Should City Churches Celebrate the Harvest Festival?

 

This may seem a strange question perhaps, especially as we still bask in the heat of summer here in the UK. The question is straightforward. Should an urban church celebrate the harvest festival or is this something only relevant for rural parishes surrounded by the farms?

Growing up in church, the Harvest Thanksgiving Service as a fixed point in the church calendar, though I grew up in the inner city. Each October we had a Harvest Weekend, which consisted of a Harvest Supper—a church meal held on the Saturday evening—and a Harvest Thanksgiving Service held on the Sunday. Produce that had been donated for the harvest service was then distributed to elderly and needy people in the parish as well as to local charities working with the homeless and foodbanks.

In the church I now attend, we do not mark harvest in any way and I have always thought that was strange. The answer I once received was that as we are a city parish, harvest is something for rural parishes and so it is not relevant to us.

I didn't agree with that thinking then and I don't agree with it now.

So here are my reasons why I think celebrating harvest should be a part of urban church life as well as in rural churches.

1. Harvest Thanksgiving is about giving thanks to God for his provision for us. Christians in city parishes have no less reason to thank God for the production and supply of crops, fruit, vegetables, meat, fish and dairy produce than anyone directly involved in the production of these foods. Likewise, we can thank God for fresh and clean water, essential to life.

2. A Harvest Thanksgiving service gives us an opportunity to speak about God's creation and creation care more widely, which is obviously of relevant to all Christians wherever they live.

3. Harvest Thanksgiving can also provide an opportunity to reflect on those parts of the world that do not have enough food or clean water and encourage Christians to support charities working in these areas.

4. In urban areas, the concept of thanksgiving for the Harvest, can be broadened to include the "Harvest" of all the talents and work done by others that are good gifts from God—teachers, doctors, nurses, manufacturers, tradespeople, etc.

5. Harvest Thanksgiving in urban areas gives an opportunity to remind children (and indeed all city dwellers) that food does not ultimately come from supermarkets, but from farms and fisheries, and ultimately from God's providing hand.

These are practical reasons and possibilities to make an urban harvest relevant. There is no particular need to gather food in church for the service, though there may be benefit in doing so to support local foodbanks and charities.

It just seems really restrictive to me to suggest that only farmers or fishermen have any reason to give thanks to God when the harvest of food comes in each year. As the harvest hymn says:

All good gifts around us are sent from heaven above;
Then thank the Lord, O thank the Lord for all His love. 

Cleansing the Temple

Yesterday was Palm Sunday, the day in the Christian year marking the start of Holy Week and on which Jesus' triumphant entry into Jerusalem as the Messiah is celebrated. The next day, the Monday of Holy Week, Jesus visited the temple complex in Jerusalem and drove out the money changers and merchants who were turning the house of God into a marketplace for trading ordinary money for the special temple currency (at profitable rates of exchange) and selling animals for sacrifice (at inflated prices).

The incident is recorded in the three Synoptic Gospels at Matthew 21, Mark 11 and Luke 19. Interestingly John's Gospel records a similar event right at the beginning of Jesus' ministry (some believe this is the same incident with the story told out of chronological order, but I think this was likely a different event as the chronology is completely different). This could mean Jesus had to do the same thing at the beginning and end of his public ministry.

What seemed to anger Jesus was two things. First, people exploiting those who wanted to worship God for financial gain. Secondly, God's house being for purposes it was not intended for.

I was thinking about what would be the equivalent to this in our churches today. 

Are there churches that exploit people financially? I am sure that there are organisations calling themselves churches that are more like businesses run for profit. At the obvious end of the spectrum are those who preach "the prosperity gospel". In crude terms, give money to the church and you will receive even more back from God. What a travesty of the truth! It can be dressed up in more subtle ways, but that's the basic message. I am sure Jesus is angry now with those who would directly pervert the gospel for financial ends.

Maybe there are more subtle ways though in which we can set up barriers to worship for people, even if financial gain is not the motive. If we send out a signal that only those with the right kind of education or job, or those with the right accent, or the right hobbies and interests are welcome, we can be putting up barriers to people who don't fit the expected mould. That's why I think those who welcome people to church on a Sunday are absolutely vital in outreach work. All the effort to invite new people to church can be wasted if the welcome people receive is not genuine, warm and friendly when they actually step inside the church building. I believe the skill of welcoming people is vastly underrated as a talent. Churches should treasure those who do it well.

The second aspect to the cleansing of the temple is using our buildings in ways they were not intended for. The situation in the Jerusalem temple seems to have been that the merchants had set up in the "Court of the Gentiles" - the outer precinct of the temple provided by God for non-Jews to come and pray. There is an important point being made here about the extent of the Messiah's mission to take the gospel to all the nations. But what about our church buildings? Does any of this have anything to say about how we use them?

I think it is important to point out that this is not a criticism of churches who make a wide use of their buildings for various purposes. I know that some churches let out halls or rooms to outside groups. That's not really what I'm criticising, at least it is not automatically covered by Jesus' criticism, depending on the circumstances.

The key question is whether some activity the church should be doing or would like to do is being prevented by the building being used for some other purpose. To give an example, suppose a church would like to run an evening service on a Sunday or a prayer meeting on a Wednesday but they decide they can't because that's when some other group has a let to use the church. I would argue that the priorities of the church should always to be a church and any other activities should come far behind if they take place at all. Never should the church's key tasks of worshipping God, prayer, discipling believers and evangelising non-believers be prevented because the church building is being used for something else. How that plays out in practice is for church leadership to wrestle with and sometimes there will be difficult cases that need prayer and wisdom to sort out. 

 Yet the general principle is clear. The church building exists to let the church better be the church first and foremost in its tasks of worship, nurturing the people of God and reaching out to those outside with the gospel. If something is preventing that, it has to go. When we have it any other way, our "temple" needs to be cleansed.

 

(Image: Christ Driving the Money Changers from the Temple by Theodoor Rombouts)

Why our churches should have small groups (Part Three)

We have already looked, in the first and second parts, at the reasons for having small groups in church. In this third and final part of my series on small groups, I just wanted to share some of my personal reflections and experiences of small groups.

In the church where I grew up and worshipped for most of my life, there were no small groups at all. The congregation was around 90-100 people, mainly elderly, and there was a midweek Bible study and prayer meeting led by the minister where about about 6-10 people attended regularly. However this group met in a church hall, not in anyone's home, and to be honest there was little time given to fellowship and almost no sense that had to look after, pastor, or share our lives with each other. We studied the Bible in a question-and-answer format, we prayed together, we went home.

I have to say this left me initially sceptical about having small groups. I didn't really see the point of them and I was not enthusiastic about them in any way. I thought a small group would simply be the same as the church Bible study but transported into a living room with more comfortable seats! I think it's important to know that's the background to the rest of what I'm about to say.

When I started going out with Laura, I went along to the small group she belonged to in another church and though I found it strange to begin with, once I began to experience a small group I enjoyed the relaxed atmosphere of a meeting in the comfort of someone's living room (apart from anything else the chairs we used to sit on for my old church's Bible study were pretty uncomfortable).

Immediately I realised that most of my negative preconceptions about small groups were actually prejudices and I began a serious re-think about how small groups might actually be a blessing and a benefit in a church. I changed from being a sceptic to being convinced I wanted to be in a church that had small groups.

