The Nature of the Church

It has been estimated that there are 20 000 or more species of ants! We can relate this to the church – “of every nation, tribe and tongue’! They are found on most of the earth’s landmass and are able to adapt to their environment when necessary. Ants are also social creatures, living in colonies.

The ants form new colonies through two methods, namely budding and swarming. Budding is a “breakaway of a group of ants from a mature colony to form a new colony” whilst swarming is when a young inseminated queen attempts to start a new nest by herself (not always successful). One can see the parallels to church planting!

The nest itself differs according to the species of ants. Some nests are quite complex, whilst others are not. Some are sub-terranean, some are built on trees, under stones or inside logs. In the same way each church is unique, built according to the culture of the people and according to the environment. We have communities who meet in buildings, under trees, underground, in people’s homes etc.

The queen ant is usually the largest member of the colony and of course her primary role is reproduction. The primary role of the lead elder of a church is to give vision and to teach the congregation which should lead to the raising up of more leaders, leading to growth of the local church and of course church plants. Of course within the church the lead elder is not expected to be solely responsible for the growth of the kingdom of God – individuals are commanded to go out and make disciples of all nations. Thus the comparison is not perfect! One could make another comparison of the queen ant to Jesus Himself. The queen is the head of the colony, and the ants exist to serve her and to contribute to the smooth running of the colony.

The group of non-reproductive ants are called workers. Within the church we are to contribute to the functioning of the church. The workers are involved in the building of the nest, in foraging for food, in caring for and rearing the young ants, and of course in serving the queen. Their task is chosen according to their size. In the same way the church is a group of people who seek out where they can be of service within the community of believers. Of course this is dependent upon their talents and their age (in the Lord and physical!).

The development of an ant starts from an egg which undergoes metamorphosis. It is interesting to note that a larva is cared for by workers, being fed liquid food. After a series of molts it becomes a pupa. I have read that during these developmental stages the workers actually move the larvae and pupae around the brood chamber depending on the change of temperature, as they have to ensure a constant temperature for proper development. Is this not like mature Christians caring for the young Christians, feeding them the Word of God, guiding them through their first months or year of serving our God? I have read further that even the adult ants share food which is stored in the “social stomach” of the group. Is this not like a group of believers, who share the Word of God amongst themselves? Yet on a practical level we are also required to share possessions and to help the poor.

Consider the way ants communicate. They smell with their antennae, and they leave pheromones (chemical signals) upon the soil for their fellow ants to follow. If a path is blocked then an ant will make a new trail. An unused trail soon loses its scent. The ants will continue to seek out the best route towards their food supply. A successful trail will be used frequently. The church learns from other churches in a similar way. For example. in Durban North the church leaders meet regularly to share in friendship and to share ideas. The church adapts to the times for what worked in outreach twenty years ago does not necessarily work successfully in 2012.

The ants are also able to protect themselves through biting and stinging. We believers have been equipped with the armour of God and the Holy Spirit. Just as the ant has to defend itself, we have to be alert to the enemy and be prepared to fight.

Ants are considered pests yet they are also considered beneficial to humans. They are beneficial in the aeration of soil, are used as surgical sutures in parts of Africa and South America, help to harvest rooibos, and in southern China the weaver ants are used in citrus cultivation. To me this speaks of Christians being involved in society at large. The church is not called to sit in a holy huddle behind closed doors, but is called to make an impact on the world. The individual believers can do this by being the best employee, the best board member, the better politician!

In conclusion, as the church is a group of people who continually adapt, multiply and function socially, I consider the ant colony a good comparison.

Resources
http://www.greensmiths.com/ants.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ant

Two are better than one - Ecclesiastes 4:9

About three years ago I was sitting on the verandah enjoying a coffee whilst watching the weather change from bad to worse.  As the wind grew stronger I believe that I heard God whisper in my heart to me:  “trouble is coming”.  My initial reaction was to feel fear and dread, and I responded by thinking “Nonsense!  Anyway, we have been through enough trouble in our lives, physical, financial and emotional, and we can’t handle anymore.”   But as I attempted to block out fearful thoughts my attention was caught by the two swallows who had returned to their nest.  They flew onto a candlestick which was hung upon the wall of the house, each bird perching upon a solid candle.  The more I observed them the more my mind was filled with what I believe God knew I had to meditate upon for preparation for the troubled times ahead. 

