Ready for Reformation? Southern Baptists and the Seminary Structure
I’m well aware that one could easily get lost in the blog-maze of Southern Baptist Convention reform. It seems everyone with a computer sees themselves as a reformer these days. Well, I am probably much less qualified than most to add a twist or turn to this confusing maze, but maybe you will find this helpful . . .
Having attended one of our great Southern Baptist institutions of higher learning, I have a few thoughts about the seminary structure in the SBC. There are many reasons that I would spend time thinking and writing about the need for SBC Seminary reform. I could discuss the high cost of seminary for the students. Not just the tuition, textbook, and housing costs, but many must leave jobs that provide well in order to relocate away from the support structure of their church, friends, and family. I could even discuss a culture that often births in seminary environments that are filled with pride, one-up-manship, name-dropping, and a striving for accolades. Even worse, seminary often leaves students with a disconnect between their newly acquired head knowledge and practical ministry leaving damaged churches that have been experimented on crippled, dead, or dying. Yes, I would imagine all of these and more problems are too common in any seminary’s life. But, in my opinion, these alone are not worth all the trouble to reform a massive beast like the SBC’s six seminaries.
The greatest problem that exists in today’s seminary structure is that, try as they may, they do not give attention to the priority of the local church. Christ has promised to build His church and though the gates of hell try to prevail against it, they shall never succeed (Mt. 16:18). We too often think that this applies to our particular extra-biblical ministry -a seminary, for example. Christ never promised to build a seminary, a youth ministry, a recovery ministry, a retreat ministry, a printing ministry, or any other extra-biblical ministry. He promised to build His church. I’m crazy enough to think that a way to seek the blessing of God in our ministries is to get in line with His plan to build His church. What are the purposes of a seminary? Are they not the same purposes that the Bible gives to the church? It is through the church, after all, that the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places (Eph. 3:10). As Paul and Barnabas passed through Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch, they did not send the leaders off to Jerusalem to learn from Peter, nor did they order them to accompany them so that they might go to Paul’s traveling missionary seminary. Instead, they appointed elders with prayer and fasting and committed them to the Lord (Acts 14:19-23). Paul and Barnabas did not look on the wall of these men’s homes for seminary degrees. Instead, they probably looked within the walls of their homes to see if they managed their own households well (1 Timothy 3:4-5) and outside of those same walls to see if they were well thought of by outsiders (v. 7). Our seminary degree culture in the SBC has blurred the lines of qualifications for eldership and removed the importance of a pastor being known in the area in which he is shepherding. I have a deep love and appreciation for those who serve faithfully in our denomination’s seminaries. I have profited spiritually from many of them. And most of them, I believe, probably have a deep love for the local church and this comes through in their labors. But I believe that we can do better. What follows are some suggestions.
1. Close 4 of the 6 seminaries. Think of the impact on our churches if the education is going on right in their midst rather than seeing their called and gifted young people leave to obtain their theological education. 2 Seminaries should remain open (SouthWestern or GoldenGate in the West and Southern or SouthEastern in the East) to ease logistics of suggestion #2. These remaining two campuses would be used to house offices, libraries, temporary student housing, host modulars, conferences, etc.
2. Offer only non-traditional classes. I am referring to on-location modular courses ranging from 1-6 wks at a time. I am referring to weekend simulcasts hosted churches, associations, or state conventions. I am referring to professors visiting these same venues once a week for the duration of a semester. I am referring to DVD and internet-based classes that students may take part in as a group at one of these venues or at home. I am referring to mail correspondence courses. Some, and maybe even all of these, are already being used by our seminaries, but there is no need for traditional classes in this day and age of technology and ease of transportation.
That’s pretty much it. Just 2 suggestions. Of course, this raises lots of questions. Questions, such as:
What about the other 4 campuses? There are any number of options. We could sell them and use the money to pay for expansion of the libraries at the remaining two locations, relocation costs, severance packages, purchasing new equipment to make the new class format necessary, or we could just give it all to missions. Another option would be to keep the buildings to use for ministry as another missionary learning center location, another retreat center, a hospital, or college.
What about the staff? Obviously, we would want to offer a healthy severance package for folks whose jobs have been eliminated. The professors would have plenty of options. Some would continue to teach full-time with modulars, internet, correspondence, and satellite locations. Others would opt for teaching part-time while teaching at another school (secular or Christian), writing for Lifeway, ministering vocationally at a local church or as a associational/denominational servant. Others may choose to teach full-time at a secular university.
