It All Boils Down to Relationships

I have said for years that everything we do boils down to relationships. Success in business, success in ministry, success in family and success in life in general all come down to successful relationships.

As many of you know, I was recently laid off from a job I had for 20 years. A job, if I might say, I was quite successful at not because of my great knowledge or abilities, but because of my relationships. In my job I had direct supervision and responsibility for a team that was entrusted with the safety of a university campus. Now many of us have images of people in security, safety, law enforcement, etc. People who are tied to the rules. People who are rigid and unwilling to bend. Trust me, I have known and worked with some of them, but as a person who served in this capacity for so many years I assure you that this will only get you so far. In his blog "Relationships - The Key to Successful Leadership" Doug Dickerson refers to Alan Loy McGinnis' book "Brining out the Best in People."

“In the simplest terms, the people who like people and who believe that those they lead have the best intentions will get the best from them. On the other hand, the police-type leader, who is constantly on the watch for everyone’s worst side, will find that people get defensive and self-protective and that the doors to their inner possibilities quickly close.”

Policies and rules have a place, and without them productivity of any sort will fall apart. They may at times serve as the starting point so that people know what is expected. And on those unfortunate occasions when necessary to call people to account they may serve as an ending point. But we do not live and work at the beginning or the end. We work and live in the in-between. It is here that relationships develop and grow.

It is through relationships that people get to know each other personally. It is through relationships that people become vulnerable to each other and learn that they can trust each other. It is through relationships that we develop a vested interest in each other's welfare. It is through relationships that people become committed to each other.

Taken to its ultimate level I am reminded of the quote, "IF THEY FEAR YOU, THEY WILL ONLY FIGHT FOR YOU, BUT IF THEY LOVE YOU, THEY WILL DIE FOR YOU!" (I am having trouble placing the quote.) Do those who work for us love us? Do those we work with love us? Do those we work for love us? More importantly, do we love them?

We were never meant to live and work alone, isolated from others. God intended from the very beginning that we live in relationships.

"Then the LORD said, 'It is not good for the man to be alone, I will make him a helper suitable to him.'" Genesis 2:18

Jesus himself did not lead by giving orders and rules, but by living in relationships. Those he chose to minister with him were not servants, but friends.

". . . I have called you friends, for everything I have learned from my Father I have made known to you." John 15:15

We will not always be perfect. We will not always live up to the standards that have been set. It is only when we have a relationship that we will be able to forgive these lapses.

"Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins." 1 Peter 4:8

It all boils down to relationships. This is where we define success. Worldly success can be found apart from relationships, but it is meaningless. But relationships allow us to be successful even if we are a failure in the world's eyes. I am reminded of the quote found at the end of the movie "It's A Wonderful Life." "No Man is a Failure who has friends."

We need to reach out to others, share with others and love others to truly know success. Success in business, ministry, family and life is found in our relationships.

Historic Evangelicalism: Essential 1 - Sola Scriptura and the Perspicuity of Scripture

I realize that I have been a bit delayed in getting this written and published. Hopefully, I will not take as long on the remaining points.
__________

The first essential of Historic Evangelicalism is Sola Scripture, or scripture alone. So what exactly does this mean? What is Sola Scriptura and why is it so important to the historic definition of evangelicalism?

Well let’s start with the obvious. The word evangelical is a modern english derivation of the greek word euangelion. The word euangelion is traditionally translated with the word gospel and literally it translates good news. In short, the gospel or good news is the foundation of evangelicalism. People cannot rightfully claim to be evangelical if they are unwilling to embrace the importance of the gospel message.

Now one may well argue, “so we embrace the gospel, does this mean that we need to hold all of scripture to such a high level?” The answer is yes. From Genesis to Revelation, from the Law to the Cross, the whole purpose of scripture is to point to the good news, Christ. Therefore, if one is going to claim to be an evangelical, thereby embracing the importance of the gospel, they have no choice but to embrace all of scripture. Scripture is, in fact, at the very foundation of evangelicalism.

This importance can be traced back 500 years to the very beginning of the reformation. From Martin Luther, to the Puritan, to the Pietist, to the holiness movement, to fundamentalist, one key truth continues to ring through. Scripture alone is our final source of authority and court of appeal for all matters of doctrine and practice. All that we do, all that we believe must be founded in the revelation given in God’s holy word.

"And we also thank God continually because, when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but as it actually is, the word of God, which is at work in you who believe." 1 Thessalonians 2:13

Of course, Luther’s initial statement was a reaction to a church where the final court of appeal appeared to be man and where the words of men were held on par with, if not superior to, the role of scripture. It was a world when the educated religious leaders held the power and the masses knew only what they were fed.

