Rupert’s Blog

See previous posts:
Guidance in Community - Part 1, Part 2, Part 3.

Models of Guidance.

As I have been reflecting on guidance, both individual and in community (which I would argue is not nearly as different as we often make it to be), there are three pictures in the first few chapters of the Bible that can help us think about different ways in which God leads or guides people.

Noah (Gen 6):
God directed Noah specifically, with very precise instructions on how to build the ark. It was to be 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, 45 feet high, with 3 decks, a door in the side … and the ark was to be make of cypress wood, with pitch on the sides and top. No detail left out. Clear, concrete direction. The world was very corrupt, a flood was coming, crisis looming, and so God was very specific with Noah in how he could escape the coming devastation.

Abraham (Gen 12):
Abraham was to set out on a journey, that would take him from Haran to Canaan (his father has already travelled from Ur). He was to leave his country, his people and his father to go on this journey. Abraham got to Canaan, and they carried on travelling, knowing the God was promising the land. But a famine came, so they moved to Egypt.

In this story, we see a direction that God was calling Abraham to travel in, a promise that the land would be theirs, but no real specifics about how that would happen, when, or where exactly Abraham would go. When circumstances change (no food, always a good motivating factor!), Abraham responds and travels to Egypt where there was presumably food, but was actually away from the land that God was giving him.

Adam and Eve (Gen 2):
In the story in Genesis 1 & 2, we don’t read of some specific instructions of how to do something, or a clear direction for them to travel, but more general tasks that they were to do: care and tend the land; be fruitful and multiply. There were boundaries, the 4 rivers marked a very large area of the “garden”, but within that area they were free to roam where they like. All they had to do was to fulfill the mandate God had given them, stay within the boundaries … oh and not eat the fruit of a certain tree.

So here is the crunch:

I think in church, we often have a model of guidance that is based on the picture of Noah. We wait for a specific “word” from God, what it is God is wanting to build, expecting a very clear answer of what it will look like. If you are given the type of wood, the dimensions, the layout etc, we have a very clear idea of what it is we are building. God is an architect, and we do His bidding. When people talk about vision, I often think that this is what they are talking about. They want to know what it looks like. They want to see the artist mock up, or the computerised graphic, so they can see what it looks like when we are all done. Clearly God can and does guide like this, but is it really the norm? Or is more when in crisis or immaturity?

Some of us are moving towards a journey model of guidance, and I was suggesting this in post 3, reinforced by some brilliant comments in that post. There is a direction in which we are travelling; God is calling us towards something, a promise, a hope. But we don’t really now what that will look like, and there are often things on the way that cause us to change direction for a while, or respond differently. God is an explorer and we are travelling with Him.

But is the picture in Genesis 1 & 2 an aspiration for redeemed humanity? Before sin entered the world (and aren’t we being restored to the garden, and a bit more as well?), Adam and Eve walked with God. They knew what their task was, but they had real freedom to choose where, when and how they would accomplish that. There were boundaries, things that God has laid down, outside which they weren’t to go, and a tree they weren’t allowed to eat from. But within the garden, they could go and do pretty much what they liked. God would be with them. God is a Father, bringing us to maturity and setting us free.

Rather seeing the Noah type of guidance as the goal, perhaps we should aspire for the Garden of Eden model? Or is this unrealistic in this life? Is this just an excuse for doing what we want and asking God’s blessing on us? Or are there different types of guidance needed in different situations, or perhaps at different stages of maturity in Christ? As less mature Christians does God give more specific guidance, and more mature we are free to choose? Or is that just a cop out for being less dependent on God as we get older?

What do you think?

Amazing change website have amazingly changed! David McNeish, our guest blogger, had forwarded his article (that I have posted in the last two posts - part 1 and part 2) to them a couple of weeks ago, and yesterday he got an email from them saying they have ammended thier actions points to incorporate some of Dave’s suggestions. Here is what David said in this email to me:

As you might already know, a couple of months ago I got a bit miffed by the website that accompanies the film Amazing Grace - the story of Wilberforce and the abolition of slavery. The ten suggestions for action were, I felt, a bit limp. Thousands of folk will see the film and visit this website. What a missed opportunity! At the time I was preparing a sermon on consumerism and discovering for myself that slavery was, if anything, worse now than in Wilberforce’s day.