One of the biggest decisions we had to make after getting married was which church we would go to as a newly married couple. After a lot of discussion and prayerful reflection, we ended up both leaving our former churches and joining our present church, which although it didn't have many small groups, it did have a few and we have been going along to our group for about ten years now.

In that time our small group has really been important to me and Laura, not just for the warm fellowship, kindness and and support we've received, but for the excellent Bible studies and times of prayer we've had there. Most of the material I listed in the first two parts of this series is my reflections on the benefits I've felt by being in a small group for the past three years.

My experience during these years of being part of a small group has only re-enforced my enthusiasm for small groups being a significant vehicle for Bible study, prayer, fellowship and pastoral support.

I would warmly encourage all churches to at the very least explore the small group model, to try it out if there are currently no small groups in your church, and if there are small groups, to encourage, promote and work for their development and growth. In doing so, I am positive many churches would be the better for it.

Why our churches should have small groups (Part Two)

In Part One we tried to define Christian small groups and began to explore some of the reasons why small groups in our churches should be regarded as a positive benefit. In this second Part we continue by looking at a number of other good reasons for having small groups.

Reason 7: Building One Another Up

In 1 Thessalonians 5:11, the apostle Paul instructs Christians as follows: "Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing."

One of the benefits of close fellowship is that it gives more opportunities to get alongside one another to give that personal word of encouragement or support to build another Christian up in their faith and walk with Jesus.

In many churches very little time is spent actually talking with each other. How often do we rush into the church, take our seats, sit without engaging with anyone around us other than to say a quick "Good morning" or "Good evening" and then head off after maybe another brief chat with one or two people at the end.

Even when we do have a longer conversation, how often do we actually communicate at a serious personal level where encouragement can be given? Not very often in my experience, but then I may be as guilty as anyone of failing in this.

The point is that small groups create relationships which are close and relaxed enough to actually do what Paul calls on Christians to do with each other.

Reason 8: Conducive to Bible Study

Small groups are very conducive to Bible study and to grappling with the message and challenges of Scripture. One of the things about studying the Bible together in small groups is that it allows group Bible study in an interactive, discussion-based learning atmosphere.

Traditional teaching in the church in a sermon or large group Bible study is essentially a monologue, more-or-less a lecture-based format where one speaker talks and the group or congregation listens. Although some modern teaching takes this traditional approach in schools, colleges and universities, the truth is that many teachers realise that this approach is not the only way to teach, and for some people, a more effective method of learning consists in dialogue and discussion rather than handing down knowledge from the pulpit or lectern. Anyone under 40 years of age is probably more familiar with a dialogue based learning approach, and many people nowadays find it difficult to imbibe knowledge from a long monologue.

Jesus' approach to teaching encompassed both sermons addressed to large gatherings (Matthew 5-7) and more intimate and interactive teaching sessions with his disciples (John 13-16) as well as people who wanted to question him and hear his answers (Mark 12).

It seems to me that our approaches to learning God's Word at the very least can and in all probability should include all of these kinds of teaching in our churches and I believe the teaching is enriched by having all methods going on together and complementing each other.

Reason 9: Aiding Growth to Christian Maturity

Many of the particular benefits in having small groups within our churches can be summarised in the general benefit of aiding growth towards spiritual maturity in the Christian life. As our knowledge of the Bible, prayer life, fellowship and so forth develops through involvement in a small group, so the overall aim of the Christian life - to grow and mature in Christ - is increased.

So, small groups help facilitate church growth not only in terms of numbers in evangelistic aims but in discipleship terms regarding Christian maturity.

Reason 10: Development of Future Leaders

A very practical and realistic benefit of small groups is in the training up and development of future leaders. Leading a small group gives an excellent opportunity for participants to "try their hand" at leading a Bible study, praying aloud, and so forth. It also allows group leaders to develop their talents in leadership, organisation, service, working with people, pastoral work, etc. as well as teaching and praying.

A leader in a small group may then have a better grounding and preparation for other work in the church whether in the eldership, ministry, mission field or in some other teaching or pastoral role within a congregation.

Reason 11: Flexibility

Having a number of small groups within a church provides a range of different nights and locations for Bible study, prayer and fellowship. Where a congregation has one large scale midweek meeting, inevitably this may not suit every member of the church due to work, family, other commitments, or for other personal reasons. Having only one meeting and few or no small groups is a kind of "all or nothing" approach, where, if a person cannot attend there is little or no opportunity to engage in these activities at all with others in the congregation.

Small groups meeting on different nights maximises the opportunity for members to take part in midweek Christian worship, Bible study, prayer and fellowship.

Another kind of flexibility is that small groups allow the level of teaching to be tailored better to where the group members are at in their Christian walk if this is considered desirable in certain circumstances by the church leadership.

Reason 12: The Biblical Example

Our final reason for having small groups within our churches is simple: small groups are a biblical practice!

To begin with, as we have already noted, Jesus himself met with his disciples in a small group setting. Although he would teach to larger gatherings, many times in the Gospels we find Jesus meeting privately with his disciples or sometimes other groups for more focused teaching and times of prayer or fellowship.

Secondly, the fact is that the apostolic churches founded in the New Testament were all essentially composed of small groups meeting in people's homes. For example if we read Romans 16, it is clear that though Paul was writing to the church in Rome, that church was itself made up of a number of different house churches that met in various houses in the city.

It seems as if the building blocks of the early church were small groups meeting in people's houses. The early church grew bottom up from small groups. Rather than breaking up a larger congregation into small groups, it looks as if the base unit was the small group, which linked together to form larger congregations in the various towns and cities of the Roman Empire which had churches. After all, the opportunities for large gatherings where small groups would get together were probably few and far between in apostolic times, especially once the church began to be persecuted and had to go "underground" during the reigns of Roman emperors like Nero.

This alone is enough to at least admit the validity of small groups in our present day churches. But more than simply acknowledging the validity of small groups, I believe when we look at all the points in their favour, we will actually want to encourage their introduction or support their development in our churches.

And if you are not already involved in a small group, perhaps the Lord is calling you to consider joining one, forming one or even leading one?

(Part Three of this series will follow soon with some personal reflections on my experience of small groups)

Why our churches should have small groups (Part One)

What is a small group?

As I'm using the term, a "small group" is group of between around 5 and 15 church members (many experts say 8-12 members is the optimal number), which meets regularly (usually either weekly or fortnightly), normally in the home of one or more of the group (it is possible for a group to meet elsewhere). The purpose of a small group is to develop, grow and encourage Christian discipleship and fellowship in its members. Most small groups also aim to grow to the point where they can split into two groups when enough there are too many people for one group. For some groups this growth may be from within the body of disciples within a congregation while other small groups have an evangelistic aim, to draw people from outside the church into the group and the church as new believers and new disciples.

The core activities of the group are usually Bible study, discussion, prayer and fellowship, though group activities are often flexible enough to include social and recreational activities from time to time.

A typical small group meeting would last anywhere from approximately 2 to 3 hours and may take the following pattern (though this is very flexible):

• Welcome and catching-up with people
• Refreshments or a meal
• Bible study/discussion
• Prayer time
• Final chats and goodbyes

Some groups will sometimes vary the usual pattern to spend extra time on one or two of these activities (e.g. an evening mostly devoted to prayer).

