Who Is 'In'? Who is 'Out'? How Do I Know?

Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware.  You know that when you were pagans, you were led astray to the mute idols, however you were led.  Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God says, "Jesus is accursed"; and no one can say, "Jesus is Lord," except by the Holy Spirit. (1 Corinthians 12:1-3 NASB)

My personal and group study of 1 Corinthians was driven by a desire to explore what Scripture says about 'spiritual gifts'.  There's a lot of controversy between groups and even within groups who call themselves Christians or 'believers' or 'Christ-followers' on this subject.

Few topics (actually none that I can think of) instill this sort of divisiveness between groups of believers.  One side fears this topic like no other, creating the most outlandish reasons for not permitting practice of spiritual gifts.  On the other side, it seems Scripture is almost optional, and personal experience preempts the inspired words of our Savior.  It's the oddest thing.  But it's not a new problem.

Paul enters into this topic toward the end of his letter to the Corinthian church.  He has beat them verbally over divisiveness and pride, ministers from outside and sin within, marriage and 'food sacrificed to idols'; and several other failures along the way, all actually quite common in our own day.  Having done all that, he turns to this topic.  What first stopped me in my tracks was how he began.

First off, this problem seems to be a Gentile problem.  I thought it would stem from either both sides or from the more Jewish among them, but it doesn't.  My error is probably in that I'm not familiar with pagan practices of the First Century Roman culture.  Clearly though, '...when you were pagans,' can't refer to Jews.  The second part though, that they were led astray to mute idols, obviously sets up what he says next, but I can't clearly make the connection.  "...no one speaking by the Spirit of God says, 'Jesus is accursed'; and no one can say 'Jesus is Lord,' except by the Holy Spirit." How does that relate to the pagan problem of being led astray to mute idols?

And for those of you who, like me have blown by this while reading the chapter, never really paying much attention to it, consider that to really get what he's saying in the rest of this chapter, possibly the rest of this discussion, we need to get this introductory statement.  This forms the 'cornerstone' of the rest.  Without it, our understanding is skewed somewhat.

So, the problem isn't with the second part itself, that's pretty straight forward.  And really, it's not with the first part, that makes sense; sort of defines what a pagan is in the first place.  The problem is how the two connect.  So, here's what I do with it:  Paul is defining who is in and who is not in a relationship with God versus over against an accusation that some are still 'pagan' in their practice.  Sounds simple enough.  But, he's doing this only because it's not as 'obvious' to the Corinthians as it should be.  What I mean is that the church in Corinth was accusing each other of not being 'led by the Holy Spirit', and since this falls here in the letter, I'm assuming their accusation had to do with this topic.

This should sound rather familiar because it still happening today.  Groups that overly focus on spiritual gifts tend to 'grade' believers on how 'gifted' they are, and on whether or not they have certain gifts.  Paul is starting out clearly arguing against such judgements.  So, to begin my own study here, I will say the same thing Paul is saying, "STOP IT!"  Very therapeutic.  Okay, that's out of my system. 

I find it interesting that the only determining factor between those who do and those who don't have a relationship with Jesus is the declaration that He is Lord.  Why is the also the element we have the most problem living out as well?  I hesitate to stand and accuse the people to whom Paul is writing as I'm actually standing with them accused of a similar problem.  My specific behavior is different, but the problem is the same, "Is Jesus truly my Lord if I behave this way?"  I must declare Jesus is Lord, which can only be done by the Holy Spirit.  But I must live that out; behave consistent with that statement; and declare with my life that He is my Lord.  Then others will see through my life that He is Lord of all.

The point here is two-fold: 1) the determining factor of who is in and who is not is declaring Jesus is Lord, not 'gifting'.  2) My declaration that Jesus is Lord should be obvious to both the blind and the deaf (what I say and what I do - calm down, it was a metaphor).  Okay, now I'm ready to discuss gifting...or rather 'unity of the church.'

Christian Magic Words and Co-Dependency

Hocus Pocus, or Abracadabra, or some other nonsense are common references to “magic words”.  It seems that in my history with my Master I have some of my own.  They usually cap off my prayers with, “…in Jesus’ name I pray, Amen.”  It may not be obvious, but two sets were just used.

The first set of Christian “magic words” is the more obvious, “…in Jesus’ name I pray” phrase.  I picked this up from vocal prayers I heard in church growing up.  But I can’t really blame my upbringing, because when I did learn that they were not “magic words” I still continued to throw them into my prayers, so I am without excuse.  I picked up a habit, which I still practice, now for more co-dependent reasons.

The second, less obvious set is, “amen”, which is the vocal punctuation in church for ending prayers.  At least it is now, which is sad.  Again, this is more habit, and a co-dependent one as well.  If I don’t end with that, other believers get upset with me that I didn’t “signal” them I was done praying.

What I have arrived at in my current walk with my Master are three very effective ways to irritate other believers with whom I may pray audibly.  First, I can begin by praying to the Holy Spirit.  I have no idea why that irritates people but it does.  No one has given me an adequate explanation either, they’re just uncomfortable with it.  The second is to skip the whole, “…in Jesus’ name I pray,” phrase, which is forgivable, except when coupled with the third irritant, skipping, “amen” at the end.

