Are Reparations Biblical?

The issues of injustice and ethnicity in our country appear to have reached a watershed moment in wake of the murder of George Floyd. With this come various issues which many may prefer not discuss. Can’t we just move on? We’re all equal under the law, what more should we do? Phil Vischer tried to communicate a compelling narrative with a video on various injustices in the black community. The end application of that video? Care. 

I find arguments like this uncompelling not because I am not moved by the tears of my brothers and sisters in Christ who have suffered, but because I find them mysteriously absent of gospel application. This is why I am thankful Dr. Bryan Loritts recently shared his thoughts on reparations and the gospel. Dr. Loritts is someone whom I deeply admire. His thoughts after my friend Darrin took his life were some of the most comforting and truthful remarks on the issue I found. Dr. Loritts is trying to help us think through what the gospel in action could look like. He is right that we should be willing and able to talk about these issues and a lack of willingness to do so might reveal something about our hearts that would be unChristian. 

Just as Dr. Loritts discussed his desire to discuss these at the table, I would like to throw my two cents on his arguments as he presented them. I would hope that by showing areas of agreement and areas of concern, I am in line with his vision of having a conversation. A chief concern of mine is how these discussions are presented at all. Or to put another way, how the table is being set. It would seem that having concerns or serious disagreement with the gospel demanding societal reparation could be interpreted to be denying that I care or that I am willing to consider the idea. Far from it, by engaging on this issue with a man I deeply respect, I am trying to consider the idea very clearly. 

One non-starter with the idea of reparations for the history of slavery and even Jim Crow in our country is that it would be too complicated to carry out. While this pragmatic line of thinking is a legitimate and necessary means of moral reasoning and cannot be dismissed outright, what should chiefly concern us is if reparations are what biblical justice demands. If it is, then we can move on to implications and the limitations regarding the pragmatic implementation of what biblical justice demands. Sometimes what biblical justice demands isn’t fully possible on this side of the return of Christ. But, we must have the conversation before we should simply refuse to discuss because it seems too hard to implement.

Does the gospel demand reparations? One biblical example Dr. Loritts mentions is that of Zacchaeus in Luke 19:1-10. This is a wonderful story of Jesus’ love for sinners and the response of someone who has encountered the radical and revolutionary hospitality of Jesus. Zacchaeus is moved to restore to those from whom he has stolen four fold. Dr. Loritts takes this to be a form of reparations. Zacchaeus’ heart is moved by Jesus and his love for Jesus to restore from those he has stolen. Zacchaeus is part of a system of corruption in tax collecting for Rome and he has participated in systemic injustice. Therefore, after encountering the good news of Jesus he works against the systemic injustice in which he has participated. 

I am trying to consider reparations in the light of the gospel. It’s important to bring clarity to the potential limitations of this example and others regarding the broad based application that because Zacchaeus was moved to practice a form of personal restoration or reparations for the wrongs he committed, there therefore should be some form of communal or societal or national reparations. It could be argued from this that reparations for slavery are a natural outworking of the gospel. This is essentially what Dr. Loritts argues in saying “a mature believer places love for neighbor over arguments of silence, the law, questions of culpability and logistical details of who gets the money.” It could also not be argued. In fact, it could prove to be an overreach of what the Bible expects.

As an example, there is an absence of evidence that Jesus desired his disciples to implore the government to divest itself of Gentile-ness and recreate a more equitable Roman system. To read back into the gospels these kinds of implications or even imperatives would be to create a false gospel of sorts. Is it exegetically sound to take this passage which deals with an individual walking in repentance and then make a political demand that the same is expected of a nation, country, or empire? To be certain, the United States has certainly paid reparations and continues to do so. But the line of reasoning I am arguing for is not political but biblical in this situation. There is a difference between a government deciding that reparations are justified and claiming that the gospel demands them and are therefore required.