Perhaps three to six times a year, groups sometimes vary this typical pattern or meet at a different time and may have more varied activities such as:

• Watching an edifying film, documentary, discussion programme or debate and then using this as a basis for group discussion.
• Games nights
• Going on group outings such as the cinema, a concert or the theatre, going for a country walk, visiting a museum, going out for a meal together, etc.
• An evening of practical service to the larger congregation or community. This could be anything from DIY, cleaning or maintenance, through to evangelistic activities.

Why should our churches have small groups?

This is a very important question. Some people would argue that there is no need to have small groups within a congregation. Perhaps a few would even argue that small groups cause problems and should be avoided. These objections are not completely off the mark. It is possible for small groups to "go wrong" and cause problems, perhaps exposing members to false teaching, or leading to the formation of inward-looking cliques, or channelling energy away from other meetings or programmes in the congregation. Yet these problems are hardly unique to churches with small groups. The very same criticisms could accurately be levelled at churches with no small group structure in place at all!

More importantly, it simply does not follow that because something can be abused or done badly that it should not be done at all. If that were so, many a church's activities would have to be curtailed.

It is more objective to consider the advantages small groups can bring when done well. There are a number of points in favour of encouraging small groups within a church congregation, particularly if the congregation is larger than say 100 members (though this is hardly a baseline figure - small groups could give many of the following advantages even in smaller congregations).

Reason 1: Closer Relationships

Small groups are one of the best ways to help build closer relationships between members of a congregation. In the early church, believers shared their lives with each other in close fellowship (e.g. Acts 2:42). In large, modern congregations this is often difficult to achieve. Too often our churches are large groups of people who gather to hear a sermon, sing hymns and pray together, as if this were all that Jesus requires of the people of the Kingdom. Small groups of 6-12 people, particularly when meeting in the comfortable and familiar setting of members' homes, immediately create a more intimate atmosphere, and as the group meets and becomes more relaxed with each other so the Christian ideal of the church as the family-community of shared lives with God and with each other is more apt to flourish.

In a large church of over 200 members it is almost impossible to get to know everyone, and it is easy to just be an anonymous churchgoer and consumer of Bible teaching.

It has been pointed out that the number of inter-relationships in a group of people grows exponentially with the size of the group. With four people, A, B, C and D, there are no less than six interpersonal relationships: A-B, B-C, C-D, D-A, A-C, B-D. If we merely double that to a group of eight people, there are then no less than 28 interpersonal relationships possible and needing to be maintained if there is to be a "family dynamic" in the group. It is immediately apparent that in a church congregation of 100, 200, 300 or more people, it is simply impractical to maintain a close relationship between everyone in the many thousands of possible relationships that could potentially exist. As human beings we can only manage a certain number of close family-like relationships. We need smaller units of people to relate to. That is where small groups offer a tremendous advantage for encouraging close Christian fellowship.

Reason 2: Approachable to Outsiders

The days when most people attend a church even occasionally, such as for weddings, funerals and maybe a Christmas service are rapidly disappearing into history. For many people, especially among the under 30s, the church is an alien environment where people do strange, unfamiliar things like sing together, sit quietly or listen to an extended monologue from a speaker, and where much that goes on is not explained and hard to understand.

As we seek to reach others with the gospel against this background, small groups offer a great setting to meet, welcome and introduce enquirers to the Faith. The homely environment of someone's living room is much less "threatening" for many people than a church building, and a conversational discussion about the Bible is easier for many people to process than a half-hour sermon.

Many churches have found that small groups are an invaluable evangelistic tool that has led to significant growth in the congregation.

Reason 3: Pastoral Care

The idea being small groups is that they are more than a home Bible study or prayer group though they certainly are no less than that. By sharing their lives together, the members of a small group get to know each other closely, and get to know each others needs. Small groups can offer mutual pastoral support for the members.

The biblical model of pastoral support is not the minister doing everything. Neither is it the church elders or deacons doing all the pastoral work. The biblical model involves all members giving and receiving help as they are able and require it.

Small groups provide an excellent framework to enable the joy and privilege of ministering to other believers in practical ways.

Reason 4: Living Out the Faith

Pastoral care is only one way in which small groups can help facilitate the practical living out of the Christian faith, but there are many others. Many small groups work together to do evangelism, or charity fundraising, or be of practical service to the church or the local community.

The small group can provide a focal point that brings Christians together to live out their faith in ways that are difficult when Christians operate only on "solo missions" or where only the church as an amorphous whole is working but many individual members can get left behind.

Reason 5: Encouraging Prayer

One of the most important benefits that flow from the increased intimacy of a small group and the closeness of trust and fellowship between the members is that small groups create a comfortable atmosphere for prayer. For many Christians a Sunday service or even a larger prayer meeting does not allow either the time, the opportunity or the right atmosphere to share personal information and seek prayer support. A small group is in many respects a more natural environment to discuss our innermost needs.

Small groups can also prove effective in developing the prayer life of Christians who are not confident enough to pray aloud in a larger setting.

As well as praying for each other in the group, a good group leader will also make sure there is an outward aspect to the group's prayer life, praying for the wider needs of the church, the community and the world and will encourage all the members to participate in prayer.

Reason 6: Open and Honest Communication

One of the perceptions many people have of Christians and churches, rightly or wrongly, is that they are at best uncomfortable with questions and expressions of doubt or uncertainty and at worst judgmental of anyone who does not conform to the "official" line (whatever that is in each particular congregation).

By comparison, one of the strengths of a small group environment, is that it allows the development between members of a level of trust, support and mutual acceptance so that everyone can be completely honest about what they think and how they feel. Rather than closing down communication, the small group fosters openness and honesty. This is not only more healthy on a human level than any kind of repression of the truth, it is also more in line with how the Bible presents the openness and honesty of many of the heroes of the faith in their relationship even with God himself.

One of the wonderful things about salvation by grace through faith alone is that our acceptance with God is not dependent on us getting everything right in our beliefs or in our conduct. As has been said by Tom Wright and others, we are justified by believing in Christ, we are not justified by believing in justification by faith. According to the apostle Paul, this truth gives us a liberty of tremendous value that we should never fritter away.

In my view, when a small group gets to the point where the members realise they are accepted for who they are, not just by God but by the people in the room, even if they make mistakes, even if they don't get all the doctrines 100% accurate, then they are actually beginning to embody the very foundational truth which Luther and Calvin recognised lay at the very heart of the good news and was the doctrine by which the church stands or falls - that our acceptance is not based on anything in us, not even our doctrinal purity, but only, only, only on Christ and his redeeming work.

If that doesn't encourage us to be open and honest with each other, nothing will. The small group merely provides one of the most appropriate and fitting settings for it to take place.

(The second part of this paper will follow soon)

How to treat someone like a pagan or tax collector

In Matthew 18, Jesus has just taught the parable of the lost sheep and concludes it with an insight into God's purposes and desires: "In the same way your Father in heaven is not willing that any of these little ones should perish" (v.14).

At first glance it might seem that Jesus then suddenly changes subject and speaks about how to conduct church discipline and possible ex-communication of a persistent sinner within the church:

"If your brother or sister sins go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.^' If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector." (Matthew 18:15-17)

My argument is that this apparent "switch of subjects" is nothing of the sort. What Jesus is doing is explaining an important point for how we deal with the "lost sheep" who goes astray and, in one way or another, leaves the flock. We often think of the Parable of the Lost Sheep about bringing new people to faith in Christ, but it seems to me the parable is also about someone who was in the flock and then went astray.

The key aspect here is getting a right understanding of what it means to treat someone as "a pagan and a tax collector".