This leads to the sub-point of the perspicuity of scripture that I have included as part of the first essential of historic evangelicalism. The perspicuity of scripture simply put, states that people without special knowledge or insight can understand scripture. That is to say, scripture is written to be understood. This is a key part of what Luther was reacting to when he called for Sola Scriptura. Scripture needs to be in the hands of the people and not controlled by an elite few. Now understand, I am not saying that advanced education and study of scripture is not needed. There is much to be gained by intensive study. I am simply saying that God did not hide the message so it could not be found without special insight.

The law of the LORD is perfect, reviving the soul; the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple; the precepts of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes; the fear of the LORD is clean, enduring forever; the rules of the LORD are true, and righteous altogether." Psalm 19:7-9

So the first essential of historic evangelicalism is Sola Scriptura. Unfortunately, there are two major challenges to Sola Scriptura and the perspicuity of scripture often found in contemporary evangelicalism. Those are “Solo Scriptura” and the role of tradition.

Contemporary evangelicalism, especially in America, has been influenced by the rationalism of a secular enlightment and rugged democratic individualism. A “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” Christianity which is as individual as the person who believes it.

The term “Solo Scriptura” (Coined by Douglas Jones) points to a belief that each person can interpret scripture as it applies to their unique situation. That is to say, scripture finds it’s meaning based on its interpretation. We see that people have taken the concept of the perspicuity of scripture and run amok. Their mistake is that scriptures ability to be understood does not mean that different people can understand it differently. Its meaning does and must remains constant, even when read by different people.

Those who call themselves evangelical must be careful not to read their own opinions and feelings into scripture. In The Shape of Sola Scriptura Keith A. Mathison writes:

“A fundamental and self-evident truth that seems to be unconsciously overlooked by proponents of the modern Evangelical version of Solo Scriptura is that no one is infallible in his interpretation of Scripture. Each of us comes to the Scripture with different presuppositions, blind spots, ignorance of important facts, and, most importantly, sinfulness. Because of this we each read things into Scripture that are not there and miss things in Scripture that are there.”

Mathison presents the clear outcome of this action.

"If a proponent of solo Scriptura is honest, he recognizes that it is not the infallible Scripture to which he ultimately appeals. His appeal is always to his own fallible interpretation of that Scripture."

The danger cannot be denied. To place the interpretation of scripture in a vacuum is to leave man at the mercy of his own sinful nature.

"All a man's ways seem right to him, but the LORD weighs the heart." Proverbs 21:2

This brings us to the second challenge to the primacy of scripture found in contemporary evangelicalism, the role of tradition. When we take a look at contemporary evangelicalism, tradition almost seems antithetical. In a desire to keep worship fresh and exciting, anything that hints at tradition is viewed as old and stagnant. Unfortunately, contemporary evangelicalism has thrown the proverbial baby out with the bath water. That is to say, that not only have they removed the traditional music and form, but have stepped away from the creeds and writings of the church. By doing this, however, they have failed to take advantage of the insights, experience and teachings of those who have come before. They are trying to live their Christianity in a vacuum. This is exemplified in this statement by Ed Stevens.

“We must not take the creeds any more seriously than we do the writings and opinions of men like Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, the Westminster Assembly, Campbell, Rushdoony, or C.S. Lewis.”

While Scripture alone is our final source of authority and court of appeal for all matters of doctrine and practice, church tradition and history serves as a lens that helps us to focus.

“Therefore, since we have so great a cloud of witnesses surrounding us, let us also lay aside every encumbrance, and the sin which so easily entangles us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us.” Hebrews 12:1

In a final note, this is not a new problem for the church today. In a letter from Martin Luther to Ulrich Zwingli, he writes”

"If the world lasts, it will be necessary, on account of the differing interpretations of Scripture which now exist, that to preserve the unity of faith, we should receive the [Catholic] councils and decrees and fly to them for refuge."

Those who call themselves evangelical must embrace the role of scripture. They must stand solidly on scripture as their authority in faith and practice. And they must be cautious of trying to live in a vacuum, ignorant of all that has come before.

Laughter Is The Best Medicine?

So I am home from Church today sick. Very frustrating in and of itself. So what do I do? I turn on the TV and flip through the channels to learn, there is nothing on Sunday Morning. So I end up landing on Lakewood Church with Joel Osteen. I know what many of your are thinking already, that apparently my illness has made me delusional. But it was like watching a car crash. I just could not turn away.