There are legitimate political and economic arguments for reparations to be made because of slavery and/or Jim Crow. It could be a legitimate means of restitution for injustice. But my question is: are we making the Bible say something that it doesn’t wish to say? While the Bible does lay out an ethical system as a formational tool for God’s people and then those people in turn shape society at large, to claim that the Bible demands governments act in line with it’s ethical system is questionable. Could we make the argument more appropriately utilizing economic and legal precedents for such reparations? Could we argue from natural law that reparations are a legitimate means of correcting a past injustice against a people group? I believe so.

Another example of reparations biblically could be found in Numbers 5:5-9. In this passage, when a person commits a sin against another, the person is not only to confess the sin he has committed but must pay full compensation with interest. Some translations refer to this act of restitution as reparations. This is a legitimate example of biblical reparations. But, consider what verse 8 says, “if the man has no next of kin to whom restitution may be made for the wrong, the restitution for the wrong shall go to the LORD for the priest, in addition to the ram of atonement with which atonement is made for him.” This creates some sort of biblical limit for reparations. It does not say go find someone who is a distant relative and give them the money. It says no next of kin. I take that to mean no immediate living family related to the aggrieved party (my Hebrew is rusty enough such that this brief interpretation could very well be mistaken). 

This brings up a legitimate concern regarding the conversation regarding reparations. And, lest we forget how the table has been set, I am not saying that any talk of reparations is on its face illegitimate. I am trying to biblically reason through the issue. Is there a point at which justice unserved, or an injustice, has passed a feasible point of biblical restitution? It’s even hard to type that question because it puts the legitimate pain of people into a category which would seem hopeless for justice. But if we want legitimate biblical justice, we must ask if there is a ‘statute of limitations’ to some issues of justice? Might there be a gospel to be preached amidst situations where injustices persist for which minimal earthly justice can be done? Are there some historical atrocities for which restitution cannot be made? I am not saying that slavery or Jim Crow would be an example of something like this. I am saying that it seems that there could be an argument, biblically, for a statute of limitations on some historical injustices. In the case that the injustice has passed a point of legitimate justice being done, what alternatives to reparations could be explored?

All of this is to add to the conversation not to detract. There are and continue to be legitimate grievances and injustices towards people of color in the United States. This bring us to the question of the gospel. Because I do not believe “care!” is a sufficient application to injustice biblically. If we want to execute justice well, we must know the greatest injustice in history. The injustice of Jesus dying for sins he did not commit on the cross. This paradigm shattering act flips the script on how conversations of justice should go. God used the greatest injustice in human history to restore us to relationship with him. Conversations on justice apart from that reality will invariably drift into conversations about “who deserves what.” And in light of the cross, Jesus Christ got what I deserved. Because of that, I am free to give and be generous and consider reparations for wrongs committed, even if I did not necessarily personally commit the injustice. And because of that, I am free overlook wrongs and not “get what I deserve” because I have been forgiven by Christ. To make gospel demands where the gospel might not demand is dangerous territory (worth considering but dangerous territory nonetheless). In our efforts to explore what the gospel demands, let’s make sure we don’t add to the gospel itself. 

Christians Who Harm

Eric Johnson’s God and Soul Care is a fantastic treatment of formation and discipleship. While it is focused on soul care it reads almost like a systematic theology (which may be a turn off to some, I realize). However, his attention and thought on the topic of sin (referred to in traditional theological terms as hamartiology) is exceptional. Here is an excerpt followed by some thoughts of my own:

“At the most superficial level, this opposition to God, self, and others is paradoxically manifested in conscious overidentification with God. Here, we might say, sin cloaks itself under the guise of one’s religiosity, where one is consciously ‘on God’s side’ and opposed to sin. Yet this reaction formation is the most dangerous side of our opposition, supremely displayed in the murder of Christ in the name of God and righteousness” (220).