If we consider that "pagan" is practically synonymous with "Gentile" and "Tax Collector" is akin to a Jew who has turned against his own people to help the pagans, we may begin to see what is going on here.

A pagan is, in the Jewish terms of the day that Christ is adopting here, someone who is completely outside the sphere of the people of God. A tax collector is essentially a Jewish traitor, someone who grew up within the sphere of God's people, but who has turned against his own people to help the pagans.

I would argue that in modern church terms, these could be compared to someone with a completely unchurched background and someone who grew up in the church and then turned against it.

Contrary to how some people might view a verse like this, Jesus is not teaching that we are free to shun, ignore or even hate someone who persists in sin, fails to accept church discipline and is put out of fellowship. We can be certain of this because that's not how Jesus treated pagans and tax collectors. He loved them, befriended them and sought to bring them into the Kingdom of God.

What Jesus is really saying is that if someone fails to accept church discipline, we must treat them as if they were not one of Christ's sheep and then go and seek to bring the lost sheep back into the fold. Never are we to abandon them or have a "good riddance" attitude.

Once we remember that our attitude to someone who is not a believer—however they got to that place—is to love them, tell them of Jesus Christ and the gospel of forgiveness and restoration for sinners, we see that sometimes church discipline, followed by ongoing love and seeking to care for the lost sheep, is Christ's chosen method for making sure that none "of these little ones should perish."

A Vision for the Local Church (Remix)

Originally I wrote most of this piece nine years ago for a parish church magazine. As my current church comes together to discuss the future this coming Saturday, I have remixed it and updated it as a personal vision for what our local church could be like.

I have been thinking a lot recently about the church. Not so much the church worldwide or nationally, but our local church. I’ve been thinking about and asking myself a lot of questions about us. Hard questions, like why don’t more people want to come and worship with us, or even better, join us and become part of the church family. We give thanks for those who do come with all our hearts. But why don’t more people come?

After all, I think we are a welcoming and friendly congregation and I know how eager we are to see more people coming along to our services and other events. We are a strong and committed congregation – strong in our faith and committed to doing God’s work in our part of the city. And I believe we are a loving and caring church too.

But there’s a hard fact that we have to face. In the past three years we have been shrinking as a congregation. Recently some have left because they do not want to stay in the Church of Scotland. I believe many others left before that because they were not happy with the ministry of our soon to be departed minister. Most of us stayed put and wait upon the Lord's leading for the next part of our story to be written. 

I know full well that if God wills it, he can send a revival and save a thousand souls. He can fill our church with new life and new Christians by the hundreds if he wants to. And we pray that he will! But, what if God is waiting until we show our willingness to change and go further as a congregation to bring people to Christ? God has always also worked through the work and witness of his people. Sometimes he waits until we give our lives to his service and to mission. He might be waiting to act until we decide what our priority is as a church, until we decide we are willing to change ourselves and the way we do things, so that he can then do a new thing through us. As he said to the prophet Isaiah:

“Forget the former things; do not dwell on the past. See, I am doing a new thing! Now it springs up; do you not perceive it? I am making a way in the desert and streams in the wasteland.“ (Isaiah 43:18-19, NIV)

The question we all have to face is whether we are ready and willing to change, to give up certain things, to have “dead wood” cut away from the stump of the tree so that new growth can flourish?
What things do I have in mind? Well I don’t have all the answers. I think this is a discussion we need to have with each other within our congregation. We all need to be willing to give and take, learn from each other, and take up different ideas. Here are just a few ideas to get the discussion started.

Faith. Unless we have a real, living faith in Jesus Christ ourselves, unless we know Christ as our Saviour and Lord, brother and friend, how can we really tell other people about him? Unless we understand the gospel, believe it and live it out in our lives, how can we really tell anyone outside the church that we have good news for them? This means that opening up the Scriptures, whether in Sunday preaching or midweek Bible study, must be at the heart of what we do.

Worship. We need to worship God in accordance with God’s word. But are there parts of our worship that people from outside the church would find hard to understand, or difficult to engage with? Do we have things that are merely our traditions rather than God’s commands? Could we do worship differently at some of our services if this would be more interesting or easy to understand for people who are not used to going to church? Is it a good use of our resources to have two Sunday services following almost exactly the same format?

Communication. Those of us who have been going to church for years are comfortable with church language that we use all the time. Do we need to take time to consider that not everyone knows what our church language means or how our church works? Can we find ways of communicating the truth of God’s word in ways that are more meaningful to people who are not used to reading the Bible or going to church? Should we better at explaining how our church is governed and what decisions have been made?

Prayer. Prayer has always been central to our congregation life and we need to go on in prayer if we want to become a growing congregation again. The apostles were constantly telling Christians in New Testament times to pray for one another. Do we need any new systems to enable us to pray for each other and for what we need as a congregation? Do we need to think of ways to boost our prayer life beyond the traditional prayer meeting?

Fellowship. If the churches in the New Testament were anything they were communities. We are God’s family and we need to be as close to each other as any blood family. Are we ready to share our lives with each other, allowing each other to see and to share in our joys and sorrows? Or are we too proud to let our guard down? Too scared of what people will think of us, to be really honest with each other when we have problems, doubts, sadness, or pain? If we don’t live as a family, as God’s community, really loving each other and showing it, how can we convince anyone outside the church that we really love them?

Service. One of the most effective ways of touching the lives of those outside the church is by helping and caring for them in practical ways. In this Jesus is our prime example. As well as teaching people, Christ helped people in very practical ways. He cured the sick, he fed the hungry, he comforted the broken. How can we find ways of doing that for people that we want to reach and bring into God’s kingdom?  Equally how can we serve those who have limited or no material needs? How do we ensure that everyones gifts for service are recognised, encouraged and developed to their maximum potential?

For a long time it has seemed to me that small groups is a biblical and practical way to cover several of these issues in one solution, particularly fellowship, prayer and studying the Bible. But I am aware that for others the current large midweek prayer meeting and Bible study for the whole church is also a valuable and important part of our church life. Perhaps we need to move beyond an either/or mindset to a both/and mindset?

Coming up with ideas is a human skill. Coming to agreement and moving forward together as congregation is the work of the Holy Spirit. Let us pray for his guidance in the days ahead.

A Fellowship of Differents

A Fellowship of Differents
Scot McKnight
Zondervan, 2014

I have read a number of books by the American New Testament scholar, Scot McKnight, and have never found one that wasn't both interesting and useful. His book A Fellowship of Differents was no exception. As the title might suggest, the theme of the book is that the Christian Church is supposed to be a fellowship of people who are all very different from one another. Different sexes, races, nationalities, social classes and temperaments all coming together in a shared life as God's new community and new humanity through faith in Jesus Christ.

The book's subtitle is "Showing the World God's Design for Life Together" and that captures one of the book's key themes - the importance of sharing life together as Christians. As the author makes clear, God's church is intended to show the world a new way of being human and form a new community composed of followers of Jesus, and most importantly, that this isn't some high-flying spiritual theory - it is meant to be lived out in practice at each local gathering or congregation of Christ's people, namely at the local church where you go on Sunday morning or to events during the week.

Somehow, McKnight manages to make this a practical look at what church should really be like and a theological reflection on why this should be so. Above all, it is realistic about what our expectations of our local church should be.

