ResponsiveReiding

Many have speculated about what’s next for Steve Lawson in the aftermath of his very public and scandalous fall into moral failure. It’s been about 2 years since Lawson, married and at the pinnacle of his ministry career (if we can call it that) was exposed as having carried on an inappropriate relationship with a much younger woman for about five years. The news was heartbreaking on many levels.

As one might expect, Lawson lost his position as lead Preacher (he was not actually an elder there from what I’ve been told) at a prominent Dallas based Church. His various teaching positions all evaporated – justly. His writing contracts (as I understand it) were also terminated. And of course the ministry he headed crashed.

Now, Steve has written his confession in greater depth than his original open letter. It is a sad read. Yet hopeful. It is not his best writing in my opinion. But I am not a great critic to be heard on that front either. It is short. Full of statements of sole, personal responsibility. And fiercely controversial.

For the most part, reviewers and commentators I’ve read and/or listened to are sharply polarized. They range from – “let’s forget it all and move on” to – “we wish him the best, but we really think this dog ought to go off and die somewhere quietly so we don’t have to think about him any more.”

It is understandable that many feel betrayed. His actions were a betrayal. A familial betrayal. An ecclesiastical betrayal. A personal betrayal to his many friends and admirers. A betrayal to his place of leadership and to the life of this young woman. A betrayal to the cause of solid Reformed and Biblical Christianity. No question.

In the book, Lawson owns all of that without flinching. But as one commentator I read said well, both extremes in the responders are both right, and wrong. Extremes tend not to suffer from being tempered. But I must add that I am sorely disturbed by the foulness of the vitriol from some in the name of Christ. Proper censure? Of course. But some pretty un-Christlike invective is being slung around. And that, from some who ought to know better.

Let me get on to my own thoughts so as not to make this as long as the book itself. These issues stand out to me.

1 – One prominent critic stated flatly “Steve should not be writing a book.” Mmmm. “Should” implies some sort of Biblical or at least moral imperative. But in truth, no such objective “should” can be pointed to. There is nothing governing whether anyone should or should not write a book. It is a misguided pronouncement.

Now, I do question whether or not writing this work at just 2 years in is wisest. I do not know. More on that below. But I have no right to prohibit him from doing so. There is nothing inherently wrong in doing so.

I also note that some say that writing such a book is the equivalent of “teaching” – as though Lawson is in the pulpit. In truth, any form of communication where rights and wrongs are discussed, instructions given or in this case – warnings sounded – is indeed a form of teaching. But as others have noted, if one cannot warn others in their confession, we’re not only going to have to ignore many of the Psalms, but whole books like Jonah. After all, Jonah was the only one who could record all his own failures. And he did so unsparingly as part of Holy Writ. Let’s not over speak here. Or historically, should we castigate Augustine’s Confessions or Retractions? What of other saints in history?

Once, I attended a small conference where a number of the participants were asked to introduce themselves and tell something of their life stories. This was nearly 30 years ago. But I will never forget the humble and powerful opening statement of one of the men. He began his time by saying (paraphrasing) “I’m only here today as an example of what can happen when Church discipline has gone right.” He was no longer qualified for the pastorate. He owned that. It melted us all.

Steve Lawson’s fall was very public. His confession needs to be just as public. And there is no better way to reach the broader number of people he sinned against than in using print media.

I will not fault him for this, even if I would have counseled differently on some aspects.

2 – Profiteering. Many have leveled their criticism here in terms of accusing Lawson of “profiting from his sin.”

Is it possible? I suppose. But can I say it is the case? No. I do not know his motive(s). Neither do you. But I also think there some other points to be considered.

Given the loss of Steve’s normal streams of income, he still has to earn a living. We cannot begrudge him that. And a great portion of his livelihood has been derived from being a writer. There is nothing prohibiting him from using his skills to support himself and his family in this way.

In Luke 3, when the Tax Collectors came to John to ask about what their repentance ought to look like – he didn’t tell them they couldn’t be tax collectors any more. He told them to administrate their jobs righteously instead of as the thieves they had been.