So I wrote a little pamphlet. Not something I’ve done before, but I thought - I’m no expert in this, but I know we could be doing so much more. So rather than moan I thought I’d do something about it. And having written it Iain Archibald [a friend] encouraged me in my tentative suggestion to send it to the production company behind the film.

So I did. Within an hour I had a response saying they were grateful for the feedback. Good public relations I thought, but I wasn’t holding my breath for anything to change.

Today I found out that they have in fact changed the “10 things you can do” as a direct result of my feedback. Specifically it now includes:

• encouraging sacrificial, sustained financial giving to help end slavery
• getting educated as a consumer, buying responsibly and communicating with corporations that you expect them to clean up their supply chain
• pray with perseverance until slavery is ended
• persevere - stay in this fight for the long haul

You can see the new list here.

I never imagined that one of my many rants at how things could be better would turn into tangible change! Slavery has not been abolished, but I am convinced that the changes help in a small way, to encourage people everywhere to do something more effective over the long term to eradicate this evil. One little person with limited understanding and a desire to be part of the solution…

Tags: Wilberforce, Amazing Change, Slavery

Following on from Part 1, which I posted yesterday, here are some suggestions that guest blogger, David McNeish, makes about how we can make for real, sustained change to the ongoing slavery that many find themselves due to poverty:

The following are some suggestions for change that are curiously absent from the website.
Pray - this was the silent powerhouse that fuelled abolition 200 years ago. Can we really say we don’t need it now?

Give sacrificially- not just a few pounds in response to an emotional film, but sustained ongoing giving. It is only the starting point though- charity is not enough. We need justice.

Reduce consumption - we need to stop demanding cheap goods, and start demanding total abolition of slavery in all its guises. See here for more information.

Campaign - there are so many things needing done – here are just three practical examples, with links for further information on each of them:

• Sustain pressure on the UK Govt to implement the Convention on Action Against Trafficking in Human Beings, which they recently signed. Whilst the signature is a success, it is meaningless with out action to prevent people trafficking. See Anti-Slavery Website.
• Buy fair trade chocolate - the relationship between consumption and slavery is very complex, but with chocolate it is clearer. Only fair trade chocolate guarantees that slaves were not involved in your treats. You can also write to the major chocolate companies asking them to tackle the problem. See here or Not for Sale Website.
• Call on Government to support a currency transaction tax – this would curb damaging international speculation on currencies as well as generate revenue to fund international development to tackle the root causes of poverty and slavery. See here. To find out your MP and contact them see They Work for You website.

Commit to the long haul

Wilberforce was not popular, he was told tackling the problem would cause economic ruin. That argument hasn’t changed! But justice can and will prevail. God did not specify geography or give time limits when he said:
“The Spirit of the Sovereign LORD is on me, because the LORD has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness for the prisoners”
Isaiah 61 v1

Please note there is an update on the changes made to the Amazing Change website. See here for more details.

Tags: Slavery, Wilberforce

Update: The Amazing Grace website has changed! See update for details.

Today the film Amazing Grace is released in the UK (we are thinking of going as my Mum is staying so we have a ready made babysitter!). This Sunday is Amazing Grace Sunday, where churches all around the UK remember the work ofWilliam Wilberforce. In light of this, a first for my blog, I have a guest blogger, David McNeish who writes:

Amazing Grace is a new film telling the powerful and compelling story of Wilberforce’s determined campaign to abolish slavery. On the 200th anniversary of abolition there is much to reflect on and learn from in that story.

It is therefore a great shame that the accompanying website and ‘campaign’, Amazing Change, whilst providing compelling case studies, says so little of any substance to help address the issue today.

Its ten points for action lack efficacy. Watching a film, discussing it with friends, starting a blog - these are easy things but are only of any worth if they lead to action that secures lasting change. Otherwise we end up discussing how to tithe herbs and neglect justice.

In terms of securing change the website offers signing a petition, to be presented to unspecified governments at undetermined times. It also suggests writing to your congressman - of limited value to the thousands of people outside the US who will watch the film. Or you can attend a youth rally and shout ‘freedom’. This is far more likely to result in losing your voice than in gaining justice for the millions in slavery.