At a time when my own local church is facing issues of people leaving because the denomination to which we belong is deemed by them to be unworthy of their continued membership and support, I was particularly struck by a profound quote in the book from Dietrich Bonhoeffer: "Those who love their dream of a Christian community more than the Christian community itself become destroyers of that Christian community though their personal intentions may be ever so honest, earnest, and sacrificial" (p.112, from Life Together). McKnight's point is that we cannot desert the real churches that we find down the street from where we live in pursuit of an imaginary church where everything is perfect: perfect doctrines, perfect worship, perfect people. Such a quest is not only delusional, but damaging to the real church. 

I was also fascinated and moved by a passage where McKnight describes a "typical" church service in New Testament times, maybe in a Roman city like Rome or Pompeii. The passage is too long to quote (pp. 100-102), but it describes a Roman woman going along to a church meeting in a rich person's house, seeing people from all different Roman classes sitting together and sharing in a meal together (in these times communion was taken as part of an actual meal, not in the ritualised form of "meal" we find in most modern churches). Such an act was revolutionary in Roman society where it was unthinkable for wealthy patricians and common slaves to sit at a table for a meal which celebrates God's grace for people through the death of the Messiah on the cross, and they take the bread and wine as equals and—perhaps even more amazingly—as a family gathering together.

Throughout the book, the author blends teaching with examples of real people in real churches, which also help to keep the book grounded in practical realities as the discussion moves through a number of different subjects including grace, love, communion, holiness, new life and the Holy Spirit—and there are useful insights on each of these subjects along the way.

This book would be great for anyone interested in the importance of their local church, maybe especially for anyone who is a bit jaded and needs to be reminded that the events in that building you go to, and the interactions you have with the people there (yes, even the odd ones, the strange ones, the ones who are as unlike you as you can imagine), despite how it might seem, are actually God's chosen mechanism for changing the world and making a new humanity. Think about that next Sunday and every Sunday in your local church.

The Usefulness of Church Buildings

I have often heard preachers say that according to the Bible "the Church is people, not buildings." Of course such a statement is perfectly true and accurate. The Church according to the New Testament is people. The word translated as "church" (ekklesia) in English bibles really means a "gathering" or "assembly" [of people]. It was applied by New Testament writers to the gathering or assembly of Christians as God's "saints" or "holy people". For this reason, William Tyndale, when he first translated the New Testament into English used the word "congregation" to accurately translate ekklesia.

However, when it came to the translation of the King James Bible in 1611, the King insisted that the word "church" be used rather than congregation or assembly because he was keen to emphasise the powerful institution of which he saw himself as the head on earth, and the tradition of using "church" in English bibles has continued to the present day.

In New Testament times there were no "church buildings". Churches met mainly in people's homes or perhaps sometimes in the open air. And so preachers are correct to point out to us modern Christians, who have grown up with at least 1500 years of a culture in which "church" has come to mean the building where a congregation gathers to worship God as well as serve other people, that when we read "church" in the Bible, we should be thinking of a "congregation" or "assembly" meaning a gathering of God's people and certainly not buildings or even institutions in the modern sense.

Thus far so good. But where problems can arise is in the implications that preachers then want to draw out from the truth. Most preachers I would say simply want to remind us that people are more important than bricks and mortar and that is fine. Who could object to that? However, some people seem to suggest that because the church is people not buildings then somehow buildings do not matter. That implication is not true. Even worse, is where we go a step further and the undertone is that if we are at all interested in our buildings we are somehow less spiritual than those who seem to have no attachment whatsoever to their place of worship. I think that view is open to serious criticism because it is inherently judgemental of others, prideful of self, and can be spiritually manipulative.

Let me clear: I agree that the Church is people and people are more important than buildings. Always. But a congregation having a church building is a good thing and is extremely useful to the work of the congregation and I will go into a few particulars as to why this is. As so often in life, if a good thing is misused, the answer is not to reject the good thing entirely, but to reform its use so that also becomes good.

Here are five reasons why it matters that a congregation has a good and useful building to call home and operate from.

1. Because we are physical beings and places matter. God has made us a unity of body and spirit and so, to put it plainly, spaces matter. We are not incorporeal spirits. We are, literally, "of the earth" (which is what Adam means in Hebrew by the way). We are grounded in physical surroundings. And so the place we inhabit, individually and corporately as a congregation is important. Now it is true that we can gather anywhere to worship God. We can gather in a school hall, in a living room, in an open field and we will still be the church. But that does not mean that it is not better to have a dedicated building for worship, teaching, outreach and service. The analogy I would make is eating a meal. I can perfectly well eat lunch at my desk at work, grab a sandwich and eat on the train, even eat a cold tin of beans sitting in the rain at a campsite. These are all ways that validly constitute eating a meal. But that is not to say that eating a meal in a lovely bistro or at my own dining table at home is not better or preferable. So the first reason why church buildings matter is because they create (or should create) a warm, comfortable, suitable place to conduct the church's activities in a better way than other ad hoc alternatives.

2. Because a church building is more conducive to worship. A building that is designed for the purpose for which it is used is much more likely to meet those needs than a building which is not. The fact that most church buildings are designed for the worship of God and for the church's other activities almost always makes them more useful than a generic, utilitarian hall. The advantages in having a church building in this regard are many. They include acoustics designed to enhance the experience of congregational singing, decor and artwork which helps create an atmosphere conducive to worship and makes use of Christian symbolism to emphasise that the building is there for Christian purposes, church furniture designed to enhance or aid the conduct of worship services, e.g. pulpit, communion table, baptismal font, etc. While I agree that none of these things are essential, this does not mean that they are useless. While it is true that a church can meet in a school hall or a disused cinema or any large room with seating, this does not mean that such places are as good as a dedicated church building.

3. Because a building is a landmark in a local area. Another advantage in having a recognised church building is that it forms a landmark for those in the local area outside of the church. A building is a physical reminder that the church is there for people in a much more tangible way than a fellowship that only meets in people's homes or in a hired hall once a week. Again, if the church has to operate in this way, there is no problem with that, but the question is whether it is not preferable and beneficial to have a dedicated building. The answer to that is very obviously, "yes." It is all too easy for a church without a building to "disappear" from the awareness of outsiders. "Where exactly does that group meet? And when? I'm not sure." It is hard enough to get outsiders to come to events without it being unclear exactly where and when meetings are held. Having a building grounds the church in a community and makes a statement that the congregation is committed to that area.

4. Because they allow a church to conduct a full range of activities. One of the most significant advantages in having a church building is that the congregation is able to decide for itself what events and meetings to hold without having to consult with anyone else. For a church using a hired hall, this is not the case. Such a church may be very restricted in what activities it can put on or host during a typical week. But a fellowship with its own building is free to have as many services, bible study groups, prayer meetings, social events, or any other meeting they feel would be beneficial.

5. Because we should not despise the good gifts God has given us. My final point is not so much regarding the usefulness of having a church building, but rather to point out the fact that every congregation with a building should see it as a good gift given to it by the Lord. As such the correct attitude is one of thankfulness and determination to be good stewards of a crucial resource, not despising the gift, or thinking it a matter of indifference whether a congregation has a place to call its own or not.

In closing, I would say the relationship between a congregation and its building is very similar to that of a family and its home. It is very true that the family is not the house where they live, and the family is infinitely more important than their house. It is also true that the family exists whether or not it even has a house. A homeless family is still a family. But it is not at all true to say that having a house is of no consequence to the family at all. Such a statement would be absurd. Almost everything that family life consists of is helped, accommodated and facilitated by having a home. A homeless family is not, all other things being equal, in as happy a position as a family that has a home to live in. I don't think the situation is all that different for God's family.