The question going forward for Steve is how he will use his gifts, and in what venues? No, he cannot be an elder. He has lost that place. May he speak at times to groups? In time, perhaps? There is nothing requiring him to become mute. But he has lost the position of authoritatively preaching the Word to the congregation. Could he still be used in a seminary position? Possibly. I think those sorts of things need to be worked out over time, where he has been under good accountability, and done what he can to restore something of a transparently observable track record. But writing? Why not?

Note this from The Law: “If there is a dispute between men and they come into court and the judges decide between them, acquitting the innocent and condemning the guilty, ² then if the guilty man deserves to be beaten, the judge shall cause him to lie down and be beaten in his presence with a number of stripes in proportion to his offense. ³ Forty stripes may be given him, but not more, lest, if one should go on to beat him with more stripes than these, your brother be degraded in your sight.  (Deuteronomy 25:1–3, ESV)

Did you catch that last verse? Even in punishment, it should never be meted out in such a way that the guilty party is degraded in our sight. We do not strip others of their dignity, even when discipline, severe discipline is required.

3 – Too Soon? Plenty have weighed in on the fact that this book came out only 2 years after Lawson’s disgrace. In the process, they speak as though there is some sort of Biblical standard or mandate which dictates how much time must elapse before one is restored or allowed to be heard from again. But no such mandate exists.

Is there wisdom to be sought here? For sure. Given Steve’s “affair” lasted 5 years, 2 does seem reductive. But that is merely my opinion and sense. It is not Scripture.

Others have pointed out that it was only 50 days from Peter’s triple denial of Jesus to his preaching on the day of Pentecost.

There’s debate over just how much time elapsed between the writing of 1st Corinthians and 2nd Corinthians. Estimates run between 6 months and a year or two. But think about it. The man sleeping with his step-mother while in the assembly, is rightly disciplined, but in pretty short order is brought back into the congregation. And this is done with Paul’s admonition “so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. ⁸Therefore I urge you to reaffirm your love for him.”  (2 Cor. 2:7–8, BSB)

Some corners seem to think Lawson should not be accorded similar treatment to either of the two examples above, and have set themselves up as the arbiters of what his being restored ought to look like, above and beyond those who are intimately working with him. I think this is shameful personally. I am grieved over it. Everyone can have their opinions. No, no one’s opinions are binding on the Church (or Lawson) except the authority of Scripture.

4 – Restoration is not reinstatement. Yes, it is our job – if genuine repentance is evident, to restore our brother. No, that does not mean he can be reinstated to certain positions or roles in the Church. That said, I believe that part of the restoration process ought to include our responsibility to help our brother find a continuing place of usefulness in the Kingdom.

Everyone in the Kingdom, whether they have fallen as Steve did or not, still have a responsibility to contribute the Body with what they have. What that looks like in his case will have to be worked out. But he is not to be relegated to the dung heap and forgotten. We must find ways to restore him to usefulness. That may be in roles and capacities he’s not – or even ever – considered before. I don’t know. But it would be good for us to be thinking about it.

In closing:

My dear brother Steve Lawson. Take it slow. I know the temptation is to try and make the sting go away in whatever ways you can. That is legitimate. But as John Owen points out in his work on the Holy Spirit – He is the comforter. It is not up to us to comfort ourselves after sinning, but to wait on His work in His way and in His time. It is OK to wait for that fulness. It will come. Give Him leeway. And don’t rush others. Think deeply about how hurt people, severely bruised people cannot even stand the touch of a healer. Many are still raw. Give them the space you desire too. Some will sinfully respond no matter what. Pray for them to be released. Don’t try to make a way for yourself going forward as much as waiting on the Lord for Him to open right doors of providence. Keep your head down. Keep yourself on your knees. Be open to an entirely new set of ways to serve your King and His people. Paul loved planting Churches. He wore himself out in that endeavor. But it was his time in prison that has had its most lasting effect in his being shut up to write. Wait. And don’t tell us how much you’ve suffered. That’s between you, the Lord and come confidants.