Of greater concern is the misguided endorsement of partners helping to tackle slavery. This includes links to some English local authorities and the Royal Navy. Whatever work the Royal Navy may be doing in tackling slavery (atoning for past sins?), it is not clear from the weblink. Instead their site seeks to recruit young people in to the Armed Forces - a curious priority for an antislavery campaign.

It may be worth asking WWWT - What Would Wilberforce Think?

A further source of disappointment is the failure to connect our own actions in Western society with both slavery and slavery like conditions.

‘Poverty is the new slavery‘ Jim Wallis

>Poverty is the breeding ground of many evils, including slavery. The actions and inactions of Western nations in both causing and failing to alleviate extreme poverty were brought to prominence by the Make Poverty History campaign. Much remains to be done.

And on an individual level, we may not be a Cabinet Minister or a CEO of a multinational company, but our lifestyles compound the problem. Our demand for cheap products, for luxury and comfort necessitates others being enslaved to produce them - whether directly, as in the slavery which props up cocoa production in Côte d’Ivoire, or indirectly in the slavery like conditions resulting from, for example, the poverty caused by cash crops, deforestation or polluting factories. Here workers are effectively enslaved by low wages and terrible conditions to produce goods that no one needs, instead of building houses, schools and hospitals.

In the 19th century the people of Largo, a village near St Andrews, resolved to boycott sugar and rum. Why? They said they were “denying themselves the indulgence of delicacies that are prepared by cruel stripes”. They made the link between their actions and the slavery of others.

We need to change our lifestyle, ask others to do the same and ask those in power to use that power for the good of all of God’s children.

Part 2 tomorrow - Some suggestions for action.
[More on Guidance in Community next week]

David McNeish is part of Community Church Edinburgh, and works in the area of social policy. He has from childhood been passionate about justice and poverty, and when he preaches in church, these are topics that are never far from his lips!

Tags: Amazing Change, Jim Wallis, Slavery, Wilberforce

Update: The House of Lord’s this evening supported the Sexual Orientation Regulations, and they will now become law in the UK on 30th April. Read the BBC report here.

Various groups have been issuing their viewpoints in the last few days, for some in the hope of influencing the vote tonight:

Evangelical Alliance: urging people to protest, as does Anglican Mainstream. LCF had been urging thier mailing lists to lobby any members of the House of Lords known to any recipients.
Faithworks: press release in support of the SOR’s and they have produced a very helpful guide to some of the frequently asked questions about the SORs. Really worth reading in my opinion, but then I guess I would!
Malcolm Duncan (Faithworks): good discussion on his blog

Faithworks do have some good advice: read the SORs themselves, before rushing off to a hard and fast opinion.

Original Post on Friday 9th March:

Yesterday the government published the “sexual orientation regulations” that will apply in England, Scotland and Wales from 30th April this year. They are laws that are designed to make discrimination, based on people’s sexual orientation, illegal. So, for example, this law would enshrine the right of people with a homosexual orientation to be able to use “goods, facilities or services” in the same way that others can with a different sexual orientation. For example, access to public places, accommodation such as hotels or guest houses, services of a profession or trade etc. So no longer can a plumber turn down a job because the guy wanting the work done is gay.

There is much brouhaha about all this in the Christian world. So what are we to make of it?

1. In principle, I think this is a good thing. Jesus, it seems to me, is often on the side of the oppressed & marginalised in society. He stands up for women, lepers & non-Jews (all of whom were in different ways were outcasts), and gives them back their dignity and basic human rights. Whether it is people of a different religion, colour, race or sexual orientation, I think we as Christians should be standing against discrimination based on these things. I may not agree with all the beliefs or lifestyles choices of some of these groups, but they still deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. And please, in doing so, I am not endorsing their beliefs or actions … to think that, is to ignore much of the life of Jesus recorded in the gospels! I would expect no less from others, even if they didn’t agree with my Christian Faith.

