Posts Tagged ‘church’

Welcome to our Wednesday “Ask Beau” post. The purpose of this weekly feature is to provide you, our readers, with biblical responses to questions you have about practical issues that you face.

As always, you may submit questions for future “Ask Beau” posts by contacting us at beau.stanley@gracebrethren.org or viewfromthepugh@yahoo.com or by leaving a comment on this post.

Both before and after I preached last Sunday on how a Christian should relate to the government, a question arose: Was the American Revolution biblically justified? As much as I would like to sidestep this question, it is a fair and legitimate question, especially given that the sermon was delivered one day before Independence Day.

Let’s first admit that those of us who love America are predisposed to answer the question, “Yes.” The question, however, is not, “Do we want the American Revolution to have been biblically justified?” but, “Was the American Revolution biblically justified?” Let me also admit at the outset that I am not extremely well-versed in the history of the Revolutionary War, so I am doubtless unaware of some of the relevant historical context. I also did not experience some of the significant injustices done by the British government, so the issue is not as personal to me as it surely was to some. With these things in mind, let us consider the words of Scripture.

As I expressed in Monday’s post and in Sunday’s sermon, there is a very clear call in the Bible for Christians to submit to the governing authorities (Romans 13:1–6 and following; 1 Peter 2:16–17). The Bible rejects the proposition that a superior’s unjust actions are sufficient cause for a subordinate to disrespect and fail to submit to that superior (1 Peter 2:18–20). Jesus serves as the model here for enduring injustice. When Jesus was unjustly treated, He did not respond with disrespect and resistance, but entrusted Himself to the Father (1 Peter 2:21–23).

The Christian signers of the Declaration of Independence (not all were Christians) may have found support for the document and the subsequent revolution particularly in Romans 13:4: “For government is God’s servant to you for good . . . government is God’s servant, an avenger that brings wrath on the one who does wrong” (HCSB). Some would argue that Paul presents a standard for governmental conduct within Romans 13:1–6. If the government fails to abide by this standard of conduct, it could be suggested, then lack of submission would be permissible and even proper.

I see at least two problems with this argument. First, Paul’s emphasis in Romans 13:1–6 is clearly on submission to governmental authority. He continues to discuss related topics in verses 7 through 10. Paul does speak of at least a portion of the role of government, but in the context, he is explaining God’s purposes in establishing governmental authority, not presenting an acid test by which one can tell if a governmental authority is acting properly. To suggest otherwise is to read more into the text than is present.

Second, I don’t see how we can get around the statement, “There is no authority except from God” (13:1 HCSB). This is as broad a statement about authority as one can make, and it was written to Christians who lived in a government (the Roman Empire) that tolerated and propagated the exposure of infants, emperor worship, unfair taxation, and so on. In other words, if Paul really meant, “Submit to the governing authorities as long as they govern according to godly boundaries and principles,” it’s hard to see how he could have written what he did, especially to the Roman Christians!

The truth is that every government ever instituted has failed to govern according to godly boundaries and principles at one time or another. No government has ever been completely just in its retributive function. Besides this, our own perception of justice, while not arbitrary, is imperfect. I may feel like the government is being unjust in a given instance and the guy three seats away from me in the same church pew may think the government is doing a fine job. If it were OK for us to disrespect and even rebel against the government when we feel it has overstepped its bounds or when it is acting unjustly, Paul’s words in Romans 13 would be virtually meaningless.

I suppose some might seek justification for the American Revolution in Just War Theory, which says that a war is justified if it is waged for a just cause. Augustine (354–430) and Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274) felt that the Bible supported Just War Theory. I think this proposed justification is a stretch in light of Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2. Again, the Bible commands submission to all governmental authorities, not just authorities that act justly (which none fully do).

Another consideration is that submission to the governing authorities is limited in one important sense, which I did not mention in the sermon: Christians should not obey the government when the government directs them to commit overtly sinful acts (Daniel 3:16–18; Acts 5:27–29). I wonder if this consideration was not in the mind of some who took part in the rebellion. Some may have felt that the British government was forcing them to commit sin in some way.

While I am sure that most if not all of those who supported the American Revolution were convinced that they were doing the right thing, I do not think I would have been comfortable participating in the Revolution based on what I know of the Bible and what I know of history. While I hesitate to say dogmatically that the Revolution was biblically unjustified, my sense is that if I had been alive at the time of the Revolution, I would have chosen to remain as neutral as possible, fighting neither for the American forces nor for the Redcoats. This would have put me in league with the early American Brethren, my theological ancestors, so to speak—a group that was ostracized and persecuted for this stance. Thus, I won’t find it surprising if some of you disagree with me, perhaps strongly.