To my dear brothers and sisters in your criticisms, comments, reviews and opinions – do not degrade, write off or place unbiblical constraints on your fallen brother. Like a comrade in arms who’s been wounded on the battlefield – drag him back before the throne of grace that he might be bandaged up, and raised up to fight another day. Yes, his wounds may be self-inflicted. And so are yours and mine. An old rabbinic proverb says “let the man who is too old to act on his lust, not congratulate himself that he doesn’t.” I haven’t faced Steve’s particular temptations under his particular circumstances. But I know the doctrine of depravity well enough to know that any human being, redeemed or not, is potentially capable of any atrocity given the right circumstances. When many Christians folded under the threats of the Decian persecution, many found little sympathy for those who returned. Let us learn from the stain of that response ourselves. Don’t just pray about Steve – pray FOR him. And forgive as Christ has forgiven you. Think more about what sound restoration can look like, than whether or not we’ve mapped out the best discipline.

And may our gracious God and father of our Lord Jesus Christ remind us how much more He delights in mercy than in sacrifice.

Jude – An urgently needed epistle, for our place and time. 

Given the hyper-sexualized character of our present day, nothing is more needed than the reminder that being led by our sinful impulses, out of order with God’s parameters for human sexuality – even now crept into the Church – is under the condemnation of God, and will result in the severest judgments. The Church in every age is called to holiness under the Lordship of Christ Jesus – irrespective of any supposed revelations or imagined anthropology that gives license to sexual abandon.

Let us begin:

Jude – 

A slave of Jesus Christ

Brother of James

To those – 

Called to be God’s

Beloved in God the Father

Kept by and for Jesus Christ

I wish you multiplied 

Mercy

Peace

Love

Purpose – 

I was eager to write to you about what belongs to the Christian life we both share,

But I find it necessary to narrow that focus, and to urge you to contend for the very essence of The Faith itself – that which is already settled and has been delivered to the Church once and for all – needing no emendation.

Why? – 

Because there are some specific individuals who have become part of the Church, received among us as part of us – whom God has always designated to be condemned for what they do. These are – 

Ungodly

Ungodliness shown above all in perverting the Gospel of grace by making it a matter of felt things rather than submission to Christ as Lord. In the process, this gives license to sin.

So let me remind you of some foundational truths you already know – (once received already) – 

Don’t be surprised at this. 

Let me give you 3 historical examples of those who refused to live in the holiness of serving Christ in order to indulge their sinful impulses: 

A. Even after delivering the Jewish nation from Egypt’s bondage, Jesus had to destroy unbelieving ones within their communion. 

B. And even in Heaven itself, there were angels – beings created to minister to humanity, who had to be purged, because they failed to submit to Christ, refusing to keep within their assigned bounds. Those who even now are kept in eternal chains of gloomy darkness until the final judgment. 

C. The inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah, despite righteous Lot being among them. They were so given over to this impulse toward sensuality they fell too into sexual immorality and exemplify how God judges such behavior. 

With all of this well known, these ones today, who have crept in among you, claim some sort of new revelation (other than what you’ve already received) which frees people to pursue the sexual immorality which is so defiling, and is at its heart a rejection of the Lordship of Christ, and leads them even to blaspheme those who would be holy – angelic or human!

You know how disordered this is when you consider that even when Michael the archangel was disputing with the Devil over Moses’ body, was not filled with impudence, but in reverence to his station before God, simply said: “The Lord rebuke you.” He kept his station.

But these folks? The talk glibly about high and holy things. Talk which will eventually find them destroyed by God. They imagine that if they have an impulse toward something, they are free to do it – like animals who act only by instinct. This is the essence of the sensuality they practice and preach. 

So watch out! 

They act just like Cain – He followed his wicked impulse and ended up murdering his brother.

And putting on prophet’s robes like Balaam, they are more interested in what they think they will gain by their sin, than in serving Christ rightly. 

They are condemned just like those along with Korah in his rebellion against God’s order – especially when they rebel against godly leadership.     

This being the case – they are dangerous to you. Their teaching and lifestyle is like hidden reefs to those of you on course, sailing toward Heaven. They will bring your Christian life to shipwreck. 

They even partake of the Lord’s table as though all is well. 

In truth, they take positions of authority simply to feed their own sensual appetites. And they have no benefit to your souls, like fluffy, waterless clouds have no substance and provide no benefit to a farmer whose crops need rain.