There are surely other objections, like, “What about the importance of our tradition, heritage, history, etc?” “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!” But I believe the benefits to the church far outweigh the difficult truths of these and any other objections.
Some of these benefits would include: Small churches located near the seminaries would be more likely to look for and find a long-term pastor. The minister as “professional” culture full of church-hopping, ladder-climbing pastors could conceivably diminish. Due to the professors’ and students’ involvement in more churches, local churches would have both better access to good teaching and more opportunity to see how God works in a church to raise up and develop leaders. These are just a few of the many benefits.
If Southern Baptists would seek a way forward, we must do it with the church leading the charge, not denominational servants, structures, or ministries. We must recognize that our commitment to voluntary cooperation, though solid must always be producing fluid and changing ministries. I once heard Al Mohler say that his goal was to work himself out of the job and put the job of the seminary back in the hands of the local church -I couldn’t applaud him louder. Now, let’s see some action.
A Philosophy of Ministry to Youth
Theology of young people
In order to establish a philosophy of ministering to youth, we must turn to the Scriptures first and foremost. Consider:
Joseph was seventeen years old when his brothers turned his world upside down, but his faith in the Lord remained strong (Genesis 37:2). David apparently followed the Lord faithfully as a young shepherd and was later used by God as a great king (not to mention the whole giant-slayer thing) (see 1 Samuel 17:31-37). Josiah reigned as king over Judah from the time he was eight. At the age of sixteen, he began to seek God and four years later he led the nation in a massive revival (see 2 Chronicles 34:1-21). During Josiah’s reforms, Jeremiah, a youth himself was called of God to prophesy (see Jeremiah 1:6). Almost all scholars agree that according to ancient Hebrew custom, Mary, the mother of Jesus, would have been what we consider a young teenager when she received her miraculous gift. Jesus himself was twelve years old when he amazed the teachers in the temple (see Luke 2:46-47). Many scholars also agree that the apostle John was a young man when he first began to follow Christ as a disciple. The Gospel writer, John Mark even saw fit to tell us that the angel sent to tell of the resurrection appeared in the likeness of a young man (Mark 16:3). In biblical times, God called young people to be kings, prophets, disciples, and pastors. They were expected to apply themselves to know the word of God (Psalm 119:9), to set an example for other believers (2 Timothy 4:12), and to learn to love their spouses and children (Titus 2:4). They also had many responsibilities, which primarily involved learning and mastering a trade to support the family. Young people could legally be put to death for their sins in the theocratic justice system of Israel (Deuteronomy 24:16). This would have included a maximum allowable punishment of being stoned to death for dishonoring (as simple as lying to) his parents. The consistent, though admittedly sketchy, testimony of Scripture seems to be that young people played a major role in the biblical society, culture, and people of God. It seems obvious that the Lord is pleased to use young people to accomplish His plans and He expects them to honor Him and love Him supremely just as He does adults. In short, we could summarize this ministry philosophy by saying that our goal is to lead young people to love the Lord their God with all of their heart, mind, soul, and strength, and to love their neighbor as they love themselves.
There is, however, more biblical evidence to consider:
The Family
Many books have been written on the Biblical family. Suffice for our purposes to summarize a few foundational points:
The whole family is to submit to the Lord Jesus Christ as the head of the family.
The husband, as the chief representative of the family before God is held responsible for the entire goings on in his household. He is the spiritual leader of the home.
Both parents hold the primary responsibility for the spiritual nourishment and upbringing of their children.
Parents are responsible before God for the spiritual education of their offspring. From Malachi, we learn that one of God’s purposes for marriage is to produce godly offspring (2:15). Overwhelmingly, the parent has the primary responsibility to fulfill the ministry to their children. They are to teach their children diligently at all times. (Deut. 6:6, 7) Granted, within the church, others such as pastors and those with the gift of teaching are to teach, but every parent is held responsible before God for the teaching they pass on or do not pass on to their children.
One could even make a strong case that churches need not have any other youth program in their church other than the one that God has already ordained—that of the family. To have any youth or children’s ministry apart from an intentional ministry to the family as a whole may actually work against God’s plan for the family. The Biblical church must strive to come along side the parents and encourage and equip them to parent. Church youth and children’s ministries should focus much attention on helping parents carry out a consistent Bible-saturated, prayer-filled, Christ-exalting parenting ministry to their children.
