Many find themselves reluctant to adopt new ideas because they have a vested interest in the old. Some will always suggest that “the old is better” (Luke 5:39). They possess an interest so significant that they resist anything that threatens it- whether right or wrong. This, I believe, was the crux of the early church’s resistance to accepting Gentile Christians for who they were.

One issue that repeatedly surfaces in the New Testament pertained to what could or could not be eaten. Could a Christian consume meats that had been sacrificed to idols? It surfaces in Acts 15 and was referenced by Paul in several epistles, namely 1 Corinthians and Romans. For several years now, I have sought out explanations for how, why, and when a position on this subject changed. I’ve found very few answers, and I think I know why.

The initial position derived from conclusions reached by those at the Jerusalem Council concerning the Gentiles who came to Christ was that they should

“abstain from things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood” (Acts 15:20, ESV).

This was affirmed to Gentiles by way of a letter that suggested that this was what “seemed good” to church leaders and “to the Holy Spirit” (v. 28). So the initial position was to abstain from things polluted by idols.

Fair enough. But by the time Paul writes 1 Corinthians 8 something has changed. When? How? Why? These may be definitively unanswerable questions. But the fact is…something changed. Suddenly, the question becomes an issue of conscience. Delicate concern for the souls of others needed to be taken (8:10-12), but the hard stance of abstaining was no longer normative. In fact, this was an issue that fell under the category of an earlier statement made by Paul: “All things are lawful for me, but not all things are helpful” (6:12).

This was Paul’s approach to eating according to Kosher guidelines, as well.

“Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him” (Romans 14:3).

What could or could not be eaten wasn’t an “either/or” proposition. There wasn’t one correct position.

“Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats” (v. 20).

We need to make efforts to assure we are not creating problems for others by what we do. But we also need to see that this was an issue that over the course of the early church’s maturation changed. Convictions about eating meats sacrificed to idols or eating unclean things weren’t mutually exclusive. One wasn’t damned if he ate or damned if he didn’t eat.

What drove the need by some for uniformity? It was the interest they had in preserving their traditions. It was the belief that their traditions had been galvanized into the exclusive way of life with God. But the early Jewish church was grossly mistaken, and things don’t tend to be much different today.

While Jews that came to Christ were allowed to continue various practices (eating according to kosher guidelines and etc) that were a way of life for them, they were not allowed to bind their preferences on others. They couldn’t compel Gentiles to be circumcised in order to be Christians. They couldn’t force Gentiles to dress like them. This simply wasn’t right.

Unity could be had without uniformity. Gentiles Christians didn’t have to see everything like Jewish Christians did, and vice versa. This issue alone proves it. And until someone comes up with a definitive explanation for why the position on eating certain foods changed, we’d better be careful in being dogmatic towards others who don’t see everything exactly as we do!

You’d think in its infancy it would be perfect. It burst onto the scene in the power of the Spirit, experiencing astonishing growth (Acts 2). What could be better?

The stunning growth continues (Act 3), but lingering around the corner was something that would signal that all was not well. Could the church, one initially Jewish in origin, come to accept Gentiles who would take on the faith of Jesus?

God had to shake up Peter, an apostle mind you, to get him to see what was breaking in (Acts 10-11). This was a most precarious situation, to be sure. In Acts 15, though, it is clear that a Jewish Church isn’t so comfortable with Gentile converts. Even Peter- the one God sought to assure through the experience with Cornelius- felt pressure to cave to Jewish intimidation, despite what God had already proven to him (Galatians 2). Shoot…Paul has to hold his feet to the fire about it!

The early church struggled with change. I think Jim Woodroof captured this tension well in The Church in Transition. While this book wasn’t universally received among Churches of Christ, it wasn’t because the things he elucidated weren’t true. He dared to question certain thoughts about the early church, and he was excoriated for it in certain circles. But you can’t read the book of Acts objectively and not recognize the issues with which the early church struggled. It was a conflicted church, struggling to embrace the changes God had for it.

As I’ve before stated, conflict is normal. Anytime and anywhere you bring people together you invite tension and conflict into that domain. How it is dealt with pivotal, though. It is a point of transition, a crossroad to be sure. From it, we can go any number of directions.