And, like clouds, they are just blown about by any wind of doctrine. 

In truth, they have absolutely no useful or nourishing fruit. They not only produce dead works, they are spiritually dead inwardly. They have no roots in the truth once for all delivered. All their activity is just so much churned up sea-foam. Empty froth. They are like wandering stars that can give no navigable light. And their end, is to be cast into eternal and utter darkness. 

Once again, this is not new or unexpected. Long ago Enoch prophesied that God would come with His holy angels to execute judgment upon such for their ungodly deeds, done in the most ungodly ways, all of which spring from their ungodly rejection of Christ’s Lordship. 

What are the features by which you can detect them? 

A. They are grumblers regarding anything which does not please them.

B. Never content with God’s assignments and providences.

C. They follow their own sensual desires about e everything else. 

D. They are boisterous and proud in their deportment. 

E. And they play politics in the Church to get positions of power. 

They refuse to be ruled by anything but self.

So don’t forget, the Apostles and Christ Himself said such would invade the Church. As Peter too has said, these will arise in these last times – given to following ungodly passions. 

And because of this trait, they will cause divisions in the Church. For they are worldly, not concerned with Christ’s kingdom and its character. 

So let me tell you how to respond to all of this.

1. Dig down deep into the bedrock doctrines of your Christianity. Revealed truth above feelings. 
2. Pray in concert with the Spirit’s goals and work in your life – conformity to the character of Christ.
3. Not over-reaching by trying to live in the fulness of our inheritance now, but waiting the proper time for all that is to be ours in Christ at His appearing. 
4. In these, and to these, work with others. Draw them back to this focus. 

Some will be unsettled by what is taught by these interlopers. Help steady such in the truth.

Some others will actually buy into their false teachings. Do what you can to snatch these out of the fire. Bring them back to those once-for-all delivered truths.

Some may even get caught up and follow their wicked example and fall into the same sins. Labor to bring them back, knowing that a powerful delusion is at work.

And be careful yourselves – hate even the stench of all this, that can easily rub off on you. 

And so, with this warning, I commit you to the One who is able to keep you from stumbling in the same way; even Christ alone who can present you blameless before the Father and His glorious presence with great joy in spite of it all. The Church will not fall. 

Oh, praise our Lord Jesus Christ – to whom belongs all glory, majesty, dominion and authority. To whom alone all of these have always belonged, and always will. 

So be it. 

Different books are important for different reasons. Some are essential for broader spiritual and theological foundations. J. I. Packer’s “Knowing God” for instance. Some for deeper theological understanding of a particular topic like my recently reviewed “The Earliest View of New Testament Tongues” by Maurice Vellacott. And we could add J. C. Ryle’s “Holiness”, Calvin’s “Institutes”, Charnock on the Attributes of God; Flavel, Owen, Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress – the list goes on and on.

Then are books which come on the scene answering to a particular point in time in the history of The Church. Books which address a present crying need in our own context of American Evangelicalism. Books like Matthew Bingham’s “A Heart Aflame for God.” A book providing a deeply needed corrective at a critical moment. A book I wish every modern Believer would take up and read. A book essential to basic spiritual growth. A book I hope you buy, read and think deeply about. A book much needed. A book addressing a core spiritual issue which is often ignored by many, and at the same time pursued by others quite errantly.

More than a decade ago, I found myself preaching through Paul’s letter to the Ephesians. For me, Ephesians occupies a supreme place in the Scriptures. It is, to use modern parlance, the single best metanarrative provided by The Spirit for the Christian life and mind.

In 6 short chapters Paul probes the eternal mind and purposes of God before the world was even created; 

moves us through the plan of God in the ages; 

brings us to living out the implications of these truths in the world, the Church and down to our own homes; 

equips us to wrestle with cosmic forces – and does all of this in the context of pointing us to the eternity before us. 

No other book in the Bible comprehends so much in so little space. 

The whole of God’s plans and purposes are laid before us in astonishing clarity and conciseness. 

Every time we lose perspective, we can retreat here to gain the big picture once again. And what a breathtaking picture it is. 