2. Law is a necessary, but is a very blunt instrument for tackling such problems. Just because there is a law, won’t stop some of the bad attitudes to gay people that exist in the UK, US and I am sure other places. The Law might have an affect on changing behaviour (if people are worried enough about the consequences of breaking that law), but it never changes hearts and attitudes. And that is where the Christian Church ought to be at forefront of this debate, calling not just for change in behaviour towards discriminated people, but calling for a change in attitude (and we happen to know SOMEONE who is rather practiced at bringing deep and profound change in human hearts!). This is our ground…

3. There are some challenges for the Religious Organisations with these regulations, but they are not half as bad as some are making them out to be. I do think it is very sad that a compromise was not found for Catholic adoption agencies to continue adopting children and be exempt from accepting same sex couples (although I don’t think the Catholics helped themselves in the discussion - but that is the another subject all together!)

4. There is a real tension and debate to be had here where the rights of two different groups clash: here it the religious group and gay rights group. There is a danger that one could have more legitimacy in law for their rights, and I wonder if sometimes we Christians are seen as a bit of soft touch. However, listening to some Christian groups, it seems they are arguing their rights over the rights of gay people, and that just isn’t right either! We need to be standing up for their rights, and the rights of Christians to say they disagree.

5. The loudest voices in the Christian world (it seems to me) are from the extremes, and they are marginalising the majority of us, who, in the main, don’t think the a same sex relationship is God’s intention, but don’t want to be associated with the propaganda coming from such groups as the Lawyers Christian Fellowship (LCF) or to go down the route of the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement.

6. I admit I am not a lawyer. But I can read. There is a bandwagon that is easy to get on, but sometimes seems based on very little fact. There are serious number of straw man arguments flying around, and it annoys me and it does the Christian Faith no credit. At worst it is lying. At best it is blatant misinformation. I call it Christian Spin, and it should stop. So here goes at burning a few of these straw men …

• The LCF state in a recent press release that the government have published the laws “without making any significant concessions to protect the rights of Christians and others with deeply held religious beliefs.” Yet when I read the laws themselves, I see a whole section on religious organisations, that exempt them from the regulations, including hiring out a building (see 14(3)(d)) … or am I reading these laws wrong?

• It is often said the ministers or religion will be forced to bless same sex partnerships, but again this doesn’t seem to be true from Reg 14(4)(a) where it the law explicitly states that it is not unlawful for a minister to restrict the services they offer.

• In a further press release, the LCF quote a Joint Committee for Human Rights, that has been looking the regulations, where they state that a homosexual pupil should not be subjected to teaching that “that their sexual orientation is sinful or morally wrong“. The LCF then comments:

“The Committee are explicit in their view that no Christian schools should have the right to promote marriage over homosexual relationships or hold to a Christian ethos that sex is only right in a heterosexual monogamous marriage.”

Eh? Sorry? Did I miss something there? I don’t believe that someone’s sexual orientation is “morally wrong or sinful”, and would have no problems in teaching that in church, school or whereever. Otherwise, in my opinion, it would be exactly the same as believing that someone born blind was morally wrong or sinful, and we all know what Jesus had to say about that (see John 9 - and please don’t stretch that analogy too far: I am not saying that someone who has a homosexual orientation is the same as someone born blind). But teaching that a homosexual orientation is not wrong or sinful has NOTHING to do with kind of lifestyle that people live and what is God’s way of living, does it?

In fact the Joint Committee go on to say that this “would not prevent pupils from being taught as part of their religious education the fact that certain religions view homosexuality as sinful”. But, guess what, no mention of that in the LCF press release!

There are more moderate views being expressed. Faithworks (founded by Steve Chalke) come out in favour of the SOR’s, probably in a similar position to mine. The Evangelical Alliance, are somewhere in the middle.

What do you think? What is a Christian response to these regulations? What would Jesus be saying?

Also see two previous posts: Gay Rights (sexual orientation regulations): Part 1 and 2.

[Note: please, this is not a debate here about the rights or wrongs of homosexuality. It is also not an opportunity to have a pop at other individuals. It is OK to disagree with me, or with others who make comments, but should anyone cross these lines, I will remove your comments].

