Sorry but…

I came across two unrelated articles in the Herald this morning. Both of them got me thinking about the nature of apologies and how often we say we’re ‘sorry’ but try to protect ourselves in the process.

The first relates to a series of racist tweets fired off by a South African model (here). After the remarks on Twitter that cost her sponsorship and an award, she tweeted back her ‘sincerest apologies’, but stated that it was ‘not in her nature’ to be racist. However, according to the Herald, this incident was not isolated and the twittersphere erupted with the discrepancy as soon as she tweeted it.

The second relates to a slanderous tweet by writer Catherine Deveny about Cardinal George Pell (here). The context was the Q&A debate where Cardinal Pell had paused between saying “We were preparing young English boys”, and, ‘for Holy Communion”. Deveny pounced on that paused and insinuated in a tweet that Pell condoned pedophilia. As a result, Pell threatened to sue Twitter, at which point Deveny issued an apology. However, her apology seems to me to be loaded with hidden barbs. Read it for yourself:

“Clearly it was significant enough hurt and embarrassment caused for him to lawyer up and spend the Catholic Church’s money to pursue defamation action against Twitter and me,” she wrote.

“There must have been deep deliberation over the decision to spend thousands of dollars of parishioners’ money on legal fees.

“Spending money that could have been spent feeding the poor, sheltering the homeless or alleviating suffering, instead of on defamation litigation, clearly illustrates how serious the breach I allegedly committed was in the eyes of Cardinal Pell.”

In both incidences, “sorry” does seem to be the hardest word (thanks Elton John). Why couldn’t the South African model just apologise unreservedly? If racism wasn’t it her nature, then where did it come from? It’s not good enough to assert, as she did, that it happened when she was frustrated and angry. I would have thought that it’s in times of stress that our true nature comes out. Clearly, racism was in her nature and she should have just stopped with a repentant ‘I’m sincerely sorry and I have no excuses.”

In the other case, why couldn’t Deveny just swallow her pride and say an unreserved ‘sorry’ without simultaneously taking a swipe at the Catholic Church once again? To me, her apology was so passive-aggressive that I commend the graciousness of Cardinal Pell even to accept it.

All of this turns the question back to us: do we apologise with a series of ‘but…’s and excuses? How many times have I apologised to my wife only to subtly (or not so subtly) defend myself in the process? In so doing, not only are we undermining the sincerity of our apology, we’re also heard as saying “it’s your fault”, or, “you (or the situation) made me do it”.

Those who have been liberated by the gospel to receive God’s grace don’t need to make excuses. As Tim Keller is often quoted: ‘We are more wicked than we ever dared believe but at the same time more loved and accepted in Christ than we ever dared hope.” When we sin, whether against God or others, we ought to come with unreserved apologies: “I’m sorry. I have no excuses. This was in my nature and my broken nature needs God’s grace and yours. Please forgive me.”

Jesus calls that spirit of mournfulness and brokenness ‘blessed’ (Matthew 5:3-4).

Five Most Challenging People You Will Minister To

The longer I’ve been a pastor, the more I find that not everything nor everyone is as it seems. Call it naivety or inexperience, but my view of people in earlier times tended to be far more black-and-white. Now I find that layers of complexity tend to lie beneath almost every person that I meet and minister to.

However, if I had to put into categories, these five kinds of people below are the ones I find most challenging to minister to. They can be vastly different to one another, and yet simultaneously, a person can fall into more than one category. What’s common to each of them is the fact that all of them are more than they appear to be. In each case, there’s the person you meet and perhaps even come to know, but there’s something more that lies beneath the surface. And in each one of these cases, what lies beneath the surface tends not to want to be addressed or ministered to or challenged.

Ok, it’s getting a bit too conceptual so here are the five types of people I’m thinking of:

1. Religious but unregenerate

There are loads of these in every church: those who appear to be Christian, have been baptised/confirmed, receive the sacraments, confess the right creeds, are church members, active in church, and yet beneath it all, they’re simply not born again. The difficulty with this group is that they will deny that they are unregenerate. In fact, when put under pressure, they will gladly give the right answers and cite their Christian resumes to demonstrate that they are ‘really Christian’ but show little or no evidence in changed hearts, behaviour or lifestyle.