We may now add to our philosophy, assisting parents to lead young people to love the Lord their God with all their heart, mind, soul, and strength, and to love their neighbor as they love themselves.
The Church
Recent statistics show that the average teenager has decided by the age of 18 that church and matters of faith are not for them. Though culture and family play large roles in these statistics, we must not ignore that the church itself plays a large role. The typical youth ministry that began in the 50’s and 60’s may not be as effective as it once was. We must raise the bar of expectation for our youth in the North American church. God expects no less commitment from a 15 year old believer than he does from a 45 year old believer. I once heard a youth ministry professor say that the average age of an elder in China today is twenty-one and the average evangelist is seventeen. He also said that most of the great revivals and Christian movements of the last 200 years can be traced back to a group of young adults. There is no age limit to serving God. You are never too young or too old. Therefore, young people should be encouraged to minister to and along side adults on a regular basis. Young people generally have more energy to spend on serving, more spare time to serve, and are usually just as capable to understand scriptural truth as an adult. When you think about it, there is really very little that a young person cannot do in the church. It is well said that young people are the church of the future, but it is also true that they are the church of the present.
Culture
This philosophy would be incomplete if we did not consider the culture. As a youth ministry professor of mine said often, we must use the culture to reach the culture. Or as Paul said, do as the Romans do. Of course we must test everything and hold onto the good. So what is good, or useable about our culture in regards to youth ministry? “Teens” are the largest subculture in the United States, with millions of dollars being spent every year in marketing to them. The good thing about this is Christian youth have a natural “in”. When a church youth event is done well, the culture appreciates it. When youth serve visibly in their communities, the culture takes notice. And most of all, at what other point in history will these individuals ever be around the same people day in and day out for 7 hours a day? What an opportunity to reach our schools for Christ! There is, however, a bad side to our culture when it comes to young adults. Very little is expected of them. A caricaturized version of our culture would say to our young people, “You—12 -25 yr old—you do nothing, but play, have fun, and make mistakes (but not too bad!) until you’re ready to be a responsible adult.” Unfortunately, the church can buy into this idea as well, essentially saying to our young people, “You stay in your youth building and on your youth retreats (out of trouble) until you can learn to be a boring adult who can be a real serious Christian.” Though youth events are seen by our culture as glorified babysitting, the church must realize that the best evangelistic youth events are those events that are already happening in the world. Evangelism geared toward young adults should primarily be more along the lines of New Testament evangelism—going where the crowds were already drawn rather than competing with the world to draw a crowd for the church.
In summary, a biblical church youth ministry will minister to the entire family, equipping them to use the culture to reach the culture by loving the Lord their God with all their heart, mind, soul, and strength, and to love their neighbor as they love themselves.
Regarding Invitations
The following was written in order to give our church plant understanding regarding our (my co-pastor and I) choice not to use traditional invitations. Maybe you will find it helpful.
Today, it is the regular practice of most Evangelical churches and the vast majority of Southern Baptist Churches in our nation to give an invitation at the end of the worship service. What typically is the invitation? It is an opportunity for those present in a worship service to respond to the prompting of God’s Holy Spirit. For this reason, we do not make a blanket rule that says, “We will not give an invitation at the conclusion of the worship service.” But, we do want to ask, “Is the invitation system the best way to encourage others to respond to the Lord’s leading in their lives?” We believe the answer is “No, the invitation system is not the best practice for our church.” Here is why:
The invitation system often distracts the majority of the body from thinking through the application of God’s preached word to their own lives or the life of the church. Of course, after God’s word is preached each Sunday, we want to create an atmosphere that encourages our response to God’s truth. Though a formal invitation may do this for a few, there are other ways to do this for the many. Such as, a moment of reflection after the sermon to meditate on the sermon and its application to our hearts. Such as singing songs, not as background music in hopes that hearts would be prompted to respond, but as a response itself. Such as giving to the church (consequently, this is why our offering is always after the sermon, not before). All of these are geared to help us respond to the morning sermon by helping us to live out the message of the sermon in our lives as we go to our homes, schools, and workplaces. It is in these places that our real response to God happens. And it is in these places that we truly worship God. This is why Paul said that our spiritual worship is to offer our bodies as living sacrifices (Rom. 12:1). So, we do want to invite a response, but not a limited, narrow response such as, “Walk the aisle to: pray a prayer, be prayed for, accept Jesus into your heart, recommit your life to Christ, or join the church.” We do not want to give the idea that these are the only acceptable responses to every sermon. The Scriptures are much more profitable than that (see 2 Tim. 3:16-17). Sermons are for every hearer to respond to, not just those who feel they should walk aisles.