Tags: SORs, Sexual Orientation Regulations, Lawyers Christian Fellowship, Faithworks, Malcolm Duncan

Individual Guidance and Corporate Guidance

Last week, I have posted Part 1 & 2 on some lessons I have been learning about how we discern God’s leading in community. So today is part 3:

I sense God is leading; I move forward with a sense of trepidation, hope and faith. Have I got it right? Small mid course adjustment here, closed door there. God seems to guide me as I am moving. I would rather that He gives the whole map before I set out on a journey, but that just isn’t my experience of how He guides. The destination is unclear, but there does seem to be some direction that He is taking me, even if it does sometimes resemble a rather inebriated person walking home from the pub: there is a general direction of travel, it just isn’t always in a straight line!

And isn’t that most people’s experience of God’s guidance? There are some people who seem to have a “clear word from the Lord”. That’s great. But I also sometimes wonder if we don’t seem a lot more certain at the end of a particular faith journey, than while we are in the midst of it.

That would certainly be true of how I came to marry my wife, Pippa. Now I look back and it just seems so obvious that God was bringing us together. There was a clear sense of Him making it happen, speaking to us, signs and clues. But at the time I do remember it was a lot more uncertain! It was with some fear and trepidation that I asked her to marry me. Would she say yes? It is the right thing? The right time? I wanted to be together, but was this the Lord’s plan? It was faith operating in the midst of uncertainty and a little anxiety!

Abraham is also a good example here. In the New Testament, he is lauded as a man of faith, who obeyed God’s word. When we actually read the story, he tried to make it happen in his own strength, work it out his own way, he lied and hardly portrays a man of certainty and faith.

But isn’t that the point? When we are in the midst of our journey, faith is walking forward in the midst of our doubts, our uncertainties, our fears? We stumble and fall. We wander off. We try different paths. We try to work it out ourselves. But somehow in the midst of it, we are walking with God, and He gently keeps us going in the right direction. When we get to the destination of that part of our journey we can say that God was leading us & speaking to us. With the benefit of hindsight, we can see God’s hand at work more clearly. But lets not confuse that with certainty at the time.

And lets not confuse uncertainty with unbelief. Using this image of journey and walking forward, faith is walking forward however certain or uncertain we are. God is drawing us forward, and we trust Him, even though we don’t know what the journey will bring to us. Unbelief is when we refuse to move forward. We go back or stand still. That’s unbelief and that’s wrong.

That’s my experience of God’s guidance. And I think it is most people’s experience of God’s guidance. So here’s my point:

Why should it be any different when it comes to God guiding a community? Is it that church should be one place of certainty, in the midst of a world of uncertainty? Do we want people to be sure, before we risk? Or can we risk together, to move forward sensing God is compelling us not to stand still? To be confident in Him, that He will lead us on the journey even though we aren’t certain where we end up together?

So what are your experiences of God guiding you? And what are your expectations of how that works in community? If they are different, why is that?

Yesterday, I was preaching in church again, and in light of discussions in a previous post and comments, here is a summary, to allow comments, thoughts or experiences from anyone, whether you were there or not. It is part of our money series we have been doing this year. An MP3 should be available here by Wednesday if you fancy having a listen.

In our protestant tradition, poverty is not something that we have really thought about much, except to say it is bad and should be avoided at all costs (and occasionally to say that it is obviously a sign of not following God, having faith, or being blessed in some way!). But in other traditions, a vow of poverty or making poverty a virtue, has been a strong emphasis (eg. in the ascetic movement, Monastic movement, and in the Catholic Church. Mother Theresa is a classic example of someone who took a vow of poverty, to give herself to serving the poor).

There is much in the Bible that would advocate this course of action: “sell your possessions and give to the poor” say Jesus (Lk 12:33. See also: Lk 14:33; Mt 6:19; Mt 19:21). It is easy to “reinterpret” those verses, to make them something that doesn’t apply to us today, but before we do, lets consider some of the warning the Bible gives us about the dangers of lusting after or having riches and wealth:

• We can fall into temptation, ruin and destruction (1 Tim 6:9)
• We can wander from faith (1 Tim 6:10)
• We can become arrogant and not trust God (1 Tim 6:17)
• It is hard to enter in to the Kingdom (the fullness of live now, rather than heaven) (Mt 19:23)
• We can become unfruitful (Mt 13:22)

These are serious warnings, and as I was writing the sermon and speaking I was feeling challenged and uncomfortable about my riches and comfortable lifestyle. This was no finger wagging time, but was sobering about what the Bible seems to be saying about poverty.

