“I believe that by my own reason or strength I cannot believe in Jesus Christ, my Lord, or come to him.  But the Holy Spirit has called me through the Gospel, enlightened me with his gifts, and sanctified and preserved me in true faith“. (Martin Luther, Small Catechism)

“Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe even more boldly and rejoice in Christ, who is victor over sin, death, and the world”. (Luther)

For me personally, the issue of justification is not an issue.  The issue is sanctification.  My question is whether sanctification is merely a question of semantics, or is there a big difference?  [ first a definition: ] Sanctification is the being made holy.  It denotes the inward spiritual transformation of the believer, whereby, one is made holy.  Justification is the source of sanctification.  Sanctification comes as a result when one becomes justified in Christ Jesus.

Evangelicals seem to focus on sanctification but it is also what trips us up.  Sanctification can also be somewhat of a tricky issue to define—is it monergistic or synergistic?  I’ve been searching but this is some of what I’ve found (Puritan Board; Monergism). Some see sanctification as a something we do in cooperation with God.  Some see it as something that God alone does for us. If we see it from a horizontal basis, then in this sense, you could say it’s synergistic, or cooperative; but on a vertical basis, it is monergistic.  It can be seen as being both; and this is why this can be a little confusing.  What is it–monergistic, synergistic, or simply cooperative?

In most rural communities, the visible church is more stable and will likely remain (although many historic mainline churches are closing).  Naturally, change in rural communities do not happen as frequently; therefore, people will have the opportunity to integrate their spirituality and their religious life when they feel a need to do so (e.g., some may even decide to enter a church after a long absence after Baptism, Confirmation, wedding/funeral, or the odd Christmas worship service).

However, in the urban communities where the visible Church is less likely to be a permanent fixture.  Fast-paced change is common place (due to construction and new developments).  If an established or historic local church were to disappear from a major intersection in “City X”, the religious loss might not be very apparent; however, the spiritual void will eventually be felt by people whether we know it or not.

What does this mean for the visible Church in urban settings today?  The visible church triumphant must continue to remain and become a more visible part in our urban communities.

Are we, the Church, trying and working hard enough to make the visible Church more visible in our urban settings?  Hardly.

Tragically, many congregations of the historic mainline denominations are shrinking and disappearing from the religious landscape.  This will continue for the foreseeable future because they are failing to  help people make the connection between people’s spiritual lives with their real everyday lives.  There is a currently a huge void and lack of vision for evangelism in reaching out to people with Jesus’ Gospel message.

This means that our contemporary evangelical churches must continue to take responsibility and carry the load for evangelism and mission in urban communities.  Thankfully, many churches have not forgotten or lost their passion and vision for evangelism and outreach.  As Christ’s visible Church triumphant in North American society, we must remember and carry out Jesus’ Great Commission from Matthew 28:19-20, “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you”.

Is your local church doing taking responsibility in carrying out Jesus’ Great Commission from Matthew 28?

[ see previous post: Part 3: Religious and spiritual landscapes -- urban vs rural ]

Morever, and more to my point, is that, people who voluntarily desire to become a part of an organized religious/faith community (a church) are not as prone to sliding into spiritual oblivion. Here’s a few cases I witnessed the past month that explains our human need to be in Christian community:

The other day, a stranger walked into our church during our prayer meeting.  he didn’t know us, and we didn’t know him from Adam.  I admired his courage to enter our church.  I suspect the reason why he came might have been motivated by his desire to express his thanks to God for getting him a new job, after having been unemployed for the last four months.  In our prayers together, I felt that our small prayer group was successful in helping him express his thankfulness to God for giving him a job.  I ended up giving him a bible to take home, and we all welcomed him to come again to join us for Sunday worship and Wednesday night prayer meetings (may the Holy Spirit continue working in his life).  Also another fellow had walked into our prayer meeting a month ago. I don’t know what motivated him to come but I sensed he had a need to come.  He wasn’t a complete stranger to the church because he says he knew someone from a while back.

All of us need to have  an outlet for spiritual expression.  Without it, we will ultimately become disconnected from true spirituality.  If the opportunity for one to access  such expressions are denied them, will their spirituality become lifeless and formless? 

[ next post expresses what we need to do about this disconnect. See previous post Part 2. ]

In my move from rural to urban, I have also noticed a big difference in how people approach spirituality (as opposed to religion).   Spirituality in the urban setting (especially on the part of the postmodern generation), is much more individualized, where one person’s spirituality might not  be the same as another’s approach.  This is fine, but when one’s spiritual life is totally disconnected from the religious community life and privatized, there is a hidden danger.  When a person’s sense of spirituality goes dry and empty without some kind of organized religion to support and back them up, their spiritual lives can slide into oblivion.   They may lose their entire sense of spirituality and never know how far they’ve gone because no one is there to keep them accountable.

Has the expression of individual spirituality become too privatized?

[ next post expresses our lack or need of spiritual expression in society. ]

Have you noticed a difference in people’s attitudes toward religious and spiritual expression between rural and urban communities?

Having moved from a small community to a large one, I have noticed very big differences in the religious and spiritual landscapes between urban and rural settings.

In the rural setting, religion is still part of people’s normal everyday lives.  Whether or not they participate in organized religion, the established Christian church is there and is accepted as an integral part of the community.  It is funny how even non-church goers understand and accept the Christian church as  part of being people’s normal everyday life.  If the church were to collapse or close  in a rural community, there would be a marked void in their life because they will feel that something is missing.  I think this is due to how the church has remained somewhat integrated into the life of small communities.