Paul speaks to the heart of this saga in Romans 14-15. If you think it was incumbent upon Gentile Christians to conform to all the ways of Jewish Christians, you are misguided. It has been contended that in order for there to be true unity, there must be total uniformity. But this simply isn’t so. Romans 14-15, unquestionably, disproves this notion. In order for Jewish and Gentile Christians of Rome to have unity, they didn’t have to agree on every… single… thing. That simply wasn’t reasonable, and what wasn’t reasonable then is no more reasonable now.

This must have been a tough pill to swallow. Maybe this is why, today, the Church is made up predominantly of non-Jews? I don’t know. But what I do know is that the early church resisted the direction God was taking it.

Things are hardly different today. We have yet to learn from the mistakes of our forefathers. Reconciliation, though, begins with acknowledging the problem. If we ever are to achieve unity, we must learn to appreciate the uniqueness of others and accept that other need not necessarily see everything just like I do.

Brad Palmore recently completed the MACRR program and was instrumental in convincing me to pursue it, as well. Brad has begun a series of blog posts that deal with Church Systems. His insights are deep and will test you, but it has been worth it so far. I can’t wait to see where he goes. But if you yearn to better understand Church Systems- how they operate, why they operate the way they do, and why things have developed the way they have- then I think you need to subscribe to his blog. Here is a link to his first post in this series.

Consequently, I’ve noticed that when it comes to Farmers and State Farm agencies, in particular, there are more than just a few of each. On my short drive to the office I count four different State Farm agencies and there is at least one more not on my route to the office.  Knowing the insurance business is extremelycompetitive, I wonder if all the State Farm agents get along. Is there enough business to go around, or does the competition create tension? Do these agents, serving the same company, get along? I’ve come to learn something of an answer to the question. After all, I’m a fan of my State Farm agent, Mike Morris, the one not on my route to the office.

Over the years, I haven’t had the best of relationships with other preachers in communities where I’ve lived. My relationship with ministers of other faiths was non-existent, but it wasn’t much better with those of other Churches of Christ.

Especially in the South, Churches of Christ are ubiquitous in communities. Large cities are prone to having tons of congregations. Sadly, though, a lot of small communities are prone to having a significant number of them, as well. I’m no longer certain whether this is good or bad. We are a people who’ve been prone to division. Much of that division is born out of people believing they were doing the right thing, which may or may not have actually been the case. That it looks so terrible that communities of 10,000 or less might have five or more congregations, I wish more would see. All you have to do is ask around and you’ll discover that we’ve marginalized ourselves because we struggle to get along with one another.  

My time in Clovis, though, has been different for me personally. I have a wonderful relationship with Larry Tittle, the preacher for the West 21st Street Church of Christ. He’s become a very dear friend to me. In the year that I’ve been with 16th & Pile, we have done a lot together. We’ve played golf, had coffee, ate lunch, worshiped, studied, and prayed with each other. We’ve done all of these activities, and more, on more than one occasion.

I am proud of the relationship Larry and I have forged. Sadly, I am on my way to the NM Christian Children’s Home and will no longer be preaching at 16th, but that doesn’t mean we will no longer be getting together. After all, Portales, NM is only 20 miles from Clovis.

Here’s what I love most: for the last twelve months, anyone who might have wondered if the preachers from the 16th & Pile Church of Christ and the West 21st St. Church of Christ got along could be answered in the affirmative!

Bovina Bulletin Board

Well, this is the final bullet point from a great bulletin board found at the Bovina Church of Christ. This last bullet point is a frustrating one. It is a virtual microcosm of congregational struggles across the land. It might reflect the degree to which the modern church has slipped its moorings from God’s original intent, and as a result impeded the church’s effectiveness in the world.

I’ve both seen and heard of church’s that have struggled to help even it’s own members because it was believed that a meeting needed to be called before responding. How unfortunate it is that churches have hobbled themselves to this degree! I’m not against meetings. Believe me, they are quite expedient. But matters as pressing as the mission of God can’t, and shouldn’t, always wait for the last Sunday evening of the month.

I suppose the New Testament church had some kind of “business” meetings. It seems logical. The New Testament, though, is relatively, if not completely, silent about them. In Acts 15 a gathering of Christians from various congregations and areas was conducted at Jerusalem to hash out matters pertaining to Jewish Christian and Gentile Christian relations and implications of Gentile acceptance of Jesus as Lord. But the issues they tackled were of a more doctrinal nature, and not so much about how one church carried out the mission of God. In fact, it is relatively clear that this “conference” actually transcended common church autonomy.