The swallows were perched out of the wind, sheltered on the verandah.  In the garden itself the branches were broken from trees and the pool was littered with leaves.  Yet the swallows did not move.  They remained still with unruffled feathers.  As I watched them I recalled Psalm 91:1-2.  “He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High will rest in the shadow of the Almighty.  I will say of the Lord, He is my refuge and my fortress, my God in whom I trust.”   As followers of Christ Jesus His Spirit lives in us.  We need to remember that His presence is always with us, whether we feel Him or not.   It is in God’s presence that we find refuge, peace and rest.  When our emotions and greatest fears threaten to overpower us we need to sit down and turn to God.  Just like the swallows found shelter and rest from the storm upon the candle tops, we need to regularly “sit” with our God.  It is by staying in God’s presence that we can experience peace and rest, no matter what the circumstances are. 

The swallows were a pair.  I had watched this pair rebuild their broken nest, defend each other in flight, and feed together.  They were now resting together.  In Ecclesiastes 4:9-12 it reads:

 “Two are better than one, because they have a good return for their work.  If one falls down his friend can help him up, but pity the man who falls and has no one to help him up. 

Also if two lie down together they will keep warm.  But how can one keep warm alone?

Though one may be overpowered two can defend themselves.

A cord of three strands is not quickly broken.”

We need each other!  In times of trouble we need to find someone to stand with us, to walk with us, to fight with us and for us, to pray with us.  This is when pride needs to be put aside.  Too often we place high expectations upon ourselves and others as to how we or they should be portraying the “strong Christ-like man or woman.”  We also want others to believe that we have it “all together.”  Yet we forget that Jesus asked for support in His darkest moments.  In Matthew 26:36-45 He asked His disciples three times to keep watch with Him in the garden of Gethsemane.  If Jesus needed support, who are we to think that we can stand alone? 

The swallows were perched on top of the candle’s wick which when lit produces a flame of light.  Two scriptures came to mind.  Firstly, Psalm 119:105 reads;  “Your Word is a lamp unto my feet and a light for my path.”  We should look primarily to the Word of God for guidance in all situations.  Secondly, with fire we will experience pain yet out of fire comes change.  When there has been a veld fire we can see the destroyed ground and smell the destruction.  Yet out of that heat comes new growth.  Some seeds will never germinate without intense heat.  Romans 8:28 reads: “And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love Him, who have been called according to His purpose.”  All means all – the good, the bad and the ugly!  The NIV Study Bible interprets the words “for the good” as “that which conforms us to the likeness of His Son (vs 29)” (2000:1720). 

I have come to realize that life on this planet is not about us, nor our comfort.  We are here to love God with all of our heart and mind and strength and to love our neighbour as we love ourselves (Mark 12:30-31).  We can choose to allow times of trouble to lead us into a reclusive and resentful way of life, or we can choose to dwell with God, experience His peace and rest, and in turn be empowered to help those who are also experiencing difficult times. 

Key Truths within Genesis chap 1-3

In this study we will identify key truths that are revealed through the Biblical account of creation. Comparing these with some unbiblical beliefs concerning the origin of man, the earth and the universe, we will be able to appreciated how God’s revelations of these key truths impact a person’s appreciation of God, one’s self worth the worth of others, and ultimately give the reason for one’s existence.

“in the beginning” implies that God existed before mankind. He is not a thing or a person or even a god who has been created or invented by mankind. The fact that God “said”, “saw” and “spoke” reveals that He is all powerful and the creator of all matter and life. Sire writes that God is personal, that “personality required two basic characteristics: self-reflection and self-determination (2004:26). The Bible reveals this to us. God determined (thinks and acts) what He was to create, and upon reflection of all created God looked at His work and said “It was very good” (Genesis 1:31). That God wants to personally interact with His creation is revealed through the account that He use to walk in the garden of Eden with Adam and Eve (Genesis 3:8-9). Being a holy God, He set parameters within which mankind could move and live and have the choice to obey or not. God’s nature as a personal God is revealed further through the fact that He is a covenant-maker as reflected by the Edenic (pre-fall) and Adamic (post-fall) covenants (Genesis 3:16-19).