But there is also stuff in the Bible about wealth and prosperity. It is harder to find in the NT, but there are some seriously rich people in the Bible (Abraham, David, Solomon, Zacchaeus) for example. There is also verses about prosperity as a blessing for those who walk with God and are obedient (eg. Dt 30).

So how do we reconcile these two streams of teaching and understanding? Well, perhaps neither poverty nor riches is right or wrong, but it is more about our attitude to money that is most important. God might call some to poverty, some to riches (which is perhaps the harder journey!), or there may be different seasons in our lives where we experience both. So what would Jesus say is the most important attribute to have concerning money?

I suggested that there was a ladder to climb. At the bottom of the ladder, when we are first grappling with our attitude to money in a society that is continually lusting for more, is contentment. This word is mentioned 7 times in the NT, and 6 of them are about money / possessions (eg. Phil 4:11-12, where Paul says he has learned the secret of being content in any situation, whether has loads, or nothing!).

The second rung of the ladder is generosity. I suggested that generosity is not the same as giving. Giving is good, but it becomes generosity when it costs. For example the Macedonian churches in 2 Corinthians gave generously out of there extreme poverty (2 Cor 8:2).

But the thing that Jesus seems to value more than anything else is being faithful or trustworthy (eg. Mt 25:21 & Lk 16:10-12), which we learn through contentment and generosity. This is when He trust us with Kingdom resources, knowing that we will use them wisely. This is when God can trust us with more money (tricky issue as we can’t give to get, otherwise we haven’t really learned the lesson of contentment!), and trust us with “true riches” … riches of the Kingdom: influence, power, fruitfulness etc.

Mother Theresa followed the path of poverty to come to this place of being truthworthy, and she was then trusted with Kingdom riches of influence and power. God could trust her, knowing that she wouldn’t abuse those riches, but use them for the Kingdom, as she had proved trustworthy with money.

What do you think? What are you experiences of poverty or wealth, and what did you learn? Does it surprise you to learn that Jesus talks more about faithful or trustworthy with money than anything else? Or perhaps you don’t agree?

Tags: Money, Poverty, Wealth, Mother Theresa

The Mind of Christ

Yesterday I posted Part 1 … how I think we often have a Old Testament model for guidance and leadership. Now for Part 2:

In 1 Cor 2:16, Paul says that “

I love the way that is translated in the Living Bible:

But, strange as it seems, we Christians actually do have within us a portion of the very thoughts and mind of Christ.

And this translation forces us to recognise something: it is plural. We Christians. I don’t have some of the thoughts of Christ, but together we do! So when is comes to guidance in a Christian community, the leaders don’t have the mind of Christ, nor the prophets, nor the intercessors, nor the sceptics, nor the finance team or any other group! But together we do, and we need to listen to everyone to discern the leading of the Spirit.

What then is the leaders role? Here are some thoughts:

1. Leaders creates a safe context for people to express what they are seeing and hearing, in conversation and prayer.

2. Leaders help people to recognise they don’t see it all, but they see part that makes up the whole.

3. Leaders help create healthy dialogue between people that see things differently so we can learn from each other, and see more of the whole.
4. Leaders draw together the different strands that emerge from the conversation, prayer and prophetic.

5. Leaders communicate to the community what is emerging from the talking and prayer.

This is not a model of leadership that we find often in churches, but one that I think is more consistent with the New Testament. It takes guts & courage, a whole different set of skills, and a HUGE faith in God, that He is leading us all together, not just a few individuals or one person (the Pastor!).

It engages people, and begins to create ownership and maturity. It breeds humility and generosity in a community, and we begin to see the church working as a body, with everyone having their contribution. It allows for thinking and understanding to develop and grow. So as we move forward, I believe, we have more of the thoughts of Christ towards us.

What do you think? Have you experienced this kind of guidance working at all?

Last Sunday, after 2 years of consultation, dialogue, prayer and dreaming, we announced that we were moving forward to the next stage (fundraising) for a building renovation on our church building. Some folk in the church thought we should have done it ages ago - others still remain unconvinced.