2. Converted but undiscipled

By this I don’t mean the newly converted who need to be followed-up on but those who have been Christians for years, perhaps decades, but  have never really ‘grown up’ in the faith. And almost always, they’re still immature because they weren’t properly discipled when they were first converted or first understood the gospel. These Christians may have drifted from church to church, with prolonged periods of absences between churches. They will be semi-regular in their attendance and you will see some latent desire to be godly, but because they’ve never known anything but spiritual immaturity, in all sorts of ways, the Word of God will more often than not be choked out by the worries in their lives. Their thinking, feeling and doing have never been properly shaped by Christian discipleship, the church community and healthy modelling. And it’s more difficult because these spiritual babies are really hard to motivate and encourage years down the track to form discipleship relationships, because by now, they are busy parents with young or school aged kids, and spiritual immaturity and laxity in church involvement have become hard habits to break.

3. Hurting but hiding

These Christians know the church too well to be honest with their pain. Theirs is the ‘stained glass masquerade’, often because they’ve tried to be vulnerable and have been shot down with judgement or moralism in the past. They’ve become resigned to the fact that no one will understand, no one will still accept them if their secrets were shared, and in fact, they’re the only ones struggling the way they are. It’s very difficult to identify who they are, let alone gain their trust in order to minister to them, because they’ve become so adept at hiding.

4. Keen but conniving

These are seemingly mature and zealous Christians, probably in leadership, whom you only find out later have been at it with their own agenda in mind. Because they’re keen and want to serve (and often have leadership gifts), they are sought after and placed in positions of responsibility. Only later do the pastor or elders find that that they are anything but servant-like. They’re proud, unteachable, don’t submit to loving authority, have their own agenda, gather their own followers, are great at talking behind people’s backs, and basically undermine the unity of the church when the decisions made or directions taken don’t suit them. What’s difficult about this group of people is that you often don’t know until it’s too late.

5. Busy but barren

Finally there are those who are busy serving in many ways, sometimes in leadership, but have been in a spiritual desert for years. They are the reliable and dependable people you keep turning to, and you turn to them because they rarely say ‘no’. But all the while, they’ve been serving out of duty without any delight, and their spiritual journey is like a car without fuel rolling down the hill towards a brick wall. A spiritual car-wreck is on its way but no one – not they, nor those who ask them to serve – is willing to pay the price of pulling them out of ministry and ask the hard questions. Usually these people will give out subtle ‘cries for help’ or send signals that things aren’t well, but their busyness and yours keeps them going ‘for just a little bit longer’ until the ministry they are serving in is in a better place and they can take a break. By then, it’s too late.

So there they are, and here we are. If you’re reading this and you fall into one (or more) of these categories, please know that nothing would please your pastor more than for you to allow him to minister to you, beneath the surface. This hasn’t been written out of frustration or to shame you. It’s just one pastor sharing to others about his desire to minister better to people like you, but being honest about what prevents it from being done as well as he would like.

But if you’re reading this and you’re a pastor or a church leader, I guess like me, you know how it feels to want to love and serve these people but feel helpless along the way. My encouragement would be to (and I need some of this encouragement too): pray more for them, persevere in ministering the gospel to them in the context of relationship, recruit and train others to look out for people like them and help you in your ministry towards them, and trust that the gospel can reach down deep enough to transform them.

What I Learnt From My Social Media Fast

So after 40 days… I’m back. Back on Instagram, back on Twitter, back on Foursquare, and of course, back on Facebook. Maybe it was a bit of a weak way of doing ‘Lent’. After all, giving up meat or coffee (in previous years) was way more difficult. But since this was the course of action I took, I thought I might as well do some reflecting on what staying away from social media for a month and a half taught me.