So, let us be thankful for the buildings God has given us; let us look after them and appreciate them; and let us use them for the work and witness of the church, to his glory.

The Church and the Kingdom of God (Repost)

Have you ever wondered why the Four Gospels refer many times to "the Kingdom of God" (or "the Kingdom of heaven" in Matthew) while they only mention the church a few times, whereas Acts and the Letters from the apostles mention the church many times and the Kingdom of God is seldom mentioned? In fact "Kingdom of God" or "Kingdom of heaven" is mentioned in 83 verses in the Gospels and in only 14 other verses in the rest of the New Testament. "Church" on the other hand is mentioned in only two verses in the Gospels, but in 71 verses in the rest of the New Testament.

Why the massive switch from a "Kingdom" focus in Jesus' ministry in the Gospels to a "Church" focus in the ministry of the apostles?

And what exactly is the difference is between the Church and the Kingdom (if any)?

Do you think they are two ways of describing the same thing maybe? Is the church the Kingdom of God by another name?

These are the questions we're going to have a quick look at in this post.

The first thing I think we need to sort out are our definitions. If we define Church and Kingdom correctly this will help us establish the similarities and differences between the two and enable us to answer some of our questions.

A reasonable definition of “Kingdom of God” is: all spheres on earth where God’s reign and rule (or God’s government) is accepted and embraced. The Kingdom of God is already in existence through Christ, though the fullness of the Kingdom still lies in the future. On the other hand, a reasonable short definition of “Church” is: the community of all who have faith in Jesus Christ.

It is clear therefore that though there is a close relationship between Church and Kingdom, they are not the same thing. The Kingdom of God is not a synonym for the Church. The Kingdom of God – or God’s sovereign reign and rule – is an idea or concept, a state of being, a way of viewing life and the world, and a goal towards which all of history is building and moving and which Christ lived and worked to bring about. The Church is the people who are committed to following Christ, and in so doing they are people who accept the Kingdom idea and work for its growth and further realisation in history.

If we were to put it in military terms, the Church might be compared to a country's army and Christ might be compared to country’s leader and the army’s commander-in-chief. In those terms, the Kingdom of God would be both the goal or objective of the war and the totality of the territory or people where the war aims have already been established and accepted.

The Kingdom of God is therefore both a different and a much wider concept than the Church. The Kingdom includes every area of life that is under the rule and authority of God. If God rules in a person’s life, they are in the Kingdom. If God rules a home, it is part of the Kingdom. Where a business is run on biblical principles, it is also part of the Kingdom. The Kingdom of God includes every human activity that is done according to his will. And God intends his Kingdom to grow and expand into every facet and area of life.

This expansion can take place either as a person enters the Kingdom as a new citizen through faith in Jesus (the Bible calls this being “born again” into the Kingdom) or as Kingdom citizens bring different parts of their lives under the will of God. As we have seen this can include personal relationships, family life, work, hobbies and leisure activities, political and civic life, art and cultural life, as well as, of course, spiritual and church life. The Kingdom of God becomes a present reality when a sphere of life is ruled according to the Word of God.

The Church’s role is to work to help build the Kingdom. One of the problems of our time is that rather than seeing the Church (the community of believers) existing to help with the Kingdom project, there is a tendency to see the Church existing for its own benefit and for its own growth. And rather than the Church being the Kingdom vanguard in the world, often it has become a spiritual retreat from the world. What’s wrong with that? Well, to go back to our military analogy, it would be like working to recruit and train for the army as an end in itself, rather than as a precursor to going into battle and making the King's war objectives a reality!

The community of Christ’s people is critical to the God’s Kingdom project, but it is a huge mistake to confuse the project with the personnel. The Church must never be an end in itself. It must always be working to establish the kingdom of God. When Jesus comes back he does not just want to find a holy Church, but a Church that has established the kingdom of God as a reality in the world.

So why did the apostles switch focus from the Kingdom to the Church? I think the answer is that once Christ had inaugurated the Kingdom, the focus had to switch from the concept and project to the establishment of the people through whom the Kingdom project would be continued. That is not to say that the apostles’ forgot about the Kingdom. Quite the opposite – they realised that the Church had to be established to advance the Kingdom, just as an army must be recruited and trained before it can implement the King’s war objectives. There can be no Kingdom of God without the Church, so the Church is the focus of the apostles, but even then, not as an end in itself, but as the divinely appointed agent to work with him for the Kingdom.

The Church That Christ Builds (Repost)

The following is the text of a sermon preached on 18 May 2008.

We gather here tonight one week after Pentecost, that wonderful miraculous day when the Holy Spirit was poured out on Christ’s church, and we gather as part of Christ’s church. We also gather knowing that the highest court of our own denomination, the General Assembly is meeting in Edinburgh this week, and that our own minister, Howard, is going to play his part in making the decisions that will affect the church this year and perhaps for many years to come.

And so on a night like this, we look not at this or that Christian writer’s latest book on “How to do Church” nor do we look at reports of this or that General Assembly committee, but we turn instead to some words about the Church that come from higher authority than even the General Assembly. We turn to again at part of what our Lord Jesus Christ, the King and Head of the Church, himself taught about the Church in Matthew 16:18 where we find the words we are going to concentrate on this evening:

“And on this rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

There are five things for us to have a look at in these words of Christ tonight.

There is a building: “My Church.”
There is a builder: Jesus Christ says “I will build my Church.”
There is a foundation: “On this rock I will build”
There is opposition and danger: “The gates of hell”
And there is the promise of safety and security: “The gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

So first, there is a building: “My Church.” Before any of the rest of this verse can be properly understood, it is crucial that we understand what this building, the Church is. It is a very special kind of building you see. It is a building not made of bricks or stone or marble or wood. It is a temple, but not one built by human hands, not one we can see standing on the earth. There is no cathedral, no temple, no chapel, no church building that you can see anywhere in the world and point to it or photograph it on holiday and say of it: “You see that place? That is the Church Christ is talking about in this verse.

No, the building being talked about by Jesus here, the building that he calls “my Church” is a great company of men, women and children. It is a spiritual building consisting of everyone who believes in the Lord Jesus Christ.

The word usually translated “Church” in English bibles here is the Greek word Ekklesia. And that’s a very interesting word. Literally it means “A Calling out” in the sense of people being called out to form “a gathering” or “an Assembly”. The Church is a group of people.

When William Tyndale first translated the New Testament he translated this verse as: “And
upon this rock I will build my congregation: and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

The New Jerusalem Bible translates it: "And on this rock I will build my community. And the gates of the underworld can never overpower it."

So this Church that Christ talks about is a congregation or community of people, not a collection of buildings or any human institution calling itself a church. It is not any particular denomination or branch of the church. It is not the Church of Scotland, or the Free Church of Scotland, or the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, or the Episcopal Church, or the Methodist Church, the Baptist Church or any Charismatic Church. And it is not the Russian or Greek Orthodox Churches or the Roman Catholic Church. None of these bodies are the “Church” that Christ referred to. None of them can claim to be definitively "His Church"though any and probably all of have members who are indeed part of the church Christ refers to here.