The most dangerous outworking of sin is when people use God to play God in the lives of other people. This is incredibly accurate from my personal experience. The most relationally harmful people have been those that stand on “God’s side” of issues and have inflicted undue harm to me relationally because they stand on God’s side of things. The most relationally harmful people in ministry that I have served have been those that have an “overidentification with God“ issue. They claim to represent God and his ways while being merciless and ruthless in their application of “God’s ways.” In doing so, they misrepresent the very God they claim because no matter how much one repents or apologizes, there is no mercy. No matter how much one pleads that our only hope is in Christ alone, those that have an overidentification with God issue simply will not let up. These religious types are like a pit bull and once they have bitten, they will not let go.

Furthermore, could it be that those with a strange obsession to prophesy on God’s behalf, speaking his words, hearing directly from him, and challenging those around them with specific words from God, have a subconscious desire to over-identify with God himself? Not that everyone who desires these gifts have nefarious intentions, but that it could be possible that those with a strong desire for charismatic giftings, a seemingly unrealistic thirst to be ‘used by God’ could, in fact, be operating in the dark and simply be trying to be like God. Speculation, sure. Possible, yes.

I personally believe that these giftings are important aspects of the church, but I have seen church communities and church unity ripped apart by people who seek to control the church with their unique take on how the giftings should work out. As an example, I have heard of a situation where one individual who was in the middle of bringing charges against his pastor in order to show his pastor’s unfitness for ministry then proceed to share a prophetic word from his wife with the pastor so that she could share it with the church during a Sunday service. This kind of relational denseness underscores the real possibility that it wasn’t God using this individual but this individual using God.

The relational harm inflicted by those who stand “on God’s side” is disturbing and, as Johnson highlights, exemplified by those who killed Christ. Those of us who follow Christ would do well to model his charity towards those who stumble and falter (as we all will at some points in life). We would also do well to call out those religious types who show no mercy to the wayward (as Christ did). The situation for those who over-identify with God seems hopeless, but we must remember that Paul himself was this very type of person, killing in the name of love. God’s mercy is inexhaustible. Let’s not become the very people we have been harmed by, by not extending mercy to the religious as well.

How Has My Understanding of the Church Changed During the Pandemic?

How has this experience changed the way we understand church?

I think it’s important to differentiate, when we’re talking about ‘church’ as a theological category, between the ontological, meaning the nature or essence of what church is, and the more functional or pragmatic definitions. Obviously, we want our functional ideas and practices and definitions to be informed by the ontological meaning how God defines the church. The Church is supposed to carry out certain works [Funt], for cetain purposes [Tel], because of the way God has made it [Ont]. Of course a common way to understand this is through the Nicene Creed which uses characteristics one, holy, catholic, apostolic to describe the nature of the church. So in terms of what the church is or how God defines the church, or even what it is tasked with doing such as being the steward of the missio Dei really not much has changed. It’s essence has not changed.

Or at least it shouldn’t because while theological development is conversational between Revelation and context, how you under the nature of the church hasn’t changed. All of us we have an opportunity during this pandemic to revisit our prior assumptions about what church is because we typically define things by what they do and accomplish rather than what they are. This is an unfortunate consequence of modern industrialization.

So with that said, we’d looking at more functional or pragmatic understandings of what the church is and in that case of our course our understanding of the church has changed greatly. A common way that we can think about the functional nature of the church are by the marks of a good church, meaning the word rightly preached the gospel being preached, and the sacraments rightly administered, and even if you add a third which is commonly thrown in which is church discipline. Well all three of those have been comprised in some way during this pandemic. 

As a Lead Pastor of a church my preaching continues but it is to video camera. And this has tragic theological ramification because it is not a sufficient replacement for this mark. Preaching the word rightly implies an in person experience. In fact, one could argue that settling for a virtual preaching experience as a sufficient replacement for the gathered saints would be akin to denying the necessity of the incarnation where the Son God came in embodied presence to us. And so while this has changed for a season, we can’t settle for this as a sufficient mark replacement. 

