God's Covenant with David

Matthew, chapter one.  As a child, I thought this was one of the most boring pages of the Bible.  Now I see it as a fascinating chapter, loaded with significance.  In a masterful way it covers the covenant history from Abraham to Christ.  It is the story of creation (Abraham to David), fall (David to Exile), and restoration (Exile to Christ) of God’s Kingdom.  In Christ we find the climax of the covenant, for He is the true Son of Abraham and the true Son of David, for in him all God’s covenant promises are fulfilled. 

Creation:             God’s Kingdom-restoration work effectively starts with Abraham.  In Abraham’s seed God seeks to build his model kingdom, and in Abraham’s Son He will bless all people groups.  Abraham is trained to model the man “to trust and obey” God.  His son, however, is a disappointment: the Genesis record pretty well ignores Isaac (There is no toledoth or account in his name).  Just like Eli’s sons later, Isaac seems more interested in his pleasure of steak than in the Kingdom of God.  In fact, after Abraham the whole Genesis story shows a downward trend: from cunning Jacob to his murderous sons.  Judah, who appears more righteous than his brothers, even marries a Canaanite woman and lives like a Canaanite himself.  Yet, God is faithful to his promises: Through Joseph He delivers Israel from starvation and from further corruption by godless people, who in their perverted wickedness are headed for judgment.  And finally, after four centuries of darkness, God ‘remembers’ his covenant with Abraham.  He calls Moses to set his people free and to lead them to the Promised Land.  Yet, when they finally enter this land of milk and honey, there is another period of darkness until God calls Samuel to prepare his people for the coming of his chosen king.

We can see the Old Testament as the “rise-and-fall” story of the kingdom of God in Israel.  The second part of the Matthew One account shows how in two-times-seven generations God’s glorious kingdom breaks up until it appears to have been totally destroyed.  Yet, at the beginning of this stage- at the turning point- we find King David, the man after God’s own heart.  At the height of his career as mighty king, we see how David strips himself of all his glory.  He is not ashamed to dance publicly in his underwear, among the common folk of Israel.  He is so overjoyed with God’s goodness, that he gladly sacrifices personal pride and royal splendor to give it all to God.  God is pleased with David’s attitude.  Yet, when David wants to sacrifice his wealth to build a temple, God rejects the plan, for He does not dwell in a man-made structures.  He seeks to live in human hearts.

It is at this time of David’s reign that God extends his covenant to David.  David was a man of the battlefield, but God will provide him with a Son, who will be the Prince of Peace.  He will secure David’s dynasty and build a temple for God, where He will dwell among his people: Immanuel!  His Kingdom shall be all-comprehensive, and it will last forever.

Fall:        Soon after these glorious words we see that David cannot be the king of righteousness.  David fails and in his life the pre-Flood evils of human pride, sexual bullying (taking any woman that one desires for himself), and murderous violence, are manifested even in God’s chosen king.  And later, David’s son is another disappointment.  Solomon does not live like the true son of David, who used to put God in the centre of his life.  Rather than fighting the Lord’s enemies, Solomon abuses God’s people for his own glory.  So, finally we see Samuel’s warning come true: this is what a king (like the other nations’ kings) will be like!  In later life, Solomon is more interested in his personal status and luxury than in the building of God’s Kingdom.  So, after his death the kingdom falls apart, leaving the righteous ones to wonder if there is going to be another Son of David, a better Prince of Peace through whom God’s everlasting kingdom will be built.

Restoration:       When the kingdom of Israel has almost disappeared, God sends his greatest prophets with his greatest messages of hope and restoration.  A righteous remnant will return and a shoot of Jesse will appear as suffering servant and as conquering hero.  God’s Kingdom will be restored- in a way that cannot fail.  God’s own son will be the promised Son of Abraham.  He will “trust and obey”, even on the cross; he will be the beloved son, sacrificed for all who believe in him.  Through him and his work all nations will be blessed.  Christ is the Son of David, who volunteered to be stripped down to his bloody flesh.  He first sacrificed his divine glory, and then all human dignity to pay the price to set us free.  Through his death, we may receive life, and through his Spirit we are equipped to embody his Kingdom.  Jesus Christ is “climax of covenant history”: in him all the covenants are coming together for the final stage of history.  

God's Covenant with the Hebrews

The Bible shows us that God uses covenants to restore His rule on earth.  Whether it is His covenant with creation, with Abraham’s seed (the Hebrews), with King David, or the new covenant in Christ, essentially it is always about God’s Kingdom restoration project.  In spite of the destructiveness of human behavior, God continues to make and keep his promises.  And what is the key promise?  He will continue to secure a people for Himself and one day all creation will be restored to the proper relationship with God.  This would be accomplished by the perfect obedience of the Son and the ongoing work of His Spirit.  Ultimately it is for Kingdom restoration that God calls and chooses people like Noah, Abraham, Joseph, Moses, Samuel, David, Paul, and all true disciples of Jesus Christ.

The Great Rebellion: God had told humanity to spread out into the earth.  Yet, they chose to stay together to build a mighty empire and a strong tower to challenge their Maker.  So, to break their rebellion, God confused their communication, and then the nations spread to the ends of the earth.  Afterwards God chooses Abram to begin his offensive against the enemy.  He is going to build a kingdom for himself: Abraham’s offspring is supposed to model the God-centered community.  Abraham is trained and equipped to be his faithful servant, so that God’s glory may eventually fill the earth.  He must model the man to ‘trust and obey’ the Lord God in everything.  His offspring is called, saved, and sanctified to play a key role in God’s plan of redemption and restoration.

There is so much to say about God’s covenant with the Hebrews, but we will focus on a few central themes: the blood, the worship, and the dispersions.

The Blood: The Hebrew text speaks about “cutting a covenant”, and covenant history is often about cutting and about blood.  Immediately after the Fall already, God cut up animals to provide protection to the fallen humans.  From then on, blood had to flow as an ongoing stream all the way to the cross at Golgotha.  Apparently in line with regional customs, God decided to make a covenant with Abraham and his offspring.  He called for an official cutting ceremony where cut-up animals were used to make a path of blood.  The covenant parties should have walked together through this path of blood.  The blood-covenant sealed them together to the death: the bloody carcasses served as a warning for the one who would dare to break the covenant.  Naturally, this would be disastrous for the Hebrews.  However, Abraham did not have to walk the path of blood, and in the end he did not have to sacrifice his son.  God had already provided for a Substitute, for He knew that the Hebrews could not keep the covenant.  So, the ‘impossible’ had to happen: The Trinity would be broken, and the Son of God (the true Son of Abraham) had to walk the path of blood to shed his blood on the brutal cross.  Yes, it was a covenant of love, but we