The Church in this verse consists of all true believers in the Lord Jesus Christ. It consists of all of God’s chosen people. It is the body of Christ, the flock of Good Shepherd, the Bride of the Lamb. It is the “one holy, Catholic and Apostolic church” that the Nicene Creed talks about.

It includes everyone who has repented of sin, and turned to Christ in faith. This membership of this Church is made up of all who have been washed in Christ’s blood, all who have been clothed in Christ’s righteousness, all who have been born again and sanctified by Christ’s Spirit.

J. C. Ryle says of it: "The Church of our text is one that makes far less show than any visible church in the eyes of men, but it is of far more importance in the eyes of God."

All the denominations, groups and fellowships we find in the world are visible churches. They are all human institutions to some extent, and they are all imperfect manifestations of Christ’s own church to some extent. But the Church of this verse is invisible, and it is not a human institution. It is an assembly or gathering of people from all over the world and throughout all of human history who form the covenant people of God, the people he chose, the people he saves, the people who have faith in him and follow him as their Lord.

J. C. Ryle gives an illustration of the difference between the various visible churches in the world and the one true, but invisible church made up of God’s chosen people who live by faith in Christ. He says that the visible churches of this world, be they Presbyterian, Episcopalian, Independent, Baptist, Charismatic, Reformed or Methodist are “the scaffolding behind which the great building is carried on.” The denominations are the scaffolding around the true Church of Christ, which is being built in the background.

Think of a mighty cathedral shrouded in scaffolding and plastic sheeting. The scaffolding is what is visible, but it is not itself the building being built. It is merely what can be seen, while within and behind the scaffolding, the real building work is going on. I think that’s a brilliant illustration. All this that we see around us, is merely scaffolding, while the real building work of saving souls and rescuing lives, of drawing men and women into a living covenant relationship with God and with fellow Christians is slowly, silently, relentlessly going on in the background.

The great congregation of the redeemed is the Church Christ talks about in this verse. Outside of this church, the body of Jesus Christ, the faithful congregation of all believers, there is no salvation. By definition this must be so since only believers in Christ can be saved.

Second, there is a builder: Jesus Christ. “I will build my Church…” says Christ. No one else can or will build it for him. He must build it with his own hands.

The prophet Zechariah said of the coming Messiah in Zechariah 6:12-13:

“Thus says the LORD of hosts, "Behold, the man whose name is the Branch: for he shall branch out from his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD. It is he who shall build the temple of the LORD and shall bear royal honor, and shall sit and rule on his throne. And there shall be a priest on his throne, and the counsel of peace shall be between them both."

The Messiah will build the temple of the LORD. Not one part of the Church can be built without his work and his blessing.

It is Christ who calls the members of the Church to leave the world’s way and follow him. It is Christ who breathes spiritual life into sinners who were by nature dead in trespasses and sins. It is Christ who washes away their sins. It is Christ who gives them peace. It is Christ who gives them eternal life. It is Christ who grants them the gifts of repentance and faith. It is Christ who enables them to become God’s children.

He is the Alpha and Omega, the Author and Perfecter of faith. He is the life. He is the King and Head. From Him every part of the mystical body of Christians is supplied with all they need. Through Him they are strengthened for duty. By Him they are kept from falling. He preserves them to the end, and presents them faultless before the Father’s throne with exceeding great joy. He is all in all to all believers.

It is true that he does often carry on his work through subordinates, through human beings. He works through the preaching of his word, through the circulation and reading of the Scriptures, through Christian literature, through providential circumstances, through prayer, through church discipline, through fellowship and human friendships, through evangelism and mission. He works through all these things, but it is always Christ who is at work to build his Church.

Preachers preach, theologians write and discuss, but only the Lord Jesus Christ can build his Church. Not TV evangelists, not Popes, not even General Assemblies. Christ alone builds it.

Christ is the builder because of who he is and what he has done for his people. And that leads us to the next part of this verse.

Third, there is a foundation that Christ builds his Church on. “And on this rock I will build my Church.”

This is the most controversial part of this verse. There have been many different views put forward for what this foundation is that Christ will build on. The Roman Catholic Church of course say that the Church is built on the foundation of St Peter, the first pope, and on all the popes who have succeeded him to the office of Bishop of Rome. I don’t think it is too strong to say that such a view is totally without biblical warrant. Even if you interpret the verse to mean that Christ will build his church on the witness and work of the apostles and on Peter as the leading apostle, there is no way this verse can be used to justify the papacy. There’s no way these verses can be wrested to mean that. But actually, I don’t think that Christ was saying he would build his church on Peter at all.

Jesus says, “You are Peter and on this rock I will build my Church.” Notice that Christ did not say, “You are Peter and on you I will build my church.” And the rest of the New Testament does not give any real support for this either. Although we have two letters written by Peter in the New Testament, much more of the New Testament was written by John and especially by the apostle Paul for example. And far from being the infallible leader that the Church could be built on, though Peter was transformed by Christ and was one of the first leaders of the church, he was not perfect. He got things wrong. In Galatians 2:11, Paul says:

“But when Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him in public, because he was clearly wrong.”

Now of course “Peter” means rock and so that’s why the Catholic Church have used this verse to justify the doctrine of papal supremacy and papal succession. In effect they say that the verse says: “You are rock and on this rock I will build my Church.” But it’s very interesting when you look at the actual Greek words of our verse because two different words are used for “rock” in the sentence. Christ calls Peter “Petros” which is a masculine word referring to a stone or small rock, but when he says that he will build his church on “this rock” he uses the different word “Petra” which is a feminine word, referring to a large mass of rock, like a cliff or a mountain.

Also, it seems to me that Peter cannot be the foundation upon which the Church is built, because of what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 3:11:

“For no one can lay a foundation other than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.”

I believe Christ’s meaning is properly conveyed if we translated the verse as “You are a stone, and on this rock I will build my church.” I believe what he meant was really “You are Peter – a little rock – but on the immovable rock of the truth that you have confessed – I will build my Church.” In other words, I think this verse teaches that Christ builds his Church on the truth of Peter’s confession, on the doctrine that Jesus is God’s Messiah and the Son of the Living God. These two truths lie at the heart of the Christian message, the gospel.

I agree with J C Ryle: “It was not Peter, the erring, unstable man, but the mighty truth which the Father had revealed to Peter. It was the truth concerning Jesus Christ Himself which was the rock. It was Christ’s mediatorship, and Christ’s Messiahship. It was the blessed truth that Jesus was the promised Saviour, the true Surety, the real Intercessor between God and man. This was the rock, and this the foundation, upon which the Church of Christ was to be built.”

When read in this light, we see that the rock solid foundation upon which the Church is built is not any person, not even the apostles personally, but on the truths concerning Jesus Christ that the apostles taught. This ties in much better with the rest of the New Testament and with other parts of Christ’s own teaching. For example in Matthew 7:24:

“Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock.”

The gospel message that Christ is God’s chosen King and the Redeemer of his people is, I believe, the rock, upon which Christ builds his church.

Fourth, there is opposition and danger to this Church. Christ says that “the gates of hell” will try to oppose the Church that Christ builds.

In Bible times, cities were surrounded by walls. The gates by which they were entered were the principal places for holding courts, transacting business, and deliberating on public matters. The gates were where people made their plans, drew up their designs, negotiated deals and so on. The “gates of hell” it seems to me, refers to the plans and designs of Satan and his hellish minions against God and his purposes. The “gates of hell” are Satan’s evil plans against the Church.