The same things goes for the sacraments or ordinances. And we can just look at one. What does communion look like? Even before there were stay at home order many churches, mine included, chose to suspend communion because the way we conduct it is through intinction where you dip the bread in the wine or juice and so the communal threat during a pandemic are to great to continue in that manner. Not to mention, what does communion look like over virtual church? Our church has chosen to suspend communion during this season because we believe that the ordinance of communion is a gathered church practice not just an individual experience that should be practiced at home. 

What does church look like in the future and what we envision the church looking like in the future?

I think that for many churches, we’re taking this opportunity to implement online church and we plan to continue offering it even after we’re able to gather together not only because some people will not be safe to come back but also because we’re reaching people with gospel that would never step foot in a church gathering in person. So it serves as a kind of preview to what church is like. 

I also think that the church is going to have to take seriously the mental health challenges that are being exacerbated by this crisis and so church will have to be able to help people in a more holistic manner to be whole again. The amount interpersonal tragedy that is unfolding right now not just the pandemic but physical abuse, substance abuse, the church is going to have it’s work cut out for itself for a generation. That’s going to require more resources directed at mental health. 

(This is an excerpt from a panel interview at Denver Seminary. You can find the entire panel here.)

Leadership Vacuum

There is too much happening. But that is not new. There has always been too much happening. That is life on this side of the Fall. We’ve lost our innocence. I think the last two weeks have been some of the most stressful in terms of leadership and love that I have had for a long time (read: last 12 months). I’ve been on the edge of sanity trying to process all of the changes happening. Here’s what I’m seeing…

The dearth of strong leadership is the most apparent crisis we face. Yes, the health crisis (read: pandemic) and the economic repercussions are anxiety inducing. BUT, the lack of clear, decisive, and visionary leadership is appalling. I’m not suggesting this against any particular leader, or party, or media outlet (I’m sure you’d prefer I did). I’m saying across the board there seems to be a lack of leadership (save for perhaps Tony Fauci). Here’s what is needed:

1. An honest look at all the variables in play. For example, if our goal is to ‘flatten the curve’ what will be the consequences for people in the meantime economically? Is there a point at which the economic and social consequences are unbearable for society? Why, why not? And what is that point? Will someone please make a chart explaining this? These are not questions without answers. Let’s be honest about those answers. If our goal is to delay the influx of patients to hospitals by flattening the curve (which is good, see Italy), then let’s talk about what is going on in the meantime to accommodate the eventual influx of patients. How many tests do we need? What is the plan to get them produced? How many beds do we need? What is the plan to get them built? There must be an interactive spreadsheet somewhere out there for this kind of situation. Leadership does not dodge these realities, it owns them, plans for them, and creates a hopeful vision for the future in spite of circumstances that seem hopeless. Which leads us to our second point…

2. A clear and compelling vision. A vision is not a pie in the sky idea. It is not platitudes. It is embracing reality, painting a preferred future vision of that reality, and giving definite timelines to how we will work towards that preferred future vision of reality. This has been abysmal on a state by state level. At least Trump (for all his faults) has given it a timeline with a 15 day plan (who knows what happens after that or why…) but speaking from my vantage point I have been given different rules everyday with no rhyme or reason statistically. You can tell me you’re making decisions out of fear. Fine, admit it. But that isn’t leadership. Give me the reasons statistically that we are reducing the workforce by 50% today and not just shutting it down. Show me that you’ve got plan that deals with facts. At what amount of deaths to we change the rules again? How many cases would trigger a different course of action? And then how long would that course of action last until another limitation is placed on society and for what facts and reasons? Surely, there is some leader out there who can make a plan and communicate it. The best I’ve received is: “this will get worse before it gets better” and “this will last for months” and “we don’t know when this will end.” Shut. up. That’s not leadership. That’s pandering to fear. Give me a vision, a timeline for that vision, and facts and reasoning for it. Leadership based in fear is doomed to fail and will doom others along the way. Which brings us to fear…

