Group Think

As I have continued to work through my class on intercultural studies, I have been challenged with many topics. Most of these involve evaluating my own culture to see things which seemed most basic to me. Part of the class is to focus on what is essential and what is connected to culture.
One such topic is that of individuality versus the group mentality. I have been forced to realize that both in life and in the American church, individuality is stressed and applauded. I see now that our culture celebrates and emphasizes the importance of the singular person. We are encouraged to be our own man and to help ourselves. It is the individual who achieves great things that garners much attention. This same mentality can often affect Christians.
I have realized that I see a great emphasis on individual faith as separate from the feature of the church. A person is to prove and work out their salvation in order to please God. This is all acceptable and Biblical to a certain extent. However, I feel we need to carefully evaluate how much is Biblical and how much is cultural. As you study Scripture, you see collections of people forming the basis of the Christian faith. Jesus discipled a small group of individuals. After his ascension, the group gathered for prayer. It was in this group setting that the Holy Spirit came upon the people. On that day, a great number were added to the church. The Bible records the activities which the church performed together.
I guess that the basic point is that I have been starting to process the concepts of my cultural perspective and how it clouds my interpretation of Scripture. We need to be very careful to study the singular message of the Bible in its appropriate context, extract the core timeless message, and then apply those concepts to our current culture and needs. Truly, the practice of theology is just that, organizing the timeless truths in a time restricted sensible fashion. Let us not become conceited in our current construct of that process.

Modern Legalism

Since the early days of the church, legalism has often arisen to challenge the grace of salvation. From those first discussions about the necessity of circumcision for salvation, people throughout the ages have sought to require extra action to secure salvation. Often these actions rise out of a desire for control or to assuage the guilt over personal sin. However, I have seen recently a new trend toward a type of legalism which has surprised me. In a number of books which I have read recently, there is a growing trend toward challenging the status quo of the average Christian. This is of course a good action as all Christians should regularly evaluate their lives and character in light of the truths of Scripture. However, each of these books seem to focus extensively on the aspect of giving up material possessions to either live more simply or to support the poor. Let me state first and foremost that those are very good things to do and supported by examples of Scripture. However, I have issue with the growing emphasis on a singular action. The motive is of vital importance to the conversation. No person should give up anything in order for the sole purpose of being more spiritual. Unbalanced focus on the action of giving rather than the Biblical reasons or love for God turn a good thing into a legalistic behavior. We must be careful not to pursue actions of any kind which we undertake in order to gain spiritual acclaim. This can be from daily devotions to tithe to clapping while singing. It is very hard but we need to learn how our relationship with God naturally outflows into our life and let our motives of love drive our actions.

The Glory of the Story

Even if you don't realize it, much of our developmental and continued learning integrates the concept of stories. Aesop's fables are of course the most well known combination of story and lesson. However, the use of stories to teach are far more varied and subtle. Teachers use examples and object lessons. Math is brought to life in word problems. Pastor's illustrate with terse or humorous stories. Hypothetical questions and scenarios are used in problem solving. It is often integral to combine a memorable story or story feature to some aspect of truth distribution. The Bible is truly no different. The Bible is constructed of 75% narrative (story), 15% poetry and 10% direct didactic teaching. Jesus himself utilized stories to communicate much of his lessons while on earth. The question I have is if stories are so clearly important, why do we focus so much of our Bible study on avoiding the narrative sections. We teach the stories to our children because we know that they remember the life lessons through the stories. Why do we neglect to continue this as adults? Do we think we are so smart that studying stories is beneath our conceptual comprehension? Do we feel that stories are not an efficient use of our learning time? Much of the world learns through a story motif even today. I think we would do well to re-learn how to read and develop lessons through interaction with Biblical stories.

Reading the Bible Carefully

I was reminded the other day of how quickly we read the Bible on occasion. While it is of benefit to read, carelessness can limit you from truly grasping the truths of Scripture. One prime example is from Ephesians 6:1-3.

6:1 Children, obey your parents in the Lord for this is right. 6:2 “Honor your father and mother,” which is the first commandment accompanied by a promise, namely, 6:3 “that it may go well with you and that you will live a long time on the earth.” 

Many of you have probably heard this passage taught or studied it on your own. However, in many cases when I have hear it taught, the speaker struggles with verse three. It seems that in every case, the first two verses are great discussion points and the third verse complicates the matter. The most common treatment of the verse is to pass it off as a proverbial promise. I have heard such statements as "A lifestyle which is built upon respect and obedience for authority is a far safer lifestyle which generally tends toward a longer life."