It seems to me that the expression “the gates of hell” is a way of describing the spiritual forces in the heavenly realms that Paul mentions in Ephesians 6:12:

“For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.”

The Puritan commentator Matthew Henry wrote:

“The gates of hell are the powers and policies of the devil's kingdom, the dragon's head and horns, by which he makes war with the Lamb; all that comes out of hell-gates, as being hatched and contrived there. These fight against the church by opposing gospel truths, corrupting gospel ordinances, persecuting good ministers and good Christians; drawing or driving, persuading by craft or forcing by cruelty, to that which is inconsistent with the purity of religion; this is the design of the gates of hell, to root out the name of Christianity.”

History shows that Christ was correct in his view that the gates of hell – the powers of darkness – will always keep on trying to destroy his people. Such has been the case throughout history – both Old and New Testaments, and throughout this present gospel age. And the opposition and Satanic persecution of Christ’s people will go on until the end of the age.

The history of the Church, in all periods of history, is a story of conflict and war. This war between good and evil, between the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of this world, has been going on since the beginning when Satan rebelled against God. It is one of the central and recurring threads that runs through the entire Bible. As far back as Genesis 3:15 we get the first glimpse of the war between Christ and Satan and between God’s people and Satan’s followers:

“I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel."

That was true then and it is true now. The Church is always under attack by Satan. He hates Christ’s Church more than anything, except maybe the Holy Trinity. He hates us with an undying and virulent hatred. He is always stirring up opposition and trouble for Christians. The Church is the pillar of the truth and the guardian of the holy gospel that is able to make men wise unto salvation, and so Satan never tires of seeking to prevent the Church from spreading the gospel message and witnessing to Son of the living God to the world.

As J. C. Ryle says:

“Warfare with the powers of hell has been the experience of the whole body of Christ for six thousand years.”

There is no peace treaty between heaven and hell. The Church is always at war, never at peace with the world or the Prince of this world. It is always at war, always militant, always fighting. Its battle never ends. As Martin Luther said:

“Cain will go on murdering Abel as long as the Church is on the earth.”

Satanic opposition can come in hundreds of different ways. There can be direct assaults of course. There can be false teachers, heretics, who are thrown into the church lives wolves among sheep, to confound and confuse God’s saints with false doctrine and wrong teaching on how we should live.

But sometimes Satan’s opposition can be far more subtle. In fact I would say usually Satan’s opposition is far more subtle.

Do you ever get the feeling that when you try to get close to God or decide you’re going to do something for God, that you suddenly start to have problems you never had before? I know I do. It’s no accident that when I’m getting ready to take a service that’s precisely the time I seem to get a cold, or get toothache, or have something happen that distracts me from my purpose. It’s no accident that when a church decides it’s really going to concentrate on mission and outreach that it suddenly finds it’s members under attack from illnesses, bereavements, family problems, trouble in the workplace, falling out with friends. Satan doesn’t fight clean and fair. He fights dirty. And when Christians decide they are really going to live committed lives to their Lord and Saviour, Satan will do anything he can to stop that from happening.

That’s the gates of hell trying to rise up and stop us from being effective, obedient, loyal Christians.

But far from being surprised or scared when such things happen to us, actually we should expect it and rejoice when such opposition or persecution comes our way, for it means we are on the right track in our Christian lives. A church which faces no opposition or Satanic attack should be the one that is scared, not a church which does face the gates of hell rising against it.

Remember Christ’s words when such opposition comes and take heart. This is Matthew 5:10-12, part of the Beatitudes:

“Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.”

And then also think about these words in 1 Peter 4:12-14:

“Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice insofar as you share Christ's sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed. If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you.”

Things happen to us in life. Not everything is plain sailing. We go through hard times of suffering and loss and pain. Or we go through times of being mistrusted, disliked, mocked, and even hated because we have faith in Jesus Christ. The gates of hell are real and I don’t think there’s any Christian who is immune from such attack. It happens to us all.

Fifth, there is Christ’s promise of security and safety for his Church. “I will build my Church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.”

Take heart, Christians! Because as well as Christ’s warning about the gates of hell, there is also a promise that Christ makes to us in this verse, a promise all of us need to cling to and remember. Yes, the gates of hell will try to rise up and destroy us, but they cannot and will not succeed. The forces of evil will do battle with the Church, but they will never prevail against it. They will fight, but they cannot win. That is Christ’s promise to each and every Christian believer.

Have you ever thought about the emblem that came to symbolise the Presbyterian and Reformed Churches throughout Europe? It’s still the symbol used on the badge of the Church of Scotland to this day. It’s the burning bush. The first impression might be that this is a very strange symbol to choose. But actually it’s highly appropriate, not only because it symbolises God’s presence with this covenant people, but because that bush is always in the flames, always under fiery attack, but not consumed, never destroyed. “I will build my Church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.”

Only Christ’s church receives this promise from its King and Head. Other empires and earthly kingdoms rise and fall in human history. Think of the once mighty empires of the Persians, the Egyptians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Vikings. Think of, in more recent times, the great empires of France and Britain. None of these earthly powers has stood the test of time. But Christ’s church stands and grows for ever. “The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdom of our God and of his Christ” as the Book of Revelation says.

The promise does not apply to all visible churches in this world however. In New Testament times there were churches all over the Middle East and what is now modern day Turkey. Today, few of those churches remain in existence. In Bridgeton there used to be six or more churches in the area now covered by this one parish church. Individual churches can disappear and close. This is especially true of churches that depart from Christ’s teaching, from the faith that was once delivered to the saints. Christ warned the seven churches to whom letters were sent at the start of the Book of Revelation that if they did not pay heed to what the Spirit was saying to the churches, Christ would remove their lampstand from its place – in other words remove his presence and the light of his glory from them – so they would cease to be churches at all. So, although the promise does not apply to every individual church, especially churches that are not faithful to Christ in their teaching and service, the promise does apply to Christ’s own church, to the great congregation of true believers in him. Against them, the gates of hell cannot prevail.

Even if Satan stirs up persecution so that Christians lose their lives, the gates of hell shall not prevail against this Church, because for Christian martyrs, death is only a doorway into Christ’s presence and eternal blessedness in heaven.

No matter what the enemies of the church do, whether they be worldly rulers, enemies within the church, or the cosmic forces of evil that work behind our human enemies, God’s people, God’s church shall never be overthrown. We have Christ’s own promise for that.

As the apostle Paul says in 2 Corinthians 4:8-10:

“We are afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not driven to despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed; always carrying in the body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be manifested in our bodies.”

We can go through the mill in our sufferings. God sometimes puts us right into furnace with its blistering heat and searing pain. God puts us through it, but never without a good reason, there is always a purpose behind it, even if we cannot begin to imagine what it could be.

Romans 8:28: “And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.”

In the 19th century, French troops liberated the prison of the Holy Inquisition in Rome. In one of the cells, a prisoner – probably a Protestant who had been excommunicated from the Church of Rome – had scratched some words on the walls. They read: “Blessed Jesus, they cannot cast me out of Thy true Church.” Not one single believer can be snatched out of Christ’s hand by the Devil and all his minions however hard they try.

The question each of us must consider tonight is whether we are truly members of Christ’s Church. Not members of the Church of Scotland – for that membership can save no man or woman. But members of the body of Christ, part of Christ’s great congregation who trust and follow him and for whom he died to redeem and save. For membership in that Church guarantees salvation.

“And on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.”