While preaching through Ephesians, I was captivated by Paul’s repeated motif of “Trajectory.” He refers to it almost everyplace he writes – but is perhaps best summarized in Romans 8 “For those God foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brothers. And those He predestined, He also called; those He called, He also justified; those He justified, He also glorified.  (Romans 8:29–30, BSB)

In other words, Paul, by The Spirit, is never at rest with people simply being saved or justified. We are saved for purposes – and especially for an end. As is repeated often in God’s dealing with Israel, that He brought them OUT of Egypt to bring the IN to Canaan; So it is Jesus brings sinners out of our death in trespasses and sins, to bring us unto, or into conformity to the image of Christ. To bring us into ultimate, manifest communion with Himself – face to face for eternity.

Being born again is just that – the new beginning. It is not the end. It is the starting point. Hence the entire Christian life is meant to be pursued on purpose in concert with the ends He has in store for us.

Sadly, for many, the Christian life seems to be stalled at the point of being justified. Growth in Christ, Peter’s sense that “Grace and peace” are to be “multiplied to you through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord.”  (2 Peter 1:2, BSB) appears almost absent. That there is no conscious attempt to “make every effort to add to your faith virtue; and to virtue, knowledge; ⁶and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; ⁷and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness, love.” (2 Peter 1:5–7, BSB)

Effort in the spiritual life seems to be a dirty word to some. As though intentionally living in concert with God’s purposes for us is somehow contradictory to living by faith.

Then again, we have (seemingly) scores of Christians (whether they actually are or not I’ll leave to a different discussion) pursuing a deeper spiritual life by swimming back across the Tiber to Rome or Eastern Orthodoxy. They have found the mere Christianity which stops at justification somewhat empty. And there is no trajectory in their spiritual lives. So they begin to look for it (as my Dad used to say) in “smells and bells.”

Perhaps they have rightly seen that some equate theological knowledge and orthodoxy with true spiritual growth. That being theological egg-heads equals spiritual maturity. Or perhaps they have found Christianity wanting because it is simply their religion of choice, having never been truly born again, and thus look for something(s) to fill the gap. I don’t know.

All that being said – there is much to be sought out and thought out regarding the nature of spiritual growth in Christ – or the lack thereof. It is to this need, and as a corrective against seeking such spirituality errantly, that Bingham’s book speaks so profoundly. And it does so by re-discovering how deeply previous generations of Reformed and Puritan thinkers and writers pursued the topic. It is a call and guide to intentionally pursuing true growth in Christ. It is a call to restore a fundamental component of genuine, Biblical Christianity. It is call to the Christian imperative to be seeking first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness – in the practicality of living unto God with purpose – daily and methodically.

I was reminded of Richard Baxter’s yearly visits with his own people when he would ask:

“Have you grown spiritually in the last 12 months?”

If they replied yes – he would ask, “how do you know? In what way?”

And if they replied no – he would ask “why not?”

Perhaps an inventory we would do well to take of ourselves on some regular interval.

While Bingham acknowledges the baggage which comes along with the term “spiritual formation” – he also defines it well: “Spiritual formation is the conscious process by which we seek to heighten and satisfy our Spirit-given thirst for God (Ps. 42:1–2) through divinely appointed means and with a view toward “work[ing] out [our] own salvation with fear and trembling” (Phil. 2:12) and becoming “mature in Christ” (Col. 1:28). (P. 34)

In arriving at this definition, he builds off of the Puritan John Flavel’s concept of “keeping the heart.” Something Flavel describes as “nothing else but this constant care and diligence of such a renewed man, to preserve his soul in that holy frame to which grace hath reduced it [i.e., led it back to], and daily strives to hold it. … [T]o keep the heart is carefully to preserve it from sin, which disorders it; and maintain that spiritual and gracious frame, which fits it for a life of communion with God. (Flavel’s works vol. 5:426)

O to be Christians in this mold!

In reading this volume, my own heart was challenged, cheered, excited, encouraged, directed, and made desirous of more of God.

If you have but one extra-Biblical book to read this year – make it this one.

You won’t be sorry.