With these three irritants present in the same prayer, I can test the spiritual waters in a Bible study, church group, or even a single believer.  But that would mean their presence (or absence) were just a ridiculous as their inclusion in a prayer.  Prayer is not a tool used to test spiritual waters, like some sort of litmus paper or dipstick.  Instead, it is personal communication with the Creator of the Universe.  Any other use is profane.

So that brings me to Chambers’ point about what is prayer supposed to be.  Returning to John 16, this time verses 26 and 27, he points to the phrases Jesus uses to lead into the prayer of Chapter 17, where He prays that we may be one with the Father as He is.  The point Chambers makes is that, when we are one with the Father, we will pray with the “nature” of Jesus, thus praying in His name without saying those words.  I suppose that is one way to look at it.  And I don’t want to say he’s wrong, because I don’t really know if he is or not.  He’s probably right, especially considering the context with John 17.  I just want to put a simpler frame on it.

I believe that praying in the name of Jesus resonated with the disciples with whom Jesus spoke.  I believe that the term had meaning in their day we miss in ours, because we have lost the whole “monarchy” or “imperial” governmental structures in our day.  In their day, to speak in someone’s name meant to speak with the authority and the words given by another, more powerful, person.  So, when a soldier spoke in the name of his commander, he spoke with authority above his rank.  But he also spoke what he was told to say by his commander. 

I believe this is the meaning the disciples understood, although they may not have had a clear understanding of how it applied to them asking of the Father.  I can assure you that they did not consider the phrase to be “magic words” ensuring they got whatever they wanted.  Their understanding would also have included the clearly understood punishment if the soldier spoke something other than what his commander commanded.  The disciples would have been left with the conundrum of asking only after Jesus had revealed what He wanted them to ask for.  It’s as if the process was reversed; instead of them asking through Jesus to the Father, Jesus asks through them to the Father…sort of.

What this means for me is that prayer, whether personal or public, needs to be communication with the Master of the Universe, not a show, or a rote connection of phrases.  I know that my Master wants things for me.  Those are the things for which I ask the Father, knowing I have whatever it is, because I ask for what the Son wants already.  It sounds redundant, and it is.  But it involves me intimately in the process of my sanctification (making me set apart for service to my King).

So, today, this day of public worship, I will speak to my Father in Heaven, asking only for what my Master wants for me; nothing more.  I will do so with the phrase, “…in Jesus’ name I pray” being true without being said.  I will do so with the declared, “amen” missing on my lips, but present in my heart.  I may even speak to the Spirit of the Living God as well, since He lives within me, interprets for me, and moves me into prayer in the first place.  If that bothers you…

Oswald Chambers' "My Utmost For His Highest": May 29th.

Circumstantial Faith?

Today’s entry is a hard one.  I think it’s hard because it was distilled down and I am missing some explanation.  On the other hand, what is left is succinctly on point.  First, my Master will bring me into circumstances where my faith in Him is tested against actualities (difficulties where I do not sense His blessings).  Second, my focus will be tested in the same circumstances to determine if it is on Him or on His blessings (am I a mercenary follower).

The passage in John 16 is part of a discourse where Jesus is trying to prepare His disciples for His coming execution by crucifixion.  He has been trying to get across the event, but also the meaning.  Both seem to be missing them.  In verse 32, Jesus is responding to their claim to “finally believe” or “understand”.  He replies with “Really?  The hour has arrived when you will scatter and abandon me alone.”  How’s that for a tough response?  Jesus sees through their pretense, through their own denial and inability to see themselves, and into their ability to connect their faith with the actual circumstances they will face.  The ability is not there.  He knows this and brings them into it anyway.  He does so because He also knows that these twelve will then have the faith to take the good news of His the work He is about to do to the very ends of the known world, and beyond.

My Master is still working with my faith in actualities.  Am I tied to my beliefs about how He must work, and is my understanding of that work driven by my desires?  Or have I reached the point beyond saying that “He works however He likes and I will follow” and actually living that statement out?  Have I focused past the blessings to the One blessing?  When I tell my Master that “You love me, You have my back, and I am at Your service,” does that statement then reach into actual events of my day?  I believe that at this point, to a large extent, it does.  But an hour comes and has come when that faith is tested in actual events that I can not predict, do not understand, and where I am completely at His mercy. 

We have an apartment and storage unit, but we also have an appeal by family for help.  This transition is no longer about whether or not to enable family members to relax in happy luxury, it is now about assisting aging parents.  Now the decision to stay or go is no longer easy, but it seems clearer.  The marks previously used have been superseded by the appeal.  Now the Scripture compelling me to take care of my own household applies as it did not before.  So, the call appears to be to leave what has been achieved here, minor and major levels of success, and start over socially and economically.

This is the actual set of circumstances I am in.  Where is my faith?  Do I follow the blessings I have enjoyed here, or follow my Master into a hard life?  Well, I hope McDonalds is hiring where we’re going.

Oswald Chambers' "My Utmost For His Highest": April 4th.