Often, the issues dealt with at the traditional invitation are better dealt with at other times. Matters of salvation, church membership, one’s personal walk with Christ, and other spiritual issues needing counsel and prayer often require much discussion, study, thinking, and prayer. These things simply cannot be done in the time it takes to sing one or two verses of a song while sleepy-eyed, impatient onlookers’ bellies are rumbling. Though we could give an invitation and immediately take those who respond to a separate room where these types of things can take place, we prefer to do it at other times than during an invitation for the preceding reason.
Often, the invitation time is seen as an evangelical confessional with the preacher as the priest. We want to discourage members from thinking that there is only one place to confess your sins and that there is a requirement to confess your sins to a vocational minister. We prefer to encourage others to go to their great High Priest (Heb. 4:14-16) and to confess sins to one another as the Lord leads (James 5:16).
The church did fine without an invitation system for 1800 years. It is only in the last 150 years with the revival movements led by Charles Finney, that the invitation system came about. The thought was that a certain mood needed to be set (often through music and lighting) in order to prompt a response. We believe that as ministers of the Gospel, we do not need to set a mood, but freely to invite all to follow Christ and trust that a sovereign God will so move in the hearts of his people, that they will choose to respond, regardless of a lack of opportunity in the worship service.
We trust that you see our hearts in this. We are trying to be wise enough to lead others in genuine, God-honoring worship as well as doing damage to Satan’s stronghold of those in this nation with false assurance due to many sloppy invitations. Of course, we are always available after the worship service, as well as most any time to help others work through many of the spiritual issues often discussed during a traditional invitation.
In as much as we follow Christ, come with us as we seek to respond to one of our Lord’s invitations, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me.” (Luke 9:23)
REDISCOVERING CHURCH DISCIPLINE AMONG SOUTHERN BAPTISTS
In his book The Purpose Driven Church, Rick Warren states that the five purposes of the church are: worship, evangelism, fellowship, discipleship, and service. At the risk of impinging upon today’s popular Southern Baptist ecclesiology, these purposes must be challenged. If not the purposes themselves, at least the definitions of the purposes according to Warren should be called into question. One glaring biblical mistake in Warren’s definition of the church is the exclusion of the church’s right to exclude –church discipline. Were Southern Baptists to recover this lost “discipline” of the church, they would undoubtedly discover with it, the blessing of God.
Church Discipline in the Bible
The primary biblical text used in advocating church discipline is Matthew 18:15-20. Regarding this passage, commentator John MacArthur states,
It is with the church’s responsibility to keep itself pure that Jesus deals in Matthew 18:15-20. He is still teaching about the childlikeness of believers, illustrated by the young child He had called to Himself and set before the Twelve (v.2). He had declared that a person enters and is considered great in the kingdom by becoming like a little child (vv. 3-4) and that, once in the kingdom, believers are to be protected like little children (vv. 5-9) and cared for like little children (vv. 10-14). He now declares that they must also be disciplined like little children.
In this passage, we see a four-step “template” for proper discipline in church life. The process is as follows: when one knows of a brother in sin, he is to rebuke him privately first (v 15). If he does not repent, the person is to rebuke the brother in sin with one or two other brothers (v 16). If the brother remains incessant in his sin, he is to be rebuked in the presence of the entire church (v 17). If this third step does not cause the brother to turn from his sin, the congregation is to resort to the fourth and final step –excommunication (v 17). Although each step leads to the next, if the errant brother repents at any point in the process, the process has been successful and is therefore aborted. Though it may sound very mechanical and inhumane to describe it in such terms, the process is actually to be done out of love for the falling brother, for the church and its witness, and for the holiness of God and His people. Scholar Robert Reymond says,
Just as God authorized Israel in its “theocratic” character to place those who committed sins “with a high hand” under the ban (herem) to be punished with extermination, so also the Lord Jesus Christ has given his church the authority to discipline its unruly and reprobate members in order to promote its purity and well-being (Matt. 16:19; 18:15-18; John 20:23). Just as by the preaching of the Word the wicked are doctrinally separated from the holy, so also by discipline the church authoritatively separates between the profane and the holy.