“Now these are the portions that the Israelites inherited in the land of Canaan, as distributed by Eleazar the priest, Joshua son of Nun, and the heads of the families of the tribes of Israel.” (Joshua 14:1, BSB)

Joshua 14-19 is a curious portion of Scripture. One wonders just what the point of recording all the minute details of the boundaries of each of Israel’s tribes is for you and me today?

Yeah, we get it for the Israelite’s back then. But do you and I really need to know that “the allotment for the clans of the tribe of Judah extended to the border of Edom, to the Wilderness of Zin at the extreme southern boundary: Their southern border started at the bay on the southern tip of the Salt Sea, proceeded south of the Ascent of Akrabbim, continued on to Zin, went over to the south of Kadesh-barnea, ran past Hezron up to Addar, and curved toward Karka. It proceeded to Azmon, joined the Brook of Egypt, and ended at the Sea. (Joshua 15:1–4, BSB)”? And this for every tribe in detail?

What’s this all about?

Good question.

And I want to argue that there is no wasted or useless information here. No, God isn’t interested in you and I becoming experts in ancient Israeli geography. But He is after something. Something very practical and instructive. Something He saw fit to record in what seems to be a lot of unnecessary detail.

What’s the point? It is one brought up again by the Apostle Paul in his discourse on Mars Hill when he said: [God] “made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and He determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their lands. God intended that they would seek Him and perhaps reach out for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us. (Acts 17:26–27, BSB)

Just as it was for every Jew who was there to receive the apportioning of their territories, so it is for you and I today.

Each tribe, and each individual in each tribe, was assigned a place and boundaries by God Himself. Just like you and me.

Some would have a coastline. Some would be landlocked. Some would dwell near the headwaters of the Jordan. Others by the fruitful shores of Galilee. Some would be in mountainous regions, and others by the arid plains by the Dead Sea. Some would face the remnants of the Canaanite giants and find their warfare perpetually hard and dangerous. Others would more easily rout their enemies and settle the land quickly. But all by divine appointment. All by the most wise and loving design. All part and parcel of being God’s people, in God’s place, at God’s time.

And so are we.

Beloved, the boundaries of your habitation may be filled with particularly stubborn remnants of indwelling sin. Or, you may be in a place where that warfare seems easier for you than for your brother or sister. The boundaries of your job, your gifts and talents, your family with all of its blessings and challenges. You may have easier access to streams of spiritually refreshing waters, or be in a place where seeking out such sustenance is a daily chore. The ground you plant in may yield crops easily, or may need to cleared of stones and other impediments almost without end. You may have a bounty of close spiritual friends to aid you. You may struggle almost alone. You may have sins easily subdued, and others that spring up like thorns and nettles at every turn.

Take heart Beloved. You have not been placed in your circumstances and brought into your unique experiences by accident. Your loving and wise Father has set your boundaries to bless you, not to curse you. Each has been lovingly and wisely crafted so as to give you the greatest advantage in seeking, knowing and relying upon Him. That you might know Him better. Experience Him more. Draw closer to Him. Learn to trust Him. And see His loving hand in all things.

Yes, there will be sorrows in your assignment, as well as joys. Seasons more pleasing than others. Times of victory, and times of stumbling. Times when you feel hemmed in, and times when you rejoice at just how safe and comforting the borders are. Times of frustration and times of freedom. But He has set your borders with meticulous care. He knows you. He knows what will be most useful in your growth in Christ. What will give the maximum opportunity for eternal blessing. What suits your gifts, abilities – or even lack thereof – and best aids you in your journey to being conformed to the image of Christ.

Don’t wish for someone else’s allotment. Seek Him in yours. Don’t chafe against the lot lines. Learn to praise Him for His precise appointments. Don’t envy someone else’s gifts. Rejoice that even if you cannot see it now, He has set all in place for your best advancement.

Trust Him.

He loves you far more than you can love yourself. He desires higher for you than you do for yourself. He is wiser in His appointments than you would be if you had the reins.

He gave His Son for you. So what good thing – if it were really better – would He withhold from you now?

The Grand Geographer never errs.

Joshua 5:12 “And the manna ceased the day after they ate of the produce of the land. And there was no longer manna for the people of Israel, but they ate of the fruit of the land of Canaan that year.” 