So he was talking about laughter, yes an entire half hour Sunday morning message on laughter. So I said, I need to see where he is going with this. First he began talking about how laughter is the key to health. If we laughed we would find that we could sleep better, we would find that we would have less pain and we would find that we would get sick less. (Apparently I have not been laughing enough. You all know me, I am so terminally miserable; ). )

He goes on from here to say that if we find ourselves laughing more, that we would build our relationships. According to him laughing is one of the two foundations of a strong marriage, coupled with respect. (Unfortunately on occasion the two seem to stand in stark contrast. There are things I would love to laugh at that I am sure my wife would not find amusing.)

I watched for about 20 minutes. Now it is possible that he mentioned it while I was not watching, but not once did I hear him refer to the Bible. What did he refer to? He refer to studies to support his point. He further referred to the fact that we needed to have joy in our lives and if we are denying ourselves laughter, we are missing the joy God intended us to have in our lives.

So here I find my dilemma. I do not argue that laughter is important and simply put, enjoyable. A person who never expresses joy or happiness is heading down a dark road leading to misery and worse. But it is his apparent, proposition that by not laughing we are missing the joy. Perhaps I read to much into it, but what I was hearing was that that joy was dependent upon our laughter. He told his congregation to daily find two or three things to really laugh heartily at, as if we could bring this joy into our own lives.

How many people saw this and missed the true source of joy. Probably most, as he never said. The Bible is clear, "the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law." Galations 5:22 - 23. The fruit of the spirit. It is from God alone that we find our true joy. It is not simply laughter. If this was the case, then we can close the churches and simply open more comedy clubs. Through this, the world will know joy. But laughter is not the answer. The angel declared "I bring you good news of great joy which will be for all the people" in Luke 2:10. And what was the source of that joy "today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord." In addition Nehemiah 8:10 declares, "Do not grieve, for the joy of the LORD is your strength."

The source of our joy is not laughter. The source of our joy is not from within. The source of our joy is God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. Laughter should simply be a expression of a joy God has placed in us, and not the source of joy.

Does that mean that laughter is not to be sought after? Certainly not. I enjoy to laugh. I have watched the "infomercial" on the Worship Network for Tim Hawkins "Full Range Of Motion" video numerous times, and I find it just as funny each time. (Yes I realize that this is supposed to get me to by the video, but I'm cheap.) Some have even said that I have a very funny streak, though it may be a bit dry for some to catch.

Further, there are clear studies that do seem to point to the "healing power of laughter." But are we using the laughter as a band-aid for what is really wrong or is it is a sign of the healing that God is working within us? Is it a sign of God's joy.

What we do need to do is watch for dangers. First, what are we laughing at. There are things that will make us laugh that shouldn't. The Bible clearly warns us that "there must be no filthiness and silly talk, or coarse jesting, which are not fitting." Ephesians 5:4. Yes I know some people who greatly pull this verse out of context and always keep a somber mood saying things like, "we should never have fun with anything dealing with God." (This includes songs like "I am a C, I am a C-H. Watch out for those children's Sunday School teachers corrupting the future generations.) This surely is not what Paul is saying. Rather we must not miss the final phrase "which are not fitting." There are some context where any jesting would be inappropriate and there is some jesting which is never appropriate, but this is not a prohibition to expressing the joy that God has placed in us through laughter.

Second, there was a movement within the charismatic movement in the past, and still active in some places called "Holy Laughter." The position is that God will simply strike people with such joy that they simply can not control the laughter and must burst out and role, even rolling on the floor. While I do argue that the joy we experience come from God and that laughter can be an expression of this joy, there is no biblical support for the idea of an entire movement of God, simply resulting in people laughing. Paul is very clear in 1 Corinthians 14 when he presents that while expressions of the spirit are valid within worship, there must be orderliness to it and it must be edifying to the body.

I am not going to pass judgement on Joel Osteen of Lakewood Church. I have read their doctrinal statement and it seems sound. And as I do not personnally know Mr. Osteen it would be inappropriate. But I do challenge his words. While laughter is important, it is joy that is crucial and this joy can only be found in a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. It is this joy we share with other who know Jesus "If you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any fellowship with the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and purpose." Philippians 2:1-2 and that we share with the world "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Matthew 28:19 - 20.

Laughter is the best medicine? No, it is not. Laughter is medicinal, but it is the joy and hope that can only be found in Jesus Christ that is the best medicine.