Tuesday 20 September 2011

Loving with Robotic Arms

At least in the West, it seems like we have been swamped by bureaucracy. In almost every field of life we now layer upon layer upon layer of management, bureaucracy and system. We are forever having meetings and preparing programs and this now gazumps all meaningful activity! While I reluctantly accept that this is my lot at work, I fear that this disease is now also overtaking the church.

At the church I attend we are involved with a child sponsorship program with a church community in Indonesia. I think this is a great thing – the church is supporting brothers and sisters who are in need by sharing from their abundant financial resources.

The program is a partnership from the church, through a special 'social justice' committee, through the aid organisation 'Compassion', through the local church in Indonesia and finally to children and their families in the city in Indonesia. The program has received moderately good support from the church (maybe 50 sponsorships from approximately 300 families), but it is not what you would call an overwhelming concern, and it seems a bit like we have done our bit by sending our $40 per month and an occasional letter. We love these children in Indonesia, but through sanitising layers of management – with 'robotic arms' as it were.

However, recently a team of about 8 people went from the church and, amongst other things, spent time with their sponsor children. This appeared to be a life-changing experience, particularly for those from the church who went to Indonesia. They were able to love the children face-to-face, with real arms, person to person. The beauty of this was when the layers of bureaucracy were by-passed (although the trip was organised, sanctioned and overseen by the organisations) the love and fragrance of God was evident.

So why is it that the church is becoming increasingly concerned with structures, programs, institutions and systems - trying to organise love for those in need. Why is it we try and set up nice, clean, sanitised forms of compassion and love and we accept loving with robotic arms, when it is so unsatisfying, so unbiblical, so unlike Jesus. Churches are now setting up programs and committees to organise solutions to a range of issues and concerns they want to address, and in this way church members can do their good works without getting their hands dirty – they do their duty to love 'at a distance'. Programs are not so much an 'outreach', but more than an attempt to 'in-drag'.

I think what God had in mind for the church was for it to meet those in need, and work with them, side-by-side and face-to-face. God doesn't need our money, He asks for us as people, and He wants us to do His work and be His ambassadors, and this cannot be done through bureaucracy. It requires believers to be equipped through the church to then go into the world (that is, beyond the safe and sanitised community and club of the local church) and love and live as Jesus did. The amazing thing is, if we can do this, we will actually be engaged in real worship, and we will know God's blessing in more amazing ways than we will ever know in the church buildings.

So, next time you think about the poor and the needy, try and find a way to actually work with the community (i.e., the people outside the church club). Don't make another committee or program, don't send people to a Christian conference on social justice – equip your people and go out and love with open hearts and dirty hands. It might be messy, but it is what Jesus would do, and the blessings will be immense.

Why I Think Speaking in Tongues is not Biblical

I have been a Christian long enough to see the 'speaking in tongues' idea sweep through the church with the Pentecostal movement and now for many be seen as an acceptable practice for Christians. While I agree that it is somewhat confusing to adequately address all the verses that seem to focus on this topic as there appears to be some contradiction, I take a broader perspective and consider how the practice fits with Biblical teaching in general and what we know about God and the church. Upfront, I DO NOT think that the practice of a 'special prayer language' is Biblical. However, I do see that there may be times when someone is gifted with the capacity to speak in another tongue – a real language, in order to advance the gospel; i.e., in an evangelistic situation. This is consistent with the coming of the Spirit on the Day of Pentecost when the apostles spoke in new languages, and the ethnically diverse crowd all heard the gospel message IN THEIR OWN TONGUE (i.e., known languages), and many were saved. This is what I believe the gift of 'tongues' is – not a gibberish so-called prayer language. Below I outline my reasons for this position:

  1. Languages have a structure, form, syntax, etc. You know when you hear a language, even if you do not understand it. However, 'tongues' as a prayer language lacks the characteristics of a language. Now I have to admit that I do not associate with people who engage in this practice (are you surprised), but I have heard it quite a few times in both church-type events and on television, and it seems to me to primarily be a repetitive sort of noise with no form, structure, or complexity of sounds. As such, it is NOT a language, and because the words 'tongue' and 'language' are the same, it is NOT a tongue.
  2. Given the point above, then it is not able to be interpreted, because only a language can be interpreted. Also, if the so called tongue that is 'uncomplex' and is made up of a few simple noises that are repeated, then the translation or interpretation should also be a few simple words that repeated mantra-style.
  3. From all the explanations I have had of 'tongues as a prayer language', it seems that God is just talking to himself, using the prayers vocal chords but by-passing their brain. So God says stuff to himself through a vessel that has no idea what they are saying. This seems quite bizarre to me and non-sensical. Now I do not want to limit God, but I don't think He does things just for a special trick or as a purposeless activity. I see no other such activity in what I read and know of God from the Bible.
  4. If you look at the spiritual gifts, they are clearly given to the church, through individuals. They are not for the edification of the individual, they are ALL for the building up of the church. Again, 'tongues as some sort of prayer language' is different and stands apart from the overall Biblical teaching on spiritual gifts. If it is so different, then it seems to me that this interpretation of 'the gift of tongues' is wrong.
  5. Also, if you look at the spiritual gifts, all believers, to a greater or lesser extent, have them all. But again, the view of 'tongues as a prayer language' does not fit.
  6. Given the clear interpretation of the gift of 'tongues' in most Biblical passages is as outlined in the opening paragraph (i.e., a known language for evangelistic purposes), it seems likely that this is what the gift actually is. There are not 2 different forms of 'speaking in tongues', so the prayer language version must be incorrect.
  7. A practice much like the 'ecstatic utterances' version of 'speaking in tongues' is not a new phenomenon and it recent history it did not begin with the church. It has been commonly practiced in various pagan and occultist ceremonies as a sort of mantra and/or mind altering activity. I am no expert here, but it seems that in all these cases (including the so-called church version) it is primarily a psychological tool to make the speaker feel like they are closer to God, even though in reality it is nothing more that mindless gibberish.
  8. While this is really more personal than a sound argument, but have yet to meet a Christian that 'has the fragrance of Christ' and is widely respected and Godly that engages in the 'ecstatic version of speaking in tongues'. I readily admit that there may be many Godly believers who may be involved in this erroneous practice; just I haven't met them yet!

I could continue, but perhaps this post is now long enough. While the practice of 'tongues as a special prayer language' is probably in many respects a harmless, if somewhat frivolous and silly activity, my main concern is that it misrepresents the nature and character of God. It makes Him look foolish, and of course there is no hint of foolishness in God. God is wise, purposeful, and passionately concerned with His church – my desire is that we, as the church, reflect His nature and His character.