Hello All,
(Just a general disclaimer that I must insert here at the beginning. I am but a lay person, like most of you. And these weekly “thoughts” are but my own. Not the definitive word on this or any topic. Just my own conclusions derived from my own study and faith in God. The greatest hope I have for these weekly “thoughts” is to have them be a springboard for further study on your part. Not to be a weekly treatise to be blindly accepted. So, please read them with this intent, this motive in mind).
This week’s lesson from “The Adult Sabbath School Guide” is titled “A Community of Sevants”. Sometimes we believe that we know what people want. As Seventh-day Adventist Christians, we believe our more accurate picture of God is what people want. At some level of their experience, this is true. But there are two pitfalls we can make when presenting the picture of God that they really need.
First, we sometimes present that picture of God in a most un-God-like manner. I remember an Adventist acquaintance of mine that was very forthright (at times, downright forceful) when “evangelizing”. He would corner people and present the “gospel”. And the usual response from the potential proselyte was one of rejection. After the rejection, my acquaintance would then pronounce he had done his part and that the rejecter had their chance. Actually, the rejecter had been put-off by the demeanor of the presenter. The presenter’s demeanor had not matched the presentation. Presenting our God of love in an un-loving manner leads to rejection.
Or I have heard of attendees at our churches that had an existing member make some critical comment about their continued smoking. And the attendee no longer attends. The existing member would then make some defensive comment that the attendee was unwilling to give-up smoking and so no longer attends. Actually, the smoker was put-off by the critical manner of the member who did not see the person-hood of the smoker but saw the offense instead. Saw the rules as primary and placed the person as secondary. Our God of love sees people as individuals and does not generalize. He meets each where they are and works compassionately for their good. He sees the person first and sees the offense for what it is… contrary to the good of the person. The person comes first, the rules are secondary because they support the person. People are first with our God and needs to be first with us, too.
Secondly, we need to see what the person needs FIRST, before we present the God they need. I know a wonderful Adventist Community Health Educator (perhaps you know Sheryl McWilliams, too). She says that the first thing we need to address when coming to people is their PERCEIVED need. “If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you says to them, ‘Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,’ but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit?” (James 2: 15-16). At the moment of destitution and hunger, to tell that one that God cares is of little consequence… unless you address their perceived need first. And this is the thought I would like to close this quarter with.
This has been a great quarter’s lesson, has it not? It has brought our focus back to the present and back to our role as true Christians. We Adventists can be so guilty of looking ahead to our God’s coming that we can fail to see the perceived need all around us. As such, our theology, our faith, means very little to others. What do they care about the Sabbath, the state of the dead, the benefits of a vegetarian diet when they are out of work, their children are hungry and the power company is threatening to shut-off their electricity? As the profound theologian, Paul Tillich, once said, “Christians are notorious for answering the questions no one is asking”. He also said, “There is no love which does not become help”. This leads me to ask, “Is our church actually fulfilling our commission”?
If you look at our church set-up and the way church services are conducted, it is based on the historical tradition of churches. But does this historical layout and worship pattern serve us well? For many of us, it’s comfortable… familiar. But comfortable and familiar should not be our primary criteria any more than traditional or historical. Christ set the tone for worship when He came. He went to where the people were. Our churches seem to be established with the intent of people coming to us, not to facilitate us going to them. Now should our places of congregating be comfortable? Yes, of course. Just as you make your home clean, comfortable and appealing for any guests, so should our church family meeting-place be clean, comfortable and appealing. But if that’s all we have, a nice place to congregate, it belies the real intent of churches. They need to places of outreach, not places of hideout. I’m not sure what “church” needs to be. But I believe we have not yet seen what “church” is intended to be. As we contemplate this quarter’s lesson and as we make decisions into the future, let us think “outside the box” we’ve created regarding “church”. Let us live the change we seek for this sinful, upside down world.
With brotherly love,
Jim