, like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily pleased.”

 The problem is not that we seek joy and happiness, but that we seek them in wrong things.   The bible tells us that true and unending and infinite happiness is found in God, not in things.

 Therefore the Psalmist pray in Psalm 67 that God’s ways may be known on earth and his salvation among all nations.  He desires people from all the nations to be happy and glad in God so that they “may praise you, O God; may all the peoples praise you.”

 Are you happy in God?  Or are you trying to find happiness in mud pies?  Do you desire and pray and plan to share your happiness in God with your neighbours and the nations?

Meeting and Mating

A recent survey on Premarital Sex in America: How Young Americans Meet, Mate, and Think About Marriage exploded these popular myths:

long-term exclusivity is a fiction.

the introduction of sex is necessary in order to sustain a fledging or struggling relationship.

the sexual double standard is inherently wrong and must be resisted by any means.

boys will be boys. That is, men can’t be expected to abide by the sexual terms that women may wish to set.

porn won’t affect your relationships.

everyone else is having more fun than you are.

sex need not mean anything.

marriage can always wait.

moving in together is definitely a step toward marriage.

It seems like the Bible's guidelines for sex in marriage are not so old fashioned after all.