If we consider deism, consisting of the belief that God is the creator but is not personally involved in His creation, then this leads to the following conclusions. “Sin is interpreted as breaking a rule, not betraying a relationship. Repentance is admitting guilt, and not sorrowing over personal betrayal. Forgiveness is cancelling a penalty, not renewing fellowship. A Christian life is obeying rules, not pleasing a Lord, a Person” (Sire 2004:131).

God knows good from evil (Genesis 3:5). This is a fact that as Christians we must believe as true as this influences our behavior. If we believe that God is inherently good, then we trust His judgements, His leadership and instructions as presented throughout the Bible, and we will believe in the forces of evil. If God knows what is good then there will be “an absolute standard of righteousness” (Sire 2004:29). But if one is an atheist, then ethics of the social good is whatever the individual may determine it to be. Sire writes that “the good is whatever those who wield the power in society choose to make it. If a person is happy with how society draws its ethical lines, the individual freedom remains (2004:227). But what if one disagrees? We see within our South African education system, in particular the Life Orientation study material, that this leads to much conflict and intolerance.

In Genesis 1:1-2 we learn that there is a creator who created the heavens and the earth out of nothing. God spoke the universe into existence ex nihilo – out of nothing. This was not a random form of creation but an orderly creation over six days and nights. God created for a purpose. He had an end result in mind. He created an environment conducive to human life. He gave man dominion over His creation. Man was created to be in relationship with His creator for eternity. Furthermore, in Genesis 1:31 we read that God “saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good.”

In naturalism one hold the belief that “matter exists eternally and is all there is. God does not exist” (Sire 2004:61). Carl Sagan, astrophysicist, expressed this even more clearly: “The Cosmos is all that is or ever was or ever will be” (2004:61). Those who are believers in abiogenesis (the development of living organisms from non-living matter) usually are supporters of the theory of evolution and micro-evolutionary change. The origin and the purpose of this “matter” is determined by the individual.

One of the key truths taught in the Genesis account is that man was created in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-28). This leads us to the conclusion that man and woman were created equal, that they have intellect, emotions, a sense of morality/conscience and creativity. Man also has value purely because he is made in the image of God. As Helmut Thielicke says, “God does not love us because we are so valuable; we are valuable because God loves us” (2004:34). This is a profound truth. When we realize that God is our source of creation, that He took the time to “form” us and to “breathe” life into us, we consider our fellow man with wonder and new respect. But if one is a naturalist one will consider one’s fellow man as nothing but a “complex machine”, with a personality that is “an inter-relation of chemical and physical properties we do not yet fully understand” (Sire 2004:64). An atheistic existentialist believes that people create their own value through their choices, whilst a Hindu considers people as manifestations of an impersonal god or Brahman without self-worth.

Man was created to be in relationship with God, to obey God, to serve God by taking care of His creation (Genesis 1:26), to be fruitful and to increase in number (Genesis 1:28), to be responsible and to be held accountable (Genesis 2:15). Man was given the freedom to choose to obey or to disobey God (Genesis 2:16-17). Man was also created to be in a relationship with other humans (Genesis 2:18-20).

As Christians, we realise that we are the created beings. We are not the source of life or the centre of the universe. New Age believers state that “the self – the consciousness centre of the human being – is indeed the centre of the universe” (Sire 2004:179). Thus man is elevated to be god, master of his own destiny. Man is not answerable to any higher being. Buddhism has a few beliefs concerning the origin of mankind. One of their beliefs is that creation is repetitive. At the start of each cycle a spiritual being takes on human form and starts the human race. “Unhappiness and misery reigns.......eventually the universe dissolves; all living creatures return to the soul life, and the cycle repeats” (Beliefs of World Religions about Origins, n.d. ¶ 1).
The Bible teaches that the origin of sin started in the garden of Eden. Eve and Adam chose to disobey God (Genesis 3:6). There were consequences to breaking God’s commands. Firstly, this led to the breakdown within their own relationship. They realized that they were naked, and in a sense hid from each other (Genesis 3:7). Secondly, they hid from God (Genesis 3:8). Their act of sin resulted in them being driven out of Eden, away from God’s presence, destined to physically die. Thus the key truth is that sin separates mankind from God.