1. Power was more addictive than I thought

It’s strange to think about accessibility to social media (SM) as power, but it wasn’t until I went without that I realised just how much it had to do with power. SM gave me the power of knowing what people were up to almost all the time. When it was suddenly taken away, I realised how power-less I was compared with everyone else who was still connected. SM also gave me an extensive reach into lots of different networks: a power that could be used and harnessed for good when it comes to ministry. That too was now unavailable.

But as already noted, the power itself wasn’t the problem since it could be used for good. However the addictive lure of this power was something I was surprised with. I missed having this power, not because of the good it could achieve, but “just because”.

2. People’s approval was more addictive than I thought

Another luring and potentially addictive aspect of SM I didn’t think I was in such need of was the ego-massaging nature of SM. Put simply: I liked being able to write stuff on my Facebook wall or post a tweet or a photo and have people ‘like’ it, comment on it, and interact with it. I had no idea how much that mattered to me until I went without it.

3. I’d forgotten how important it was to focus on the ‘here and now’ and just enjoy it

I’m a notorious fidgeter and multitasker. I used to type quietly on the keyboard answering emails whilst on the phone with Karen. I’m the kind of guy who used social media wherever I was to endlessly check in, take photos, post comments etc. etc. Not being able to do that for 40 days was initially difficult, but after a while, it dawned on me how ‘nice’ it all was. It’s like when someone switches off that endless dripping tap that you’d almost forgotten was there because it became part of the background noise. But suddenly once it’s off, you begin to appreciate its absence. It’s amazing to think how SM has only been with us for a few short years and yet, I had forgotten how wonderful it is just to be where you are without caring about letting the rest of the world know where you are, who you’re with and what interesting food you’re eating.

4. My use of time became more intentional

This is a no-brainer. SM was an incredible time-waster. Seconds here, minutes there… it all adds up. Not having a default boredom-relief in SM helped me be far more intentional with my use of time. I read more, conversed more, played more music and listened to more music.

So in summary, a SM fast was a pretty good experiment. You don’t really know how much you needed something until you go without it. And it’s easy to deny you’re addicted to something when it’s always there.

So now that I’m back, I’m hoping that I can take some of what I learnt to temper my usage of SM. I know that’s easier said than done, so perhaps another time I’ll have to unplug and switch off again. Until then… see you on Facebook!

 

Are you an online coward?

It’s been interesting to follow the recent controversy dubbed ‘Yumi-Gate‘, where hosts of The Circle Yumi Stynes’ and George Negus’ comments on air about war hero, Corporal Ben Roberts-Smith, has met with a barrage of backlash. Extreme vitriole was levelled against Yumi Stynes in particular, and most of it online. Certainly what they said was silly and insensitive, but as this opinion piece in the SMH notes, enough is enough. Given that they had apologised personally to Corporal Smith and were forgiven by him, it’s equally amazing just how unrelenting the hate-campaign has been.

We certainly live in a different world now. Social media is an instant, constant, global, and permanent way of expressing one’s opinion and creating a ‘mob-mentality’. Witness the hate-campaign against former Masterchef contestant Joanne Zalm, or the backlash against Kyle Sandilands. Or a little closer to home, any time a Christian expresses a view in the public forum, scroll down to the comments section and you’ll see just how angry, irrational and excessive the comments are from those who disagree.

Why is it that Twitter, Facebook posts, comments and blogs open the proverbial Pandora’s Box when it comes to hate-speech? Quite simply it’s because we are cowards. It’s easy to shoot a verbal arrow at someone when you’re hiding behind an online wall of safety. Most of what’s said would not be said if it were a face-to-face confrontation or debate. Social media has given a whole bunch of cowards a voice, and the democratic nature of publishing nowadays has ensured that all opinions are treated equally, even if they are cowardly, irrational or hate-filled.