We have a building in a great location, in town, good roads and buses, near students, parking OK (at weekends and evenings anyway!), on a main street. We are noticeable and central. But if we owned the plot of land with no building, the current building isn’t what we would build now. It is an old church building, about 160 years old, that was built primarily at a preaching centre (although there was a school built at the back too): big auditorium, gallery, and all rather centred around a large central gathering of the church.

Now we are looking for other rooms, a space that reflect the kind of church we are becoming. A building that helps us engage with the wider community. A building that enables some of the missional projects that we are planning.

This process has got me thinking about how we discern the will of God as a community? There is more to say in some subsequent posts, but here is one thought to start off:

Often in church (it seems to me) that we model guidance from an Old Testament model of God’s leading Israel. There God called specific individuals (eg. Moses) who lead the nation. They were the ones who went to God, got the vision and direction for the nation, told the people what God was saying, and off they all went (all be it, with some grumbling!).

In many churches, it seems this model of guidance predominates. We want the leaders to be connected to God, get the vision and direction and tell the church what to do. Now while there is a little truth in this, there are a couple (at least) significant differences between this Old Testament model of guidance (and leadership) and how it should operate in church.

1. After Exod 19, God doesn’t speak to the nation of Israel any more. He calls specific individuals (leaders and prophets) and speaks to them on behalf of the nation. They become the mouthpiece for God, and the people had no direct access to God themselves. This has obviously changed in the New Testament, where all can hear the voice of God.

2. The nature of leadership in church is significantly different to the leadership of a nation. One of main passages that speak of leadership in the NT is Eph 4, where the role of leaders is not to do the stuff, but to train / equip others to do the stuff. No longer is ministry the domain of a few individuals, but for all (or at least should be). So a leaders role is to help discern the gifts in individuals and help them into functioning in those gifts. I think this concept has been talked about, but very rarely put into practice.

So now, we have a church community where every individual can hear God for themselves, and have a contribution. That I think changed the way we discern the will of God in the church, from the way the nation of Israel found guidance in the OT.

I think this OT model of guidance in community is much easier … easier for leaders who don’t have to engage the community together in discerning the will of God, and easier for the “congregation” as they can leave it up to the leaders. Trouble I don’t think the results are that good (it doesn’t engage and empower people for starters), and I don’t think it is a NT practice.

What do you think?

Next Posts: Part 2, Part 3, Part 4.

I like to think that I am the kind of person that believes others, that thinks the best of them. Very noble you might say. Or you could say gullible. I hate it when it happens (and it does!): when I have believed someone hook, line and sinker, and then find that I have been led up the garden path (do you like my mixed metaphors?).

So when it comes to global warming, or “human induced climate change” as I am told it is now called, I am believer! I was convinced last year, watching a program by David Attenborough, hugely respected and well known naturalist and TV presenter. If David is convinced, so am I. I believe. We all believe. Er, excuse me, I don’t!

So, says Eric, in the comments of a previous post, New Earth and Carbon Emissions: he is not a believer. He cites books and points us in the direction of an article about a leading French scientist, who has changed his mind on climate change, or to be more accurate, if humans are causing climate change. And apparently Erik and this Frenchman are not alone.

Tonight, on Channel 4 at 9pm (in the UK) there is program called the Great Global Warming Swindle, questioning the consensus on global warming being induced by the CO2 and human activity. The logic goes (apparently) it is not the increase in CO2 that is producing Global Warming, but Global Warming that increases the levels of CO2. Apparently there are some leading scientists who are promoting this view on the program.

In the US there seems much more debate about the environmental issue than in the UK. James Dobson and others, has joined Jerry Falwell, in denying the human cause of climate change in a recent open letter to the National Association of Evangelicals. Jim Wallis and Brian McLaren join in the riposte against the religious right. In the UK, there really doesn’t seem to be any loud dissenting voices in the Christian World. All are believers, so it seems.

I too am a believer. But who knows what I will believe after the program tonight! What about you? Do you believe? And if you watch the program, what did you make of it?

Tags: Jerry Falwell, Environment, Jim Wallis, Brian McLaren, Great Global Warming Swindle