Let me just tell you that such interpretation and explanation is both ludicrous and shallow. Do you really think that Paul, one of the greatest authors in the Bible, would place a poorly structured proverbial adage to convince children to obey their parents? The answer is "NO!" Instead,  more careful reading of the verses opens an even greater meaning.

1.       Our English Bible structure begins this first verse with a succinct command to children. However, chapter five ends with an explanation of how a husband and wife relationship demonstrates the love of God for His church. By referencing first this key family relationship, Paul builds a base upon which he can now explain the importance of reflected Christ in other relationships. The first one he comes to is children. His first statement is a very short and simple lesson. If indeed these books were read in the church, there is no doubt that Paul wanted these children to hear and understand what was expected of them. In order to do so, Paul first states merely the expectation in clear and concise words.

2.       Paul must have known children very well. Of course most children upon such a direct command as "Obey" would naturally respond with a question. "Why?" For this reason, Paul is now going to build a two level explanation of why. Paul, as a good writer, anticipates a counter argument and offers a defense for his thesis in two stages. The first one here in verse two is to reference a document that would have been well known to any believer; the ten commandments. Since the church at that time was restricted to teaching from the Old Testament, they would have known the ten commandments very well. Paul thus first explains that obedience for parents is a reflection of the command to honor. This is clearly an important connection because all people tend to carefully define words to their advantage. "I may love that person because I have to but I do not like them." Here Paul relates his command to obey to God's clear command to honor.

3.       Stealing from verse two, we now move to verse three. The remainder of verse two sets us the third verse by explaining more. While the command to honor reinforces Paul's command to obey, there is even reinforcement to the command to honor. Paul explains that if you were to go and read the Ten Commandments, the command to honor parents is the very first one to be accompanied by a promise of reward. The commands about idols and honoring God did not come with promises. It isn't until command five (Exodus 20:12) that God offers " that you may live a long time  in the land  the Lord your God is giving to you." It is important then to realize how much emphasis God placed on the natural relationship of parenting in the Old Testament. There is of course not time to give the topic justice here but several key themes stand out from this passage forward in the Old Testament. The Israelite parents were expected and encouraged at all time points to teach their children the lessons and commands of God. At key moments in the Exodus, the people were to erect monuments in order to pass the story of God's power on to the next generation. In Deuteronomy 6, there is an extensive explanation of how fathers are to teach the commands of God in all aspects of life.  "And you must teach them to your children and speak of them as you sit in your house, as you walk along the road, as you lie down, and as you get up. You should tie them as a reminder on your forearm and fasten them as symbols on your forehead. Inscribe them on the door frames of your houses and gates." As the nation of Israel moved forward, the plan of God was for them to obey His commands. If they failed to obey His commands, he had promised that He would bring punishment on them from other nations. The responsibility for ensuring obedience did not fall to the priests, but to the families. If the parents failed to pass along God's teaching, or if the children failed to learn, the resulting national punishment would be exile from the land. This truth is played out exactly as you move through the remainder of the Old Testament. Judges records how a "generation arose that did not know God." This generation then suffered greatly as God punished the people. After a king took over, things went well for awhile. However as time moved on, things came apart and subsequent generations became worse and worse. Eventually God sent other countries to conquer and take away His people. By the end of the Old Testament, only a fraction of the amount of people still lived in the land of Israel. The closing promise of the Old Testament in Malachi reflects not a return to a physical land but "Look, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of the Lord arrives. He will encourage fathers and their children to return to me, so that I will not come and strike the earth with judgment." It is the hearts of fathers and children that God will change. Therefore, the original command to honor came with a physical promise to the people of Israel that they as a nation would live in the promised land. It was a national promise connected to the history of this people as a whole. The parent/child relationship was so vital to God, that He built the success of the whole nation dependent upon its proper fulfillment.

With that view in mind, Paul shows that the command to obey and by extension to honor parents was essential to the success of the nation of Israel in the whole Old Testament. Therefore, obedience to parents is vitally important to God. Paul, with only two verses, is able to show an immense power behind this command. With all that background in mind, the promise of Ephesians 6:3 is so much more valuable than a hard-to-explain proverb. Thus by carefully reading these three verses of Ephesians six, both parents and children are shown immense impetus to pursue God's glory in their relationship. This is why it is important to always remember to read Scripture carefully.