I’m not here to change all of that with this post. I just want to challenge God’s people to be different. It’s easy to ‘vent’ on Twitter and Facebook. It’s easy to post a thoughtless comment or a blog-post, knowing that people are going to read it, but not realising that we might hurt someone in the process. It’s far easier to post a comment or a tweet rather than give a personal and gentle rebuke, if rebuke is actually necessary.

This is a challenge for me as well as for you: don’t post anything critical against someone unless you have explored other means of giving them that feedback. If you really feel like someone on Facebook needs a piece of your mind, why not privately message them? I’ve received a few of these in the past and have been grateful to be able to consider them. Sometimes I’ve posted thoughtless words and have had people private message me about that and was then able to pull the messages off the wall.

Just because we’re not using our literal ‘tongues’ doesn’t mean that God cares any less about how poisonous our words can be (James 3:6). Let’s not be cowards and hide behind technological walls.

Thinking Theologically: Counselling and the Sufficiency of Christ

A friend of mine studying Christian counselling is working on an assignment that is asking them to come up with an integrative approach to psychology and counselling in light of this quote by John Macarthur Jr:

‘Any counsellor who desires to honour God and be effective must see the goal of his efforts as leading a person to the sufficiency of Christ. The view that man is capable of solving his own problems, or that people can help one another by ‘therapy’ or other means, denies the doctrine of human depravity and man’s need for God. It places the Spirit’s transforming power with impotent human wisdom’. John Macarthur Jr., “Our Sufficiency in Christ” (1991).

Late last night I spent about 15 mins typing out an ‘off the cuff’ way in which I might approach it. Since I’ve been trying to teach my youth leaders how to think theologically, and because I think there’s no greater discipline for anyone in Christian leadership than to be able to think theologically about any and every topic, I thought I’d post up my rambling response. The content isn’t very important (and may have lots of problems with it). However, it’s the method and the way of going about it that I would like for those who are seeking to think theologically to be able to apply. Here goes:

The integration part is what I struggle with as I have no idea how to tackle that side of things. I also can’t think of many readings/papers off the top of my head that would help. But this would be the direction I’d be thinking (very tentatively):

1. Explore the doctrine of human depravity. What is meant by ‘total depravity’ in the Reformed (i.e. Calvinistic) understanding? Total depravity means that humanity is thoroughly corrupted by the fall in every faculty and completely unable to help himself. That includes psychological, emotional, physical, mental fallenness as well. It doesn’t mean we’re as bad as we could be, but it does imply helplessness, particularly in relation to living the kind of life that God created us to live. This impacts: firstly, the client seeking help; secondly, the counsellor giving help; and, thirdly, the discipline of psychology (apart from Christ), which, being a product of human understanding, will never be sufficient in itself to truly help.

2. Explore the sufficiency of Christ in terms of ‘salvation’ in the fullest sense. Salvation is not just saving our souls. It is the total and eschatological renewal of our entire fallen humanity. Christ is the first fruits of that new creation and by his death and resurrection has secured for human beings the only access we have to that renewal and restoration. This is ultimately an eschatological reality. But because Christ has risen, the future is brought into the present by the gift of his Spirit, so that united to him, we begin to experience this renewal from the inside out. That certainly includes renewal of our minds and emotions.

3. Explore the doctrine of ‘common grace’. That is, there is still wisdom ‘in the world’ apart from Christ that is wisdom precisely because it reflects some of God’s residual and orderly goodness as discerned in the world, even in spite of the fall. So though human wisdom cannot save and bring ultimate renewal (for only Christ can), it can be used as a basis for some limited and temporary relief of human ailments (just take medicine for example). Total depravity does not mean that God leaves himself completely without witness in the world, nor does it mean that everything is as corrupt as it could be. By God’s grace, he still allows his image bearers to do good by seeking and implementing worldly wisdom in order to hold back the full effects of the fall. Secular psychology and other medical professions fall into that category.