Matthew 18 is the key text for church discipline, but it is not the only inscripturated evidence of the practice. Any avid Sunday School attendee should know it is God Himself who initiated such measures in the church. The story of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11) proves that God values the holiness of His church, even to the point of discouraging outward growth (vv 5, 11). Paul also says God caused some to be weak, ill, or even dead for ignoring personal sin while taking communion (1 Cor 11:30). But more biblical precedent does exist for the church’s responsibility to carry out discipline.
Reymond sums up the biblical teachings regarding church discipline as follows:
The exercise of discipline is extremely important for the glory of God and of Christ, the purity of the church, and the reclaiming of disobedient members (Rom. 16:17; 1 Cor. 5:1-5; Gal. 6:1; 2 Thess. 3:14-15; 1 Tim. 1:20; Titus 3:10). However, the authority to discipline that Christ has given his church is for building up and not for destroying (2 Cor. 10:8; 13:10). Therefore, it is to be exercised in mercy and not in wrath (Gal. 6:1). In this the church is to take the part of a tender mother (1 Thess. 2:7), correcting her children for their good, that everyone of them may be presented faultless in the day of the Lord Jesus.
The absence of discipline in the Southern Baptist pulpits of today is not due to an absence of the subject in the Scriptures.
Church Discipline in History
Although today’s average Southern Baptist would probably never know it, church discipline played a key role in the day to day polity of early Southern Baptist church life. Article 34 of 1679’s The Orthodox Creed states,
We believe that the great King and Lawgiver, Christ, the universal and only Head of His church, hath given to His visible church a subordinate power, or authority, for the well-being, ordering, and governing of it, for His own glory and the church’s profit and good, the executive part of which derivative power of discipline and government is committed to His ministers, proportionable to their dignities and places in the church in a most harmonious way, for the beauty, order, government, and establishment of the same, and consisteth in the exercise and execution of the censors, or rod of correction, he hath appointed therein, for the purgation of the same, in order to present scandals and offenses, both public and private.
Baptist fathers Benjamin and Elias Keach state in their 1697 covenant, “We do promise to watch over each other’s conversations, and not to suffer sin upon one another . . . to warn, rebuke, and admonish one another with meekness, according to the rules left to us of Christ in that behalf.” And later, “We do promise to bear with one another’s weaknesses, failings, and infirmities with much tenderness, not discovering to any without the church, nor any within, unless according to Christ’s rule and the order of the gospel provided in that case.”
This sort of covenant did not disappear in the eighteenth or even nineteenth century. In Democratic Religion, Southern Baptist historian Gregory Wills states that Southern Baptists of the 1800’s,
rejected modernity’s individualism. Baptist piety had individualist characteristics rooted in the Reformation doctrine of the priesthood of all believers . . . but they repulsed the privatizing trend of democratic individualism. The church, they believed, had prerogatives that superseded those of individuals. The redeemed community determined corporately the meaning of the sacred text, the shape of Christian spirituality, and the regulation of virtue.
Wills then proceeds to present thoroughly researched and documented evidence to support this statement.
It was in the 1850’s when James P. Boyce, founder of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, saw fit to include discipline alongside worship as one of the purposes for Christ’s church. “John Leadley Dagg, the author of a well-known and influential [Southern Baptist] church manual of the nineteenth century, noted: ‘It has been remarked, that when discipline leaves a church, Christ goes with it.’”
Nineteenth century Southern Baptists may, perhaps be faulted in carrying out church discipline, but it is definitely not for being too relaxed. If Southern Baptist churches lack discipline today, it is not for a lack in Southern Baptist history.
Church Discipline Today
Most Southern Baptist churches that claim to exercise church discipline today reserve such practices only for a select group of people within the church, such as church leaders or members well known within the community. Although the exercise of biblical discipline is generally lacking in today’s Southern Baptist church life, there are many influential advocates. While some Southern Baptist churches of today are doing away with the concept of “church membership,” Donald Whitney (professor of spiritual formation at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary) sees church discipline as a biblical proof for membership.