In the urban setting, religion is hardly and rarely a part of people’s everyday lifestyle.  If a church is not sitting there in front of their face, it can very easily go unnoticed and be forgotten.  Furthermore, the impact of the Christian church is minimal and hardly felt in the midst of the busy and changing marketplace.  If an urban church were to suddenly disappear due to deconstruction to make room for a new condo and business developments, most people won’t even notice.  They will have forgotten that a church had even existed on intersection of Main Street and Central Avenue.

How is your local church integrated into your community (rural or urban)? Would there be an impact in your immediate community if your local congregation were to burn down or suddenly disappear?

[ next post touches on society’s approach to finding a connection with their spiritual lives. ]

Ehrman and Evans are going to debate each other again for two days. They might be sick of each other at the end, or maybe, one might convert the other?…Not.  This should be interesting because they understand each other’s theology and points of view well.  Theological spars like this are interesting because when both hold strongly to their own convictions.  One might wonder why either do not come to the same conclusions.

Anyway, this will be very interesting. I wish I could be there myself, but unfortunately it’s way over in Atlantic Canada.  If you in Nova Scotia, check it out. [Tickets seem to be all gone now.  Maybe they'll make the DVD or recording available online].  But there’s an “After the Debate will be held at Rock Church the next day, Saturday, Jan. 21 9:00-3:30PM.

Friday, January 20 at 7PM at Acadia University, and
Thursday, January 19 at 7PM at Mary’s University
Admission is FREE [SOLD OUT]
Acadia University and St. Mary’s University
www.Religionsoup.ca

Sponsored by The Navigators

The reason for our move is that I’ve taken on a new call in a new congregation and denomination. I’ve moved from the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada to the Canadian Baptists of Ontario and Quebec. This means some different ways to “doing” church. At the outset, it may also seem like different ways of “thinking” church, but for me personally, it won’t be that different since my spirituality is rooted in evangelicalism. There will be some things I will definitely miss (e.g., Apostles’ Creed, church seasons, etc.).

On a sub-note, we will be recognizing the start of Advent with the lighting of the advent candles this coming Sunday (which I learned was a recent tradition that was started in this congregation about four years ago). It may even be addressed by someone one of these Sundays during our childrens’ talk (if not by myself).  This Sunday, I will be preaching on Isaiah 64:1-9  and will be titled: “We are the work of God’s Hands”.  I hope to challenge my congregation to think of God’s work in our lives as a vital necessity in our spiritual lives.

The theological language between the two churches may be a little different but through my years worshiping and growing in the Lutheran Church and evangelical churches, I feel that I’ve have been stretched. My wide exposure and experience have challenged me to use theological-speak without losing the crux of the theological idea. I have found that being trained in various ecclesiologies and theologies has broadened my scope of ministry methods. It has enabled me to become more versatile in ministry, leadership, and in communicating the gospel, and sometimes, find myself searching for different ways to bridge the gap of understanding.

I am sure there are many other Christians who have traveled between various denominations. There differences may seem big at first, but as one becomes accustomed to the differences, they seem to shrink as time goes by.

Anyone else out there who has, or is, going through similar life-changes?

Since President Hosni Mubarak was kicked out, these Egyptian extremists are beginning to think they have free reign to persecute Christians.  Same thing happened to Iraqi Christians after Saddam Hussein was on the run.  It may be a political game of choose the leader who will hinder your personal interest the least—not necessarily choose who you think would make the best leader for the nation.

The Jesus Seminar of Robert Funk has misunderstood both eschatology and Jesus’ proclamation of the “kingdom of God”, and so it rejects eschatology and misinterprets what Jesus meant by “kingdom of God”.  “When the Jesus Seminar interprets Jesus in a non-eschatological way, the Seminar is rejecting the idea that in proclaiming the kingdom of God, Jesus was proclaiming the end of the world”, says Craig Evans.   If the Jesus Seminar’s rejection of the eschatological kingdom was a reaction to an “end of the world” type of imminent apocalyptic theology, then their reaction is wrong-headed.  However, Jesus’ eschatology involved God’s rule breaking into the present world.

The bible does express a sense of urgency in the words of Jesus; he did say that the time was ripe for spiritual discernment and for God’s righteousness and judgment to come into our world.  Modern liberal scholarship did not like this the imminent end-of-the-world type of eschatology, and as a result, they totally eliminated an eschatological Jesus for a non-eschatological Jesus.  This is like “throwing the baby out with the bath water”.  Bruce Chilton describes Jesus’ Seminar’s elusive problem of Jesus being eschatological:  “Unhappiness with eschatology as the primary reference of the kingdom is easily converted into an equation of the kingdom with whatever the going orthodoxy is: the kingdom is the Church (so Carmignac), the kingdom of the Christ (so Dodd), the kingdom is the mystical experience of the sage Jesus (so Borg), or his philosophy in a Hellenistic key (so Mack)”.

Proponents of a non-eschatological kingdom bear the burden of proof.  There are many references of a definitive future in Jesus’ sayings, and of final judgment in Jewish writings (Aramaic, Greek, and Hebrew).  Jesus scholars have been stuck in endless debate between the eschatological kingdom vs a non-eschatology kingdom.  Modern liberal scholars need to see the meanings beyond eschatology in Jesus’ proclamation.

From antiquity to Reformation era:
Augustine
Aquinas
Luther
Calvin
Irenaeus
Basil
Ambrose
Origen
Tertullian
Anselm

Modern era:
Karl Barth
Norman Geisler
J.I. Packer
R.C. Sproul
Jonathan Edwards
John T. Mueller
Helmut Thiellicke
Wolfhart Pannenberg
C.F.W. Walther
[added:]  N.T. Wright (forgot the tenth)