4. Explore the tension that this creates for the counsellor (and this may be where the integration lies). On the one hand, your hope will need to be in the power of Christ to renew and regenerate sinful people. Only Christ can bring ultimate healing and restoration. But even for born again believers, that’s something which is only going to be completed in the new creation. In the meantime, counsellors need to apply God’s ‘common grace’ in all its forms as it is available to them, in order to help people ‘cope’ and receive limited forms of healing and help, in the prayer and hope that God would ultimately enter into their lives and work from within. A Christian counsellor will recognise the impotence sin renders their discipline in the ultimate sense, and yet understand that God has given them a task to do until Christ returns to do as much limited good as possible. A Christian counsellor knows that he or she cannot heal and restore in the way that only Christ by his Spirit can, and will always be praying that the person can experience a hope and healing that psychology and counselling alone will never bring. However, (especially) for the person who has the Spirit, counselling techniques and wisdom from the realm of psychology can definitely be used by God (and by his Spirit) to unlock areas that would otherwise remain locked within a broken person’s psyche. A Christian counsellor will always see his or her job as helpful but not necessary, as God can and does heal brokenness completely without psychology with a good dose of Spirit-led renewal and grace.

What other theological categories or avenues of thought would you add to this?

Jesus and M&Ms

(This post is adapted from an evangelistic sermon I preached at last week’s UTS mission, “MORE”)

I really love this little tucked-away story in Luke chapter 10:

Luke 10:38–42  As Jesus and his disciples were on their way, he came to a village where a woman named Martha opened her home to him. 39 She had a sister called Mary, who sat at the Lord’s feet listening to what he said. 40 But Martha was distracted by all the preparations that had to be made. She came to him and asked, “Lord, don’t you care that my sister has left me to do the work by myself? Tell her to help me!” 41 “Martha, Martha,” the Lord answered, “you are worried and upset about many things, 42 but only one thing is needed. Mary has chosen what is better, and it will not be taken away from her.”’

Every time I read this passage to someone and ask them who they identify with the most out of the two sisters, almost invariably they say, ‘Martha!’

It’s true isn’t it? I identify with Martha. I feel her frustration. After all, this is her home and she is playing host. Jesus has come to be their guest. She, like me, belongs to a ‘face culture’. Your welcome as a host is found in the kind of meal you prepare for your guest.

And like Martha, who hasn’t felt frustrated at the sibling or friend who isn’t pulling their weight? Or you may remember the group assignments at uni where you’re the only one who’s towing yours and everyone else’s workload. You remember those road trips where you’ve done all the planning and itinerary, and the rest of the group just has fun and complains when things go wrong.

Martha was feeling unappreciated, frustrated, angry… but who hasn’t been in her shoes?

And yet, it’s not Martha who’s commended by Jesus but Mary. Why?

Well, did you notice what’s behind Martha’s fretfulness? Jesus says ‘You are are worried and upset about many things.’ He’s hit the nail on the head. Her problem wasn’t with Mary, it wasn’t with playing host, it was within herself. It was her reasons for being so busy that were causing her to worry and grumble. And what was her reason for working so hard? Simple: she thought that in order to please Jesus she had to perform. She thought that in order to be a good follower, she had to work for his approval. And that’s exactly the problem.

Jesus turns the tables on Martha. He says to her, “Look, you don’t have to be worried about many things. These many things that you’re doing that you think would make me approve of you and be pleased with you are completely unnecessary. There’s only one thing that’s necessary, and it’s what Mary has chosen! Look at her!”

Do you see what Mary was doing? Mary, unlike Martha, understood that you didn’t have to perform to please Jesus. You didn’t have to work for his approval. She knew that when you’re Jesus’ follower, you’re already infinitely accepted, infinitely loved, infinitely approved. In fact, Jesus was on his way (v. 38) to the cross in order to secure that eternal acceptance, love and approval. Jesus doesn’t want us to serve him in order to please him. He came to serve us so that we would please him for all eternity.

Martha didn’t understand that, but Mary did. And because Mary did, she wasn’t there to work for Jesus, she was there to enjoy Jesus.