Obviously I have not covered this issue exhaustively. Are there considerations I have missed? What are your thoughts? 

—Beau Stanley

I think it may have been in seminary that I first heard someone present the difference between the “cowboy model” of leadership and the “shepherd model” of leadership. Cowboys, of course, lead their herds by driving the cattle from the rear and sides. Shepherds lead their flocks by walking in front of the sheep.

How interesting it was, in light of this week’s discussion in the Frontier Men’s Bible Study of Robert Coleman’s principle of “delegation,” to come across John 10 this morning in my Bible reading. Not only does Jesus refer to Himself as the “good shepherd” (John 10:11,14), he tells us that He “goes on ahead of” His sheep (10:4 NIV). The Good Shepherd, as we would expect, leads from the front.

If we plan on leading as Jesus did, we’re going to have to show people what we are asking of them (see Coleman’s principle of “demonstration” in The Master Plan of Evangelism). We can’t just tell, we need to do as well. If we aren’t willing to get our hands dirty, to be involved in the process, to give as much as we ask, then we might as well be wearing boots, spurs, chaps, and big wide-brimmed hats. This is not to disparage the cowboys amongst us who are reading this post via the one cell tower in Wyoming. Driving cattle is a good idea. Driving people isn’t.

What metaphors have you found helpful or unhelpful to communicate the essence of good leadership?

—Beau Stanley

Welcome to our Friday “Ask Beau” post. The purpose of this weekly feature is to provide you, our readers, with biblical responses to questions you have about practical issues that you face. 

We invite you to submit questions for future “Ask Beau” posts by contacting us at beau.stanley@gracebrethren.org or viewfromthepugh@yahoo.com or by leaving a comment.

Today’s question: “Should a Christian go to church?”

This is an interesting question. The answer: “Yes,” if by “going to church” you mean regularly meeting with and relating to other believers in a local body.

Western Christians in particular emphasize the individual aspects of a person’s relationship with God, and this is fine. We definitely need to relate rightly to God as individuals. However, some go further and say that don’t need to be in regular fellowship with other Christians in some sort of organized body.

It has never been easier to be a “solo Christian.” Men who want to listen to a sermon at home can access preachers who are much better than me via the Internet. Technology puts all sorts of commentaries and biblical resources within a person’s reach. You could live some semblance of an informed Christian life from a cave (assuming you could get voice and data reception there).

Still, the Bible is full of instructions for people to relate properly to other believers. There are a ton of “one another” commands in the New Testament. Christians are to “be devoted to one another” (Romans 12:10), “agree with one another” (1 Corinthians 1:10), “greet one another” (various passages), “serve one another” (Galatians 5:13), “speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs” (Ephesians 5:19), and more (NIV).

There’s simply no way that a man can obey the spirit of these and other passages without being in a consistent relationship with other believers, including meeting with them regularly (Hebrews 10:25).

Beyond this, the Bible expects Christians to be under the authority of a local body. The author of Hebrews told Christians to obey those that have oversight of them (Hebrews 13:17). Paul instructed Titus to appoint elders in the churches of Crete (Titus 1:5), and he gave detailed information about the qualifications for elders (1 Timothy 3:1–7; Titus 1:6–9). Peter appealed to his fellow elders to be good shepherds (1 Peter 5:1–2). All of these passages show that Christians are to lead and/or be led by other Christians.

The Lone Ranger mentality may be appealing in our culture, but it has no place among those of us who believe the Bible is God’s Word. We need other believers, and what’s more, other believers need us.

We’d love to hear your thoughts on this subject. Please feel free to leave a comment.

— Beau Stanley

(EDITOR’S NOTE—Photo: Brand X Pictures/Brand X Pictures/Thinkstock)

I was snooping around on Justin Taylor’s blog the other day and came across this post, which features a company called Seeds Family Worship. I listened to the songs Taylor included in the post and was impressed and even moved.

Setting Scripture to music is not a new idea, but Seeds Family Worship sets Scripture to great music, if the songs I listened to are any indication of the quality of the rest of their work. I would be happy to sing these songs with my family, and I am thinking of buying one of their CDs.

If only I could fix our broken iPod docking station . . .

— Beau Stanley

4/3 Living Upside Down from Grace Polaris on Vimeo.

GracePolaris lead pastor candidate Mike Yoder speaks during the Sunday morning service at the church.

Ohio’s budget woes and politicians’ proposed solutions are all over the news. Yesterday’s Columbus Dispatch ran two different stories on this topic: one on Senate Bill 5, the controversial legislation limiting collective bargaining, and one on funding cutbacks that central Ohio schools will face in the coming two years.

