My recent “question series” of blog posts seems to be very well received. Thanks for reading and commenting (both through blog comments and via email). In fact, I would invite you to be a part of the question process further and let me know of some questions you would like me to ask. In fact, an email I received today with a suggested question has prompted a series of questions on pastoral ministry that I will pursue this coming week.

So, thanks for reading, commenting and emailing. I look forward to exploring these questions together with you. Your comments and emails are always welcomed and encouraged. In fact, if you would like and are so inclined, I invite you to take these questions to your own blog and develop your own thoughts further (however, for the sake of connected discussion, please place a comment on my post with a link to yours so there is a thread to the discussion).

Thanks again for reading.

Why do we, in the evangelical church, fear church tradition?

The reason this question was prompted by me this morning is that it so happens to be the Sunday of Epiphany and the evangelical church we attended had a vision Sunday with no mention of Epiphany. There is nothing wrong with a vision Sunday and similar services would have been held across North America. I guess I wonder why we don’t reach back into church tradition and remember some of the important dates on the church calender – dates the Church has celebrated for hundreds of years, such as the Sunday of Epiphany.

I remember preaching a couple of years ago on this particular Sunday and tackled the idea of Epiphany (preaching on the narrative of the Wisemen acknowledging Jesus as King). Most people in the church commented that had no idea that the Church has celebrated this date for over a thousand years now.

I am not saying that we need to be “traditional” and go back to some sort of ancient Latin service. However, maybe in our post-reformation theology (which rejects the authority of tradition, saying that our authority is in scripture alone – an important distinction), we have moved to0 far in this direction and have rejected tradition all together.

I actually think if we educated the typical evangelical on the Church calender, they would gain deeper meaning and insight. In fact, it may even help us slow down and reflect on the dates we do celebrate that too often seem to surprise us (such as Easter which has Ash Wednesday and Lent leading up to it).

There has to be more room for tradition and the acknowledgment that we, the Church, don’t stand in isolation as but are apart of the Church past, present and future.

Do we at times loose sight of the proverbial forest through the trees when we study theology?

As a theology student and pastor, I have to admit there are times when I can loose sight of the big picture and get lost in my search to understand a specific aspect of theology. Don’t get me wrong, it is vital to understand God and specific aspects of Him, but that should never replace our marveling and worshipping Him. Like a botonist who studies flowers and gets so caught up in one aspect of a flower, such as pollination, and forgets to smell the scent that pollen brings, we too can can get caught up in understanding God and forget to worship, marvel and know Him. The act of theology is vital and a privilege to do, but I don’t want to loose track of the forest for my study of the trees.

Today’s question is theological in nature. I am currently taking an independent study class on “The Person and Work of Christ” that has prompted me to think through numerous questions about Christ, thus, I thought I would ask the following question:

What is meant by the humanity of Jesus?

1. We say Jesus is fully human (and fully divine) but what does or doesn’t this refer to?
2. What is the essence of being human?
3. Is being human, the ability to sin?
4. Do you have to be born to be human (note: Adam wasn’t born)?
5. Is Jesus able to be fully human if he wasn’t female?
6. Was Jesus a master of all things (the best carpenter, mathematician, philosopher, teacher, orator, etc.) or is part of being human the inability to be the best of everything?
7. Does being human necessitate that there is limited knowledge or can Jesus be omniscient and still be human?

These are a few of the many questions I have been reflecting on. I am not going to give any answers here…I don’t have the time, energy or expertise to effectively do so, but thought the questions are worth considering.

Is the “perfect” church one in which everyone agrees on everything, or is it one in which people at times disagree but with love, respect and acceptance?

I’ve heard people say that they wished everyone in their local church believed in everything, the same way, they did. I have also heard people say that they think it would be great to be in a church were there was complete agreement on everything at annual, congregational, committee or elder’s meetings.

Is that the picture of the “prefect” church? A community where there is unanimity/uniformity about every decision; where everyone looks, acts, and even believes the same thing about everything? Does this even take into consideration the fact that God has created us uniquely on purpose (individual preferences for all kinds of things including colors, food, music, etc.). Because we have been purposely created unique, it didn’t take God by surprise when his uniquely created human beings experienced conflict when they lived in community. Unlike many of our presuppositions, conflict is not evil but how we deal with it sometimes is. This is why the Bible doesn’t call us to live in unanimity/uniformity but in unity and why the New Testament talks so much about loving each other (1 John) and about unity (Ephesians). It assumes that there will be conflict, differences of opinion, etc. in the world and in the church. This is what makes love so “defining” (it is how they will know we are Christians – John 13:34-35) and what makes it so hard.

The “perfect” church is not a place that is free from conflict but where conflict is handled with love, respect and acceptance. This may be a lot harder to live in, create, lead, etc. but it sounds a lot more interesting and possible, than a church without any conflict.