What about you? In your daily walk with Christ, is he the distant Lord you are afraid of letting down, obliged to serve, hoping to please? Or is he your intimate, your friend, your security and do you know that through his perfect sacrifice you are already completely accepted and utterly beloved?

Get this, and it will change your prayer life. Get this, and you will be closer to the kind of true worship the Father delights in.

Evangelism is Easy?!

A good friend of ours recently began investigating Jesus with her husband. In the last two weeks or so, she has genuinely come to understand grace and very visibly has begun relationship with God. I can’t describe how wonderful it is to see that change – all the lights going on, the joy and peace that’s tangibly descended into her very demeanor, and the way it’s already transformed the way she speaks and thinks.

Within days, she was already on the phone with her non-Christian family members back in China: telling one that she was praying for the drought there (and would you believe, the next week it rained!); telling the other about her new life in Jesus and talking openly about God to her. I have no doubt that she’s going to continue to do this. For her, sharing her faith hasn’t been something that we’ve had to teach her to do; she’s just gone ahead and done it.

It reminded me of a couple of incidents in the Gospel of John. Firstly in John 1:

John 1:35–46 The next day John was there again with two of his disciples. 36 When he saw Jesus passing by, he said, “Look, the Lamb of God!” 37 When the two disciples heard him say this, they followed Jesus. 38 Turning around, Jesus saw them following and asked, “What do you want?” They said, “Rabbi” (which means Teacher), “where are you staying?” 39 “Come,” he replied, “and you will see.” So they went and saw where he was staying, and spent that day with him. It was about the tenth hour. 40 Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, was one of the two who heard what John had said and who had followed Jesus. 41 The first thing Andrew did was to find his brother Simon and tell him, “We have found the Messiah” (that is, the Christ). 42 And he brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon son of John. You will be called Cephas” (which, when translated, is Peter ). 43 The next day Jesus decided to leave for Galilee. Finding Philip, he said to him, “Follow me.” 44 Philip, like Andrew and Peter, was from the town of Bethsaida. 45 Philip found Nathanael and told him, “We have found the one Moses wrote about in the Law, and about whom the prophets also  wrote—Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.” 46 “Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?” Nathanael asked. “Come and see,” said Philip.

The second in John 4:

John 4:28–41 Then, leaving her water jar, the woman went back to the town and said to the people, 29 “Come, see a man who told me everything I ever did. Could this be the Christ?” 30 They came out of the town and made their way toward him. [...] 39 Many of the Samaritans from that town believed in him because of the woman’s testimony, “He told me everything I ever did.” 40 So when the Samaritans came to him, they urged him to stay with them, and he stayed two days. 41 And because of his words many more became believers.

In both instances, telling people about Jesus was as natural as spreading hot gossip. These first disciples and the woman at the well were merely ‘gossipping’ about their meeting with Jesus. It was a natural, uncontainable excitement, as natural as ‘Hey, come and see for yourself!’

It was just like our friend who had recently been introduced to Christ.

And it got me thinking: why is evangelism and introducing people to Jesus so difficult for me in comparison?

Part of it, I think, is that I’ve turned evangelism into a task of trying to convince people of a set of beliefs rather than introducing people to someone amazing that I know. New Christians don’t see it as anything else except the latter and that’s why it comes so naturally.

The other part, I suspect, is because along the way I’ve just stopped getting excited about this news – this great news, this momentous news: this gospel. Now of course I preach the gospel, teach the gospel, try and live out the gospel by the power of God… and that’s all right and good, but when was the last time I was wow’ed by this gospel, amazed by this gospel, broken-down by this gospel, excited beyond belief by this gospel? I talk easily about Masterchef because it excites me and so I like to ‘gossip’ about it and chat about it with my friends. Where is that same sort of thing when it comes to the gospel?

The solution? I need to be challenged and rebuked by a baby Christian, and of course, challenged and rebuked by Biblical examples in John and in many other places in the New Testament. And more than that, I need to keep coming back again and again to Jesus as a person, the gospel as news, and just allow him and his news excite me once again.