R. Albert Mohler Jr., current president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary says,
The decline of church discipline is perhaps the most visible failure of the contemporary church. No longer concerned with maintaining purity of confession or lifestyle, the contemporary church sees itself as a voluntary association of autonomous members, with minimal moral accountability to God, much less to each other. The absence of church discipline is no longer remarkable-it is generally not even noticed. Regulative and restorative church discipline is, to many church members, no longer a meaningful category, or even a memory. The present generation of both ministers and church members is virtually without experience of biblical church discipline.
Mark Dever is the pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington DC and author of the article “Why We Disciplined Half Our Church.” In A Display of God’s Glory, he sets forth that, “it is indisputable that one of the functions of a local church family is to draw boundaries which will exclude people who are themselves unwilling to be excluded from membership in the church.” In Nine Marks of a Healthy Church, Dever proposes:
Biblical church discipline is simple obedience to God and a simple confession that we need help. Here are five positive reasons for such corrective church discipline. Its purpose is positive (1) for the individual disciplined, (2) for other Christians as they see danger of sin, (3) for the health of the church as a whole and (4) for the corporate witness of the church. Most of all, (5) our holiness is to reflect the holiness of God. It should mean something to be a member of the church, not for our pride’s sake, but for God’s name’s sake.
If Southern Baptists do indeed lack this biblical mark of a healthy church today, it is not for lack of modern prophets. Within Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) churches, these three men and other like-minded people are in places of influence prophetically crying for change.
Change is Possible
Change is possible in Southern Baptist churches of today. Church members have already at their disposal, a solid biblical foundation to stand on, a rich heritage to draw from, and a slew of others to link arms with. If SBC church leaders will be willing to redefine the popular notions of the day regarding the purposes of the church, God will be pleased to pour out blessings on these churches and be glorified in the process. “Now who is there to harm you if you are zealous for what is good? But even if you should suffer for righteousness’ sake, you will be blessed.” (1 Pet 3:13-14).
This is not to say that the road will be easy. As any minister knows, “change” is the wrong word to bring up and stay popular within a congregation. Still, most things worth doing take time and many take hard work. The Bible never presents orthodoxy as a byproduct of love for the Savior; Southern Baptists must be proactive. If SBC churches changed for the worse in the twentieth century, by God’s grace they can continue to change for the better in the twenty-first.
SOURCES
Books
Broadus, John A. Edited by Timothy and Denise George. Baptist Confessions, Covenants, and Catechisms. Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 1999.
Dever, Mark E. A Display of God’s Glory booklet. Washington, DC: Center for Church Reform, 2001.
Nine Marks of a Healthy Church booklet. Washington, DC: Center for Church Reform, 2001.
MacArthur, John Jr. The MacArthur New Testament Commentary Matthew 16-23. Chicago: Moody, 1998.
Mueller, William. A History of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1959.
Reymond, Robert L. A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1998.
Warren, Rick. The Purpose Driven Church. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995.
Whitney, Donald S. Spiritual Disciplines Within the Church. Chicago: Moody, 1996.
Wills, Gregory A. Democratic Religion. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.
Articles
Mohler, R. Albert Jr. “Church Discipline: The Missing Mark.” In The Compromised Church, ed. John H. Armstrong, 171-88. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1998.
all things in common
you know sometimes, i get so used to the benefits of having all things in common that i forget to rejoice in the goodness of it. what do i mean? i’m referring to acts 4 where the first century Christians had all things in common and there was not a needy person among them. this is a testimony of God’s goodness to those observing Christian lives from the outside. true community. truly depending on one another. this is way better than just borrowing and lending and it was way better than socialism. i experience it almost every day:
-in friends opening up their home to me for two weeks, letting me eat their food and sleep on their couch.
-in giving my car to a friend in need.
-in receiving free fire wood from friends.
-in giving my extra washer and dryer to friends in need of them.
-in countless meals shared at no cost.
-in friends giving valuable time to listen, pray, or counsel.
-in receiving gifts of clothes and babycare items from friends who hardly know us.
i don’t think i’m making too much over nothing here. i really do think the glory of God is sometimes best seen in the little things -a cup of cold water, clothing, or comfort. thank you, Lord for great friends!
“but if anyone has the world’s goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God’s love abide in him? little children, let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth.” 1 Jn. 3:17-18