In Hinduism there is no holy god; thus one is not sinning against god. Any acts of wrongdoing are considered a result of ignorance. Doing good will help the individual to be re-incarnated in order to do more good works and eventually be re-united with the “One”. A naturalist believes that man decides what is right and wrong. This is solipsism – the individual determines his own values. If there is no God, then who sets the standard but the individual. One is accountable to no-one but oneself. Sire writes that “ethics stems from human need and interest” (2004:73), whereas Christians believe that God sets the standard of morality. As humans we are unable to live according to God’s standards. But if one is of the belief that one may define one’s own reality, then one may even choose to believe that there is a God. This God could then subjectively be a God of love, and no matter how one lives, morally or immoral, His love will conquer all and forgive all. Nothing could separate such a believer from the love of such a god.

In conclusion, I quote Charles Rynie who said:
"If man is the product of evolution, then the extent of the effects of sin and the
need of a Saviour are played down, if not eliminated. If, on the other hand,
man was created by God, then this concept carries with it the companion
idea of the responsibility of man. If God created man, then there is
Someone outside of man to whom he becomes responsible......... A doctrine
of creation implies creatures who are responsible to that Creator. The
evolutionary origin of man relieves man of responsibility to a personal
Creator outside of himself.”
(http://bible.org/seriespage/basics-christian-faith-3)

Mankind was created to live in submission to His creator. It is only as mankind bows in heart and in deed to God that he will find the peace he is always striving to determine for himself. The foundation of man’s purpose and fulfilment are found in these early chapters of Genesis.

Works Cited
Sire JW 2004. The Universe Next Door. Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press
Kraft V n.d. Creation and Fall. Online article: http://bible.org/seriespage/basics-christian-faith-3-creation-and-fall, 2010-01-05
Beliefs of World Religions about Origins n.d. Online article: www.religioustolerance.org/ev_denom2.html, 2010-01-05

Did Jesus Christ really exist or is He a legend?

Most people have heard of the name of Jesus Christ, whether it be used as a name of praise or used as a term of blasphemy. The question we are tackling today is did Jesus Christ really exist, or is He a product of a legend? And if He did exist, is the resurrection a story or a fact?

Let us first consider secular or non-Christian sources for evidence of Jesus’ existence. Cornelius Tacitus was a Roman historian who lived between 55-120 AD. When he wrote his account of Nero’s reign he mentions the death of Jesus. Thallus, within his writing of the history of the Mediterranean world in AD 52, wrote concerning the inexplicable darkness that occurred when Jesus was crucified. In AD 70, a Syrian named Mara Bar-Serapion wrote a letter to his son while imprisoned. He mentions Jesus as the wise king of the Jews whom the Jews executed. He considered Jesus to be a teacher, thus inferring that he knew that Jesus had existed. Josephus, Jewish historian and a Pharisee, wrote a history of his people up until 66 AD. His works are called the Jewish Antiquities. He mentions Jesus twice, where he calls Jesus a “wise man”, a “doer of wonderful works.” He writes further that, and I quote, “and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold” (Jewish Antiquities 18, 3, 3).

As most of our information concerning the life of Jesus is contained within the New Testament gospels we first have to briefly examine the reliability of the four gospels. Josephus’ writings include accounts of New Testament people like the high priests Annas and Caiaphas, the Roman governor Pontius Pilate, King Herod, John the Baptist and the brother of Jesus named James, and Jesus Himself. There is archaeological evidence concerning the existence of Pilate and of Caiphas. These are people who played a prominent role in Jesus’ life, and thus add to the validity of the gospel accounts. William Craig gives five reasons why we may assume that the gospels are a reliable source of information. Firstly, the recording of events between the time they occurred and the time they were recorded was too short to allow for a legend to develop. Secondly, the gospel accounts include historical men and historical placed. Thirdly, traditionally speaking the practice of memorizing and retaining oral accounts and teachings during the period of the first century was a highly skilled process. This gives us confidence to accept the gospel accounts as reliable. Fourthly, as the gospel were written soon after the life and death of Jesus and included eye-witness accounts, if any errors or embellishments were added the witnesses would have corrected this. Lastly, William Craig writes that the “gospel writers have a proven track record of historical reliability” (1998:16-26 ). Luke writes as a historian, and I quote his own words from the book of Luke, chapter one verse one to four:
Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things which
have been accomplished among us, just as they were delivered to us by those
who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, it seemed
good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write
an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may know the
truth concerning the things of which you have been informed.