Then, evangelism should be easy.

Why I (sort of, but not really) believe in TITHING

When it comes to tithing and Christians, I think (off the top of my head) there are three common views:

1. Tithing (giving 10%) applies as much to new covenant believers as it does to old covenant believers. Christians are to give one tenth of their (ideally gross) income as offering.
2. Tithing is an old covenant command that does not apply at all to new covenant believers. Christians are not commanded to tithe but to give generously.
3. Tithing is an old covenant command but still has ‘guideline’ relevance to new covenant believers. Christians can use 10% of their income as a minimum guideline and give generously on top of that.

What’s my view? Well, as the title suggests, I sort of believe in tithing, but not really. In essence, I don’t subscribe to any of the above views as I think the Biblical picture is more nuanced than any of them.

So this is what I’ve gleaned so far from the Bible’s teaching on tithing:

1. When you remember the context of the old covenant, you will see that the ‘tithes’ applied to Israel in terms of land and produce, not cash and money. Furthermore, it operated as a taxation system as well as social welfare.
2. It is a mistake to think that giving one tenth of income was a ‘flat absolute’ even in the old covenant. If you look at the Biblical material, you’ll find that at least two (some argue three) different ‘tithes’ existed: (i) The Levitical tithe, in order to support the Levites who served God full time and didn’t have their own land and ability to produce. Lev. 27:30. (ii) The Festival tithe, in order that the Israelites may celebrate in the presence of the LORD every year. This tithe was on top of the tenth that were given to the Levites. Deut. 14:22-27.
3. In addition to these two tithes, the Levites themselves were to ‘tithe’ as an offering to the LORD (Num. 18:21-32). And every third year, the ‘Festival’ tithe was to be stored in their own towns in order to bless the poor, the widows and the Levites who live among them (Deut. 14:28-29 – some would say that this is the ‘third tithe’, though my reading is that it’s a variation of the second tithe). I’m not sure how the numbers got crunched, but I’ve read that something more like 23.3% of their income was ‘tithed’, rather than 10%.
4. The tithe in the old covenant existed in the midst of general commands to generosity (Lev. 19:9-10) and the various kinds of cultic and freewill offerings (Lev. 1-7). In short, it seemed like the LORD was more interested in establishing an open-handed ‘giving culture’ than to give a hard-and-fast rule about how much to give.
5. There is no evidence that the poor, sojourners, widows, servants or those who didn’t own land were ever required to tithe in the Old Testament. The exception, as already mentioned, was Levites and priests who themselves received tithes but were also commanded to tithe back to God (Num. 18:21-32).
6. The tithe existed before the Mosaic Law as something of a cultural norm for giving. Thus Abraham ‘tithed’ when he gave to Melchizedek (Gen. 14:17-20), and Jacob ‘tithed’ as well (Gen. 28:22).
7. The New Testament only speaks about tithing eight times and never as a command in relation to giving. Five of the eight times tithing is mentioned is in Hebrews 7, and that had nothing to do with commands about generosity or giving; it had to do with Jesus as our High Priest in the order of Melchizedek. The other three times are in the gospels (Matt. 23:23; Luke 11:42; Luke 18:12). In those passages Jesus neither affirms or overturns tithing. He does, however, condemn the Pharisees who were known to tithe, but do so hypocritically. When it comes to giving in the New Testament, the encouragement is towards open-handed generosity (2 Cor. 8-9) and thoughtful and disciplined giving (1 Cor. 16:2).

So what does that mean for us?