What compounds the frustration is that often, not always but often nonetheless, calling a meeting doesn’t guarantee things get done. One reason congregational business meetings are so poorly attended is because so little seemingly is accomplished by them. Church business meetings, across the board, don’t have the reputations they do because they are adored. In my almost ten years of local work, in churches both with and without elders, church business meetings are the subject of jokes, cynicism, and a ton of sarcasm. The almost universal consensus opinion about them should speak loudly and clearly to us.

My utmost prayer from having considered these bullet points is that we’ll quit making excuses for why things don’t get done in our churches. After all, excuses are all those bullet points are. God is ready to use us, but will we answer His call?

Bovina Bulletin Board

Now we are getting at something for sure. While not always explicitly expressed, I contend that the “We’re fine the way we are” mentality is at the root of a number of church growth problems. This is simply my opinion, and I’ll own it, but there has been very little to disprove it over the years. Not surprisingly, it’s not until the “off the record” moments, though, that it verbally surfaces. But it doesn’t really have to to be recognized.

Church systems often possess the most significant power struggles of all organizational systems. At times they rival the political. Many churches have long established power bases that do not like to be disrupted. Growth often does that very thing.

Most churches, but not all, tend to grow primarily through swelling. People from one religious tradition move to another area and, naturally, associate themselves with a church from their religious tradition in the new town. This is what it means to swell. Consequently, people new to a church often struggle to fit in, especially, if they are viewed with suspicion. If they don’t dress the right way, carry the right bible, or don’t come from a reputable congregation, this is particularly so.  The same kind of thing applies to those who come to know Christ. The baggage they often bring in with them can be very disruptive as well. They, too, find significant difficulty in penetrating the prominent congregational circles.

Ironically enough, the first century church struggled in the same respects. When Gentiles finally were introduced to the kingdom, the Jewish Christian power base was reluctant to let them in without them conforming to certain Jewish practices. The book of Acts clearly attests to this problem.

The situation at Rome, in particular, is especially germane because its struggles were oriented around division on cultural norms. The Roman church went from being primarily a Jewish church to a Gentile church after the Jews were banished from Rome. When they returned years later, they were disturbed by the norms of the Gentile Roman church. They weren’t doing the right things; they were eating the wrong things; they weren’t do things the right way. Sounds eerily familiar to the modern church. Paul’s solution was Romans 14 & 15. Unfortunately, some of us are just now figuring this out. In the end, blame could be put before the feet of those who possessed a “We’re fine the way we are” mentality.

There are churches that are willing to grow, but only if the resultant growth isn’t going to unsettle the system. Fear causes some churches to be content with where they are. A church of 50 that has been a church of 50 for 50 years might be suggesting something without realizing it. I believe they might be saying, “We’re fine the way we are!” But the lack of genuine growth, too, is saying that God isn’t at work there either. That is a scary thought.

This program has restored in me the hope of fulfilling God’s mission. Ministry is about reconciliation (2 Corinthians 5:18-19), but reconciliation hasn’t always been my ministry. That’s unfortunate, given what I’ve been doing the last 10 years.

Blessed are the peacemakers…Matthew 5:9.

So flee youthful passions and pursue righteousness, faith, love, and peace, along with those who call on the Lord from a pure heart. 2 Timothy 2:22.

Strive for peace with everyone, and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord. Hebrews 12:14

And a harvest of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace. James 3:18.

These passages haven’t always been central to my life or my ministry. But God is at work- ever so slightly and at times quite abruptly- realigning, reorienting and renewing His mission in my life. He’s been extremely patient, and for that I am immensely thankful.

If peacemaking hasn’t been your forte, it’s not too late!

Bovina Bulletin Board

Are you kidding me? How much money does it cost to share the gospel with someone? It takes no money. Zero. Zilch. Not a dime. Gimmicks cost cash; conversation is free. Of course, it takes being relational to sustain a conversation with anyone. Hmmmm. Could this be part of the problem?