The Israelite’s entrance into Canaan at Jericho marks an important season of transition. These transitions seem to me to be greatly overlooked. The very first of these mentioned is in our text. The day after the people of Israel first ate of the produce of Canaan, God’s provision of manna ceased. Dead. Full stop. 

The people were no less God’s people. But this supernatural provision was not meant to be perpetual. They had come into a new era. In one sense, they had matured. They had grown past their Wilderness condition and entered into the first phase of obtaining their earthly inheritance. 

There were other similar changes. 

No longer would they be led by the cloud over the Ark of the Covenant by day. Nor would they have the manifestation of the pillar of fire by night. No longer would water be fetched out of the rock as it was several times before. Joshua would be their leader, but he was not the prophet Moses was. Deut. 8:4 and Neh. 9:21 says their clothes did not wear out during their wandering. That provision would cease too. 

Then there was the bronze serpent which was to be looked upon for healing from God’s judgment in Numb. 21. It is never mentioned again except in 2 Kings when it had taken on superstitious and idolatrous dimensions. Add to that the issue of Gideon’s ephod, crafted as a monument to God’s supernatural deliverance. Then we read: “Gideon made an ephod…and put it in his city, in Ophrah. And all Israel whored after it there, and it became a snare to Gideon and to his family. (Judges 8:27, ESV)

And perhaps one more example to try and round out all that I am after here: The Mosaic Law. It was made for a time and a place and a purpose – and attended by the most supernatural of occurrences. But in each and every example noted – any attempt to codify such matters as to make them the permanent norm within the Church in the Church age, ends up bringing confusion. When they are intentionally repurposed so as to be perpetual in all ages and circumstances – they become stumbling blocks. God is the same. But we no longer have tablets of stone to put beside the Ark. Nor will we ever have them again. Permanent spiritual realities, but carefully separated from the external events.

What does this have to do with the early Church? This: When we do not recognize that the Church of the Apostolic age was nascent. And if you will look at the history of Christian cults – you will almost invariably see an element of claiming to restore the Church to its early roots at the base. Something I think to be a serious error.

Now let me be clear. Jude is emphatic that we need to defend “the faith” which was delivered unto us once and for all. The fundamentals of saving faith – of the persons and nature of the triune Godhead; the Creation-Fall-Redemption narrative; the inspiration, authority and sufficiency of Scripture; the person and work of Jesus the Christ as very God and very man; Jesus’ substitutionary atonement on the Cross; salvation by grace alone, through faith alone in Christ alone – these (and other) non-negotiables must be defended and maintained in every generation. 

What is concerning in this regard, are attempts to re-create the practices and non-inspired traditions of the infant Church as though they are somehow sacred. House churches. Less defined leadership roles. Music. Communion practices. Congregant participation. And others. 

Now there is nothing inherently wrong with adopting such practices. Times, places, cultures, varied giftedness among worshippers, etc., these all can and do impact what might go on in any local assembly – large or small.

And I might note here that the size of a Church is frequently an area where this issue arises. And we must be charitable, flexible and wise considering it. There is nothing inherently better or worse in being a small church, nor is there anything inherently better or worse in being a large one. Each one has it pluses and its negatives. But codifying one or the other as more sacred, based on the Church in its infancy is poor reasoning. Observing what a thing was in one time or place in the Bible is not necessarily an endorsement nor a model to be emulated. It may just be a report of what was – in that time and place. 

The same could be said for the structure of Church services (more or less of a regulated liturgy or habit of practice). Or the frequency of the Lord’s Table. When to meet (Sundays or at other times). How the divisions of leadership among elders and deacons are structured. Some portions of Scripture may give us actual directives. Others may only give us examples of what was being done in a particular place under particular circumstances.

What can be missed in all of this is that the Church was meant to be widely adaptable once it was to expand outside of its Judaic womb. It was always meant to mature. It was meant to be able to thrive in various cultures, under a vast array of social, political and governmental environments and in every age. 

So it was a chief concern of Paul’s – in regard to the practice of spiritual gifts in Corinth – was this very issue of maturity: 1 Corinthians 13:11 “When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways.” 