1. It is a mistake to think that tithing exists either for old covenant or new covenant believers as an absolute standard for giving. So to ask the question: ‘Does the Bible require us to give 10% of our income?’  is the wrong question.
2. The ‘tithe’ for Christians can perhaps function as a guideline in multiple kinds of giving. It’s more in answer to the question: ‘When I give (and whenever I give), how much should I think about giving?’ For new covenant believers, the 10% is there as a way in which we can think about the various kinds of giving that we are encouraged to do. For Christians it’s not meant to be law but a principle of realising your desire to be generous because God has been generous to you.
3. You might be thinking, well, isn’t that just view (3) outlined at the beginning? i.e. the tithe is an old covenant command but a new covenant guideline. Well no, not exactly. How I differ from view (3) is that I reckon tithing is not a ‘flat’ guideline for how much to give of our total income but a ‘dynamic’ guideline for giving on lots and lots of occasions. Christians are commanded to be generous, particularly to the poor. We should be moved to give in lots of different ways: money, time, energy, resources; both in ‘planned’ giving and ‘spontaneous’ giving. Where tithing can be a guideline is when a Christian wants to give on any of these occasions and doesn’t know how much to give, 10% is a good start to consider giving.
4. The net result is that Christians should be giving in lots of different ways and be giving significant amounts of whatever they are receiving from God. The ‘tithe’ is just one way Christians can use to think about how much each ‘gift’ might equate to.
5. Therefore the wrong way to use ‘tithing’ is to look at your total income (gross or net), draw that 10% line, give, and keep the 90% for yourself. The right way is to give lots of ‘tithes’: yes 10% of your pay, but also 10% of your time, and 10% of the wedding presents and birthday gifts, and 10% of your Christmas bonuses, and indeed, just lots and lots of 10%s! But then, why be limited by 10%? The ‘spirit’ of the law is to give open-handedly and generously. 10% is merely a way to ensure that our giving is significant, costly, and reflects 100% of our lives which should be dedicated to God.

Want to read more? Take a look at http://library.generousgiving.org/page.asp?sec=8&page=589#519

Sunday Night Sins

I don’t know when it is that you are especially vulnerable to temptation and sin, but I reckon for pastors (at least for this pastor), Sunday night is probably the worst. And probably part of what makes it worst is that it’s the least expected on a Sunday night. After all, you’ve just been serving God and his people, teaching them the Word, praying with and for them. Shouldn’t you be on a spiritual high?

Well, it might surprise you, but it’s true: in my estimation, Sunday nights are often when the spiritual battles are the fiercest.

So “what sins?” you might be wondering. Well, here are my top four:

1. Pride – because you feel that things have gone well at church today.
2. Self-pity – because you feel that things have not gone well at church today.
3. Selfishness – because you feel you’ve served God all day and are entitled to kick back, relax, be served and not have to serve.
4. Lust – because you do a lot more undisciplined TV channel and internet surfing in order to ‘unwind’, and your tiredness makes you more susceptible to pornography.

So I guess to the pastors (or potential pastors) out there: watch out for Sunday nights. I reckon this applies to very involved lay people as well, who, like pastors, serve a long day from morning to evening at church. Don’t think the day is over until it’s over. Your teaching and preaching might have finished for the week, but the battles may be just beginning for your godliness.

And to all Christians out there: please don’t just pray for your pastors and church workers before Sundays and for Sundays. Pray for us especially when we hit the evenings, at the end of a long day serving God when our defenses are low and the devil prowls around like a devouring lion.

Do Not Be Afraid Little Flock

 

We’re doing a two-sermon series on money starting this week at church.

As I was looking through passages on money, wealth and possessions, I was struck by two passages that link its exhortation re: money with fear.

Hebrews 13:5–6 Keep your lives free from the love of money and be content with what you have, because God has said, “Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you.” So we say with confidence, “The Lord is my helper; I will not be afraid. What can man do to me?”

Luke 12:32–34 “Do not be afraid, little flock, for your Father has been pleased to give you the kingdom. Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will not be exhausted, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”

This reminds me that a sermon about money has to deal with ‘heart’ issues rather than just ‘hand’ issues. I’ve got to somehow allow the Word of God to expose our fears and the false securities and idols that lie beneath those fears. I’ve also got to take the wonderful assurances of the gospel in order that our fears would be addressed. Then when the hearts are stilled and at peace, the hands will open up in courageous generosity.