Thus if we accept the fact that Jesus existed, then we have to examine further the fact that it is claimed that He was a man who not only taught wisely but also performed miracles. The greatest miracle of supernatural event is the claim that He was crucified, did die, was buried and rose from the dead on the first day of the Jewish week. Let us consider the event of the empty tomb – was it really empty? Was the body stolen and hidden away? Jesus was accused of blasphemy by the Jewish high court and was condemned by the Roman court for treason. After His death on the cross, His body was removed and taken to the tomb of a wealthy man, Joseph of Arimathea. A large stone was placed in front of the tomb, and at the request of Jewish officials, a Roman guard was placed at the entrance of the tomb to ensure that the body was not stolen, as the Jews had heard Jesus speak of rising from the dead. Note that a Roman guard consisted of 4 to 16 men who took turns to stay awake and to sleep every four hours. The gospel of Matthew records that a seal was set on the stone in order to protect it from grave robbers. This was also an act authenticating that the body was actually placed into the tomb. Yet on the morning of the first day of the week Jewish women travelled to the tomb with the intent to anoint the body with oil, only to discover that the stone had been removed and the body was not there. When Jesus’ followers began to preach that Jesus was risen from the dead, the Jews never denied that the tomb was not empty. Instead they claimed that Jesus’ followers had stolen the body. They were never able to produce a body. No wonder, for in the gospel of Luke and John we read that Peter saw the linen cloths in which the body had been wrapped, and they were lying by themselves. Luke writes, “he (that is Peter) went away, wondering to himself what had happened” (NIV Luke 24:12).

Let us move on to the claim that over five hundred witnesses saw Jesus alive after His death. These witnesses were found in different places at different times, and who responded with different emotions, which aids to disprove the hallucination theory. For example, Thomas, a disciple of Jesus, refused to believe the fact until he saw Jesus for himself. He then reacted with shock and remorse and worship. The disciples in general were actually frightened after his death, and hid away in an upper room in the city of Jerusalem. Upon Jesus appearing to them they were, according to Luke’s account, terrified and frightened and supposed they had seen a spirit! Luke writes further that for a while they still did not believe until Jesus actually ate with them. Mary Magdalene’s response was to immediately inform the disciples of whom she had seen whilst crying in the garden outside the empty tomb. Jesus appeared to two travellers on a road to Emmaus.

Some critics argue that Jesus’ appearance is but a story to deceive people. But consider the following. A woman’s testimony was not considered reliable in those times yet it was recorded. Saul of Tarsus, a Pharisee of Pharisees, was incredibly hostile towards the name of Jesus Christ, to the point that he was known to persecute followers of Jesus. Yet he claimed that Jesus appeared to him on the road to Damascus. This was a life changing experience for him. He spent the rest of his life bearing witness to the fact that Jesus died, was buried, and rose again. The fact that people changed after seeing Jesus alive after His death is, in my opinion, the strongest evidence for the resurrection of Jesus. Peter, a disciple of Jesus, eventually died being crucified upside down. Paul was killed for his belief in Jesus, and James, Jesus’ brother, was stoned to death. If you read the accounts of the sufferings of the early believers during the reign of Nero, you have to come to the conclusion that they had reason to believe in the person of Jesus Christ. No one would choose to be hung on a cross, to be painted with tar and to be set alight for belief in a myth or a lie.

Thus I encourage you to read the gospels of the New Testament for yourselves as historical documentation, and then decide for yourselves whether Jesus was a mad man, a con artist, or truly whom He claimed to be – the Son of God.

Resources
http://www.bethinking.org/resources/explaining-away-jesus-resurrection-the-recent-revival-of-hallucination-theories.htm
Craig W L 1998. Rediscovering the Historical Jesus: The Evidence for Jesus. Faith and Mission 15: 16-26. Online article: http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/docs/rediscover2.html
Craig W. L. 1985. The Historicity of the Empty Tomb of Jesus. New Testament Studies 31:39-67. Online article: http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/docs/tomb2.html
Hannam n.d. Refuting the myth that Jesus never existed. Online article: http://www.bede.org.uk/jesusmyth.htm, 2012-08-08