Many people believe budget cuts at the state level will force municipalities to raise taxes. As I was considering this a couple of days ago, it occurred to me that higher local taxes might sting our family quite a bit. I started to worry a little, but then I stumbled upon a comforting thought: God has shown our family that He can provide for us adequately, even unexpectedly.

When we can’t see solutions to our problems, God can. His perspective is immeasurably broader than ours, and His power is unparalleled (Romans 11:33–36). I now see that many times in my life God has provided for me in unexpected ways. Perhaps you’ve also seen God’s unexpected provision. When Jesus tells us not to worry (see Matthew 6:25–34), He’s not just being rosy. He handles the situations we fear, even if we don’t see a way out. He even handles the situations we would fear if we were cognizant of them.

I don’t know how all of the state budget wrangling will affect my tax bills, but when I find out, God will still be reigning, and He will still provide for me and my family, even if I don’t know how He will do it. That’s good news. Come to think of it, that’s really good news.

— Beau Stanley

102-90 were the winning numbers for Clevelanders on Tuesday as the Cavs unexpectedly bested the Miami Heat on Cleveland’s home court. An Associated Press article appearing in yesterday’s Dispatch said it best: “In an unbearable season of losses, Cleveland got the win it wanted most: The Cavaliers took down LeBron James.”

Since LeBron decided to “take [his] talents to South Beach,” things have been tough for Cavs fans, and things will probably be tough for some time to come. But for now, Cavs sympathizers have gotten a little payback, or at least one small payment on the installment plan.

Whether or not you’re a Cavs fan, you probably would agree that vengeance can be sweet. Maybe a little too sweet. In our heart of hearts, we often want to stick it to people who have hurt us. It’s one thing to want my team to beat another team. It’s another thing to pursue a course of revenge against someone, not resting until I get them back.

Even when someone truly wrongs us, we would do well to remember that God said, “Vengeance is mine” (Deuteronomy 32:35; Romans 12:19; Hebrews 10:30). This means that when we are wronged, we should not pursue revenge, but entrust our situation to God. As the Creator of all and the impartial Judge, only God has the ability and the insight to avenge properly.

I’m happy for Cavs fans, but I hope that they see this as a nice win rather than a hoped-for slap of vengeance in LeBron’s face. I hope that all of us are seeking the good of others rather than seeking to “pay back evil for evil” (Romans 12:17). After all, God didn’t say “Vengeance is thine”; He said, “Vengeance is mine.”

— Beau Stanley

After another unpredictable weekend of basketball, only five pickers are still alive for the top prize in our First-Ever Waterproof NCAA Tournament.

They include “Bracketology 2011,” “bball bracket,” “Athin,” “The Frontcourt at Grace” and “77viking.” Nice work, everyone.

Of these pickers, “bball bracket” is the only one whose choice of national champion, Connecticut, is still alive in the Final Four.

Let us know how your bracket did.

— Chris Pugh

If John Kasich had hoped to escape the watchful eyes of newspaper reporters, he has failed abysmally. Since his inauguration Kasich has been a magnet for the media. Stories about Kasich and his policies get a lot of attention because the governor is initiating significant change in our state. Whether he is initiating good change in our state is a question for blogs other than this one.

It is no secret that Kasich’s political views differ markedly from those of our president, Barack Obama. I’m sure that there have been politicians who differed more on the issues, but one could never accuse Kasich and Obama of being political carbon copies. If you voted for one, there is a very good chance you didn’t vote for the other.

God says we should respect all our leaders, even if we don’t agree with them on issues of policy. As a result, whether we are “blue,” “red,” or neither, we are to respect both John Kasich and Barack Obama. Respecting our governor and our president entails submitting to their authority (Romans 13:1). It also entails honoring them—unconditionally (1 Peter 2:17).

We can easily respect the leaders we like, but we can also respect the leaders we don’t like if we recognize that “there is no authority except that which God has established” (Romans 13:1 NIV). According to the Bible, God has given authority to Barack Obama and to John Kasich. In the plan of God, “who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will” (Ephesians 1:11 NIV), He has ordained that men with very different perspectives would lead our nation and our state simultaneously.

Would I line up more with President Obama or with Governor Kasich on political issues? I won’t tell you—at least not in this forum. What I will tell you in this forum, however, is that I respect them both. I hope you do also.

— Beau Stanley

In a recent interview with ESPN, Tiger Woods talked about changing his priorities since his fall from grace.

As men of faith, what advice would you give Tiger if you had the chance?