Every child has the inborn capacity for speech. But as one matures, they become responsible for their speech. Babbling is fine for an infant, not for an adolescent, teenager or worse yet, an adult. As we mature, native capacities are harnessed so as to be brought to usefulness. As children our thoughts are unguarded and unregulated. As we grow we take more and more responsibility for governing our thought life. So it is self-control is not only a fruit of The Spirit (God’s thought life is NEVER uncontrolled), but among the 17 times it is addressed in the New Testament, is also cited as a requirement for leadership (1 Tim. 3:2, Titus 1:8). Hence even the exercise of Spiritual gifts which might have taken on some unique forms in the earliest days of the Church, will need to be considered in more refined ways as the Church and those in it, mature. 

Now, back to where we started. Might not our observations of Israel’s transition from its wilderness wanderings to their physical inheritance be worthy of consideration? I think so. Consider the following.

It might have been very easy for those now camped outside of Jericho, to wonder if God was still among them once the supernatural manifestations they had experienced for the past 40 years ceased. Isn’t it better to always have the supernatural manifestly evident every day? Apparently not. 

Having come to a next stage of growth, Israel was to take on responsibility for feeding themselves in a way they did not previously. They were going to have to be guided by what God had already communicated and inscripturated more than by the direct prophetic leadership of Moses. Yes, Joshua was there, but that wasn’t quite the same was it? And when he passed, there was no one appointed to take his place. The bronze serpent wasn’t a means of healing anymore. In fact, it does not appear to have been excepting its singular usage. Did their clothing wearing out and their need to make new ones mean God wasn’t among them as He once was? Was this a lesser spiritual state? Should they be crying out for water from the Rock to slake their thirst once more? 

You get the picture.

But I wonder if we have some in the Church today who might not have a similar problem in our hearts past the early Church age. 

Are we still clamoring after cloven tongues of fire? Is the Church less Spirit-filled without them? So house churches were the norm. But weren’t the Jewish Believers already used to organized Synagogue meetings? Might they not legitimately look to organize similarly? Was Paul in error and refusing the Spirit when he met in the Hall of Tyrannus (Acts 19) instead of a home? Are there no more Ananias and Sapphiras to be slain for lying to the Holy Spirit? Has the Spirit left us because no Elymases are being struck blind by apostolic fiat? Are we less spiritual because there were no official apostles raised up and universally recognized after John’s passing? Baptism isn’t any more efficacious performed in the Jordan than whatever body of water it was Philip used when meeting the Ethiopian eunuch on the road to Gaza. Accidents of time and place are no more directives perpetually binding on the Church than making axe heads float. 

My point is simply this – romanticizing the early Church in its infancy as though it is the paradigm for the Church as it matures throughout the ages is a fallacy. 

Certainly there are aspects of its original zeal and dependence upon the Spirit that we do well to preserve. We see principles like devotion to the Apostle’s teaching, breaking of bread, fellowship and prayer which endure. And then forget that they also met daily, BOTH in the Temple courts as well as in homes. Why is no one codifying the Temple part? To sacredize and codify every practice of the Church’s beginnings, is to fail to recognize how it is God is bringing us along in continued growth until Jesus’ return.

Spiritual gifts for instance will come and go as The Spirit sees fit. That is His domain, not ours. He knows what is best in every place and time. We have no more right to expect or require Him to manifest what He did at Pentecost today, than to require Christ be crucified over and over again. There are once and for all matters, and there are continuing realities. But to make experiences and events perpetually repeatable in order to be the Church at its best is very simply misguided.

If the early Church was the Church at its best and most mature, then Paul’s letters to Corinth, the Galatians or Jude’s make no sense. We need to have our share in Pentecost without trying to recreate it. We need to grow up. We need to see our roots, learn from what was good and what was not, and make maturity in Christ preeminent above by-gone practices peculiar to their unique time and place.

The early Church was just that – the Church in its infancy. And the Church today, is the Church 2000 years later. We are not 1st Century Believers, but 21st Century Believers. Some things have changed. By necessity. Practices can shift and adjust. Foundational truths remain the same. May we find wisdom in differentiating them one from the other. And may Christ be glorified above all in it all.