The 1^st Century church didn’t thrive because it had unlimited resources. Had they possessed such, the Jerusalem benevolent effort would not have reached out as far or lasted as long as it did. Paul was collecting funds for the needy of Jerusalem late into his ministry. The kingdom advanced naturally, not because there was an unending supply of monetary resources. Resources, actually, were scarce.

Churches grow because God is at work in them.  Churches came together collectively to “stir up one another to love and good works” (Hebrews 10:24-25). God is intimately engaged in this process. It’s a joint venture project wherein he helps us “ to will and to work for his good pleasure” (Philippians 2:12).

In our culture, though, resources seem to be essential for churches to survive. I think resources are more integral to the edification process than to evangelism. Still, it’s functional relationships within the body that causes it to grow “with a growth that is from God” (Colossians 2:19). Resources only facilitate the relationships, giving us avenues and opportunities in particular environments. Nevertheless, resources aren’t necessarily essential for such.

At the core is how we believe growth is derived. I began this series with the premise that God is the one who gives the increase, not us (1 Corinthians 3:6). Growth cannot be forced. That we haven’t learned this yet is disturbing. That “resources” even come up goes to show that commercialism and consumerism overly affects our thinking.

Bovina Bulletin Board

I believe it’s important that followers of Christ be concerned with not being offensive to people as they live out their faith. Unnecessary barriers simply do not help. But I also believe Christians can profess the gospel in a “non-offensive” way, yet people still get offended. More often than not, though, those who refuse to profess the Truth lest they offend another are simply deceiving themselves. Generally, fear is responsible for this excuse.

We simply cannot please everyone. At times our efforts are genuinely offensive and I don’t think Jesus is pleased when they are, especially, when we are dealing with delicate souls. How Jesus dealt with the religious “know-it-alls” of his day- the Pharisees, Sadducees, and etc.- shows us that sometimes people need to have their worlds rocked. But he didn’t treat the woman in John 8 like he did outspoken religious hypocrites. They needed what she didn’t!

Consequently, there are those looking to be offended. They are critical of anybody and anything. Nothing can please them.

Still others stumble at the mere fact that what’s being said or done doesn’t jibe with their preconceived notions about things. Such was actually the case with John the Baptist.

John’s depiction of the Messiah in Matthew 3:12 didn’t necessarily reflect how he actually came. In fact, Isaiah 42:1-2 suggested that the Messiah would come in a gentle fashion, not heaving a winnowing fork. Jesus himself told Nicodemus, “God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him” (John 3:17). So when John sends word to Jesus inquiring as to whether or not he was truly the Messiah or should they wait for another (Luke 7:20), Jesus tells John’s messengers to inform John of what he’d been doing. But the last thing he told them to mention to John was, “Blessed is the man who does not fall away on account of me” (v. 23). Numerous translations render “fall away” as “offended.” What did Jesus do to cause John to question and become offended? He simply didn’t live up to John’s expectations.

Some people are going to be offended whether it’s justified or not. Let us make sure we do not give the grounds to be offended.

But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander. 1 Peter 3:15-16.

Bovina Bulletin Board

In an effort to foster growth, the church has found itself resorting to various approaches and sundry tactics. These often generate sparks of interest and increased numbers, but the sparks seem short-lived. Too, authentic discipleship in Jesus is rarely a result. In a sense, I agree with those who cry, “It Never Worked Before,” especially, when we’re talking about unbiblical growth.

Jesus simply wasn’t about gimmickry. He worked relationally, fostering genuine relationships through discipleship. His approach was for long-term commitment, not short-lived numbers. The fact that he let the Rich Young Ruler walk away is proof. If in our appeal to the Way of Jesus we develop a resolve to approach people on Jesus’ terms, I believe we would never say, “It Never Worked Before.” The New Testament evidence simply won’t allow for it. It has worked, and I believe its something we need to get back to.

Most assuredly, especially with the general population, combativeness has never worked over compassion. There’s a time to take a stand and make a “defense” (Philippians 1:17), but we weren’t made to live in a defensive posture 24/7.  I’ve found in my own past that I’ve often closed doors before they were ever even opened. How self-defeating! That is something that never works. Listening doesn’t mean we cave, it means we care.

There are things that aren’t working for us, but our plea isn’t the problem. Our plea is the rallying cry of Jesus. What I’ve had to do is seek His love to replace mine, so that the plea can be practiced as well as proclaimed. That is something, truly, that will work!