3. Reporting of information that is honest and helpful. Helpfulness cuts both ways. Helpfulness is not sugar-coating like putting frosting on a turd. It is the most important information presented a clear manner. Here’s what is not helpful: “You’re Likely to Get the Coronavirus.” “We’re Flying Blind.” “We Were Warned.” “We’re Past the Point of Containment.” “You Want a Coronavirus Test: Here’s Why Your Doctor Probably Won’t Give You One.” “Too Little, Too Late.” “How the Coronavirus Became an American Catastrophe.” Wow, that’s some really helpful headline crafting (sarcasm). I’m sure most people are thrilled to wake up tomorrow. TBH, I didn’t even read those articles. Why? Because the point is not about the content of the articles. The point is that most people are looking at news headlines and the large print to get the big idea. And right now, the big idea that you’re seeing across the board is this: be afraid. And fear sells. I’m not saying there are not legitimate concerns and fears to consider. Surely, there are. I am saying that we are being taken advantage of by people wanting to profit of our ‘clicks.’ False prophets looking for profits sounds clever (and familiar biblically) to me. We need helpful reporting to reduce panic because panic is not helpful. There may be moral reasons to inflict fear on the naive but that is not a helpful strategy longterm. Where are the leaders who will decide that reporting should be helpful? Which leads us to clarify further, what is helpful for society…

4. We want to ‘care for the least of these’ and do ‘what is most loving.’ Fine. Same. Define that for me and tell me where your definition of what love comes from. Talk to me about the sacrifices that love makes (read: Jesus on the cross). Talk about the tradeoffs that come from prioritizing what is loving for one segment of the population over what is loving for the other segments. Please tell me you’ve thought through that and the implications regarding ‘human flourishing.’ Tell me what sacrifices I should expect to make along the way. But don’t try to use God’s terms against me just because I’m asking legit questions (especially if you don’t believe in God). Because if we’re not clear on what it means to be loving in society and we’re all just singing Kumbaya about love while the Titanic goes down, count me out. I want to take care of the most vulnerable. But are we creating more vulnerable persons in the meantime? Has that even been considered? If so, tell me and make a plan, or PASS A BILL ABOUT IT.

Will someone please step into this leadership vacuum?

Why Trust the Bible?

Hasn’t the Bible been debunked as reliable? Isn’t it riddled with errors? This seems to be the common assumption for most people. The Bible has either been translated too much or transcribed so many times that there is no way that it can be relied upon as entirely truthful. Sure, there may be some interesting stories and general concepts that are true to life, but authoritative in all it says? Surely not.

But for Christians that is exactly what it is. The Bible is authoritative and truthful in all it says.

First, let’s talk about accuracy. There is a common assumption that the Bible is inaccurate. But when we look at the historicity of the manuscripts of the Bible, we can trace the earliest manuscripts to the first century AD. When we say manuscript, we mean parchment that has the Greek or Hebrew on it. So in order to verify the original content of the Bible you need to have manuscripts, that’s copies of the original to verify what it says. So if you had 3 different versions of the Bible all saying different things, it would be hard to be certain was the Bible says. But we have thousands of manuscripts saying the same thing. The accuracy of the text of the New Testament is accurate almost to 98% of all the text. And I’ve researched the 2% and we’re not talking variations that are determinative of our faith, we’re talking where someone put a comma or a period.

Second, let’s talk authority. If you believe that Jesus rose from the dead, you believe something incredible has been accomplished: that Jesus died on the cross for our sins and rose from the dead. This is a historical fact. If you believe this, then you should believe what Jesus said and claimed. Jesus said and claimed that the Bible is the authoritative word of God. Paul says this about his writing and the writings of the other apostles - 2 Timothy 3:16-17: “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.”

The Bible claims to be the authoritative word of God. Now if you’re picking up on this, you’re picking up on some circular reasoning. The Bible is true because it says its true. This is fine actually because any claim of truth must be defended by the premise of that claim. If you say that rationality is the way to truth, you’re going to prove that using reason. If you claim that Islam is true, then you’re going to use the Koran to prove that. So we should ask if what the Bible talks about is true. Is the content contained in it verifiable. And the answer is yes. We have extra-biblical sources, those are sources outside the Bible that testify to it’s accuracy such as Josephus and other historians. What we believe is that every word of the Bible was written by people who God was working through to write what he wanted to communicate to us. This goes back to the first point, accuracy.

Third, let’s talk about the activity of the Bible. Many people get skittish about the Bible because they don’t know how to read it. We get obsessed over literal interpretations or how we’re supposed to harmonize the Bible with science. But we have to understand the Bible in context. The Bible is made up of all sorts of genres of literature. You get narrative, poetry, prophecy, songs and each one should be read for what they are. The Bible is not a science textbook. I think this is where many people get hung up. It may not speak to driving cars but one can infer from the text of Scripture the principles and ethics necessary to understand the development of cars and the right way to conduct oneself when driving a car.

In fact, let’s have some fun. The Bible doesn’t talk about A.I. or V.R. does that mean A.I. and V.R. are unbiblical? Not necessarily but from Scripture God can show us all about his understanding of humanity, the limits and boundaries of people. We can begin to understand and draw conclusions regarding the utilization of V.R. and A.I. based on what God has revealed. The Bible has the sufficient information for anyone to come to a knowledge of God but that doesn’t mean that the Bible is exhaustive in that it talks about everything that has ever been.

Based on these three concepts, we can confidently support what Jesus and the disciples said all along, that the Bible is the word of God. These three things, accuracy, authority, and activity, should bolster the faith of all Christians and should be seriously considered by anyone exploring Christianity.

Winter as Death

As I write this, my wife is on vacation laying next to a pool in a warmer climate. I am staring out at a cold snow covered landscape. This is her annual pilgrimage to a warmer place during the heart of Winter. Winter is beautiful in many ways but for most of us it gets old. As a parent you have to make sure your kids have layers of clothes on. The sun isn’t out as long. It feels like there is less time and opportunity to spend time with people. Throw the flu into the mix and it’s outright depressing. Not only this, but for some people the darkness this time of year causes them to have seasonal depression. I’ve had friends who have had to relocate from more northerly locations because of the seasonal depression they experience. Why? Because there’s not enough light.

God made this world with natural beauty and seasons. I can’t help but reflect on how the seasons of the year mirror the story of redemption. Winter in many ways parallels the chapter of the story of redemption commonly called the Fall (not like autumn but separation from God because of sin). There is less light, less warmth, more isolation. Our bodies rebel against this cold. It’s like we weren’t designed for these frigid climates. In the same way, we were not designed to be separated from God. We were designed to be in the light, to use biblical language. We were designed for relationship with God.

But God doesn’t let Winter last forever. He brings us the hope of Spring and Summer. He offers us resurrection hope and new life. Even in the midst of winter, we can be people who remember that we’ve been set free from death and been brought to life because of Jesus.

Looking for Joy

If you were to get to know me, you would discover that I can have a slightly melancholy bent on life. I’m one of those weird people who kind of enjoys being sad. My disposition in life isn’t exactly one that always sees the silver lining; I can just see the looming clouds. This proves challenging in life because as a leader, husband, father, you have to learn to inspire and lead and you can’t just be negative. No one wants to follow Eeyore (yes that is how you spell it, much to my surprise).

So joy has been somewhat of a learned practice for me and I’m still learning it. Like when my things aren’t going well, I have to practice reminding myself of what is good rather than just seeing things as bleak. I’m not alone. There are many preachers and leaders who suffer from a similar disposition or even depression like Charles Spurgeon who struggled with depression and yet preached 35 sermons on the topic of joy of the course of his ministry. I don’t know if what I experience is actually depression. I don’t call it depression, I just call it Tuesday. But that’s kind of my disposition in life.

So here are a few things that I think are helpful to find more joy in life pulled from Mary’s prayer in Luke 1:46-55. If I can learn to practice joy and cultivate joy, I think you can too.

Gratitude - Mary is grateful and is filled with wonder. Mary’s song speaks praise of God and thankfulness towards him. She magnifies, meaning she holds God in high regard, he is worthy of praise, and her soul rejoices in God who is her savior. Why though? Because he sees her. He has looked at her humble estate, meaning she knows she is no one special and doesn’t deserve to be used by God in this way. God seeing her is what we all want. We want to know we are seen. We want that someone to look at us. Someone to notice. People to pay attention to us. But when we have the attention of God, we can experience joy and thankfulness. We can be grateful because we are his in Christ. We are seen by God.

Wonder - Another key feature of Mary’s joy is God’s faithfulness to show mercy to his people which cultivates wonder in her. God is faithful to generations of people. God is not just interested in you, although surely he is. He is interested in redeeming generations of people. I often get this question as a pastor, if Jesus is going to come back and make everything right, why won’t he just come now? What sense does it make for him to hold off his return? Because, the longer he holds off, the more people he can redeem. God is sovereign and merciful to those who will come to him for mercy, those who fear him. Fearing God looks not just like acknowledging that he is God, believing that God exists. It means fearing God and his sovereignty and that he is our only hope for salvation, for reconciliation, for wholeness.

Hope - Mary celebrates her hope in God. He doesn’t give up on his people. He is faithful to remember his promises. God doesn’t break his promise to you and I that he would began a good work in you will see it through to completion. God has remembered his people Israel, is the way Mary puts it. She is part of the great story of God’s redemption offered to you and I. She has hope in God because he will rule forever and she knows she’s part of that story. God has given her a better story. God has given you a better story in Jesus.

These three habits of joy help me choose joy even when I don’t feel like it. Perhaps they could help you as well. We live in a joyless world obsessed with death and absent of wonder. We live in a disenchanted world but God invites us to be joyful like children who are in awe of life itself. Making a habit of gratitude, wonder, and hope in the gospel can prepare you to face even the bleakest of days.

How to Make Friends…

In John 15:15, Jesus calls us friends. What wonderful news! In fact, this could be a summary of the gospel itself. The gospel is the good news that God saves sinners. I being a sinner in need of saving that can only come from God. Because of Jesus, we are now friends of God.

My friend Matt, preached a sermon on friendship yesterday where he shared what it looks like to be a friend from the book of Proverbs. If we are friends of God, then we can approach friendship with others from a place of giving rather than getting. Rather than church participation being about consuming others relationally, we can approach our belonging to a local body of believers with generosity. Because we have been restored to the garden so to speak where we walk with our Father, we can encounter our friendships with others without seeking redemption from them. Will friendship be a place of healing relationally? Yes. God designed it that way. But, our ultimate craving for connection and friendship comes from the Trinity. By being brought into the eternal community of friends, the Trinity, our identity has been secured and bought. We are now free to be friends with others.

One of the most important aspects of friendship is vulnerability. Brené Brown has written extensively on the importance of vulnerability for connection with others. Jesus shows us this in John 15:15. He says that his friendship with us is based in his vulnerability with us. His self-disclosure in sharing with us “all that I have heard from my Father, I have made known to you” is the example of what it means to be our friend. In a similar way, we model friendship through our vulnerability with others. This vulnerability can take time depending on our personality and attachment patterns, but it is essential to any friendship.

A key feature of fostering this kind of vulnerability and self-disclosure is a relationally safe environment. Too many Christians with good intentions cause great harm in friendships because they are so eager to help and correct. They read Proverbs regarding “iron sharpening iron” and believe they have been placed in friendships to cause friction and pain. Might I suggest that the sharpening comes more through receiving one another as fellow sojourners rather than confronting and controlling each other. The point of the illustration is not to try to be like iron sharpening iron by inflicting relational pain and confrontation. Those things will invariably happen. No need to chase them. The point is that close friendships will produce sharpening as a byproduct.

Parenting Using Philosophy

Fatherhood is no doubt one of the most challenging (and rewarding) relationship roles I have experienced in life. The responsibility to raise up children who are not only decent human beings but also love God is overwhelming at times (not mutually exclusive concepts either, the best humans are the ones who love God the most). Your own issues get worked to the surface and you begin to see the errors you have made in the lives of your children.

John Frame’s triperspectivalism has been one of the most helpful theological methods to grow me as a Christian. I think it’s application is far reaching and impactful for a variety of circumstances. Parenting is no exception to this conviction. When I think about raising my two boys to love God and love others well, here’s how I use triperspectivalism.

I want my kids to engage God and others with their minds. I want them to think clearly, critically, and logically. This can turn sideways when I expect too much from a 6 year old. But in general I don’t want to provide them with simple answers to complex problems (unless it’s after bedtime and it’s the 3rd time they’ve come out of their room). Intellect matters.

I want my kids to engage the world whole-heartedly (to borrow language from Brene Brown). I want them to be deep feelers who are in touch with their emotions. I want them to be curious about their desires and why they do what they do. I want them to grow up knowing how to be vulnerable and how to trust others appropriately. Heart issues matter.

I want my kids to engage others recognizing context and embodied situations. When mommy and daddy are talking, I want them to show respect for our conversation by not interrupting. I want them to value their bodies and know what is an appropriate use of their strength and physical boundaries. I want them to pick up on social cues. I want them to be able to understand how their story fits into the greater story of God’s redemption. I want them to know that they have been very fortunate to be born in America and they shouldn’t take that for granted. Context matters.

Triperspectivalism helps me engage my kids holistically. Rather than treat them as an intellectual project, or a big ball of emotions, or even just going for behavior modification, I am able to see all three as important pieces of them being formed not only as good men but godly men.

This Church Only Cares About Numbers

It happened again this week. Another person accused our church of being too business minded to be spiritual. In 10 years of ministry, I’ve probably heard this critique a dozen times. It comes from well meaning Christians who want to see more of God in their lives and the church. They desire to experience more of God personally. And they view spirituality as a feelings game where what one feels on the inside is what counts. If they don’t feel God, then God is not there. And if someone tries to organize spiritual things, it becomes all about business and numbers.

The critique could be something like “this church just cares about numbers.” If they want to take it to level 2 it goes, “this church just cares about numbers and that’s unbiblical.” And if they want to take it to level 3 (only about 5 people have made it to level 3), “this church just cares about numbers and that’s unbiblical and the reason you care about numbers is because you’re filled with pride.” Ouch. Definitely true that I am prideful, but ouch nonetheless.

The idea that churches should not be business minded is an interesting one. Churches are not businesses and yet they are in the spiritual business. Meaning that churches are in the business of changed lives. God wants his people to be in the business of bringing him glory.

I’ve noticed that the books of Kings, Chronicles, Numbers, and Leviticus rarely come up in conversations with Christians. You don’t see verses from these books on coffee mugs or bumper stickers very often. I wonder if the lack of biblical literacy has something to do with some Christians distaste for anything that smacks of organization. In the Old Testament (and even in the New, see Acts 1), organization and planning was a key feature of God’s instruction and the way his people honored him in their liturgy. God cared about the way his people were organized and the strategies and plans they had to carry forward his mission. It occurred to me that some Christians are reading their Bibles with blinders on, unaware of the beauty of God in his organization.

God’s church is not a business, that is the church doesn’t exist as a profit making institution. But God’s people should be in business, they should be organized and strategically positioned to carry forward his mission. This includes things like budgets, planning meetings, and goals. Far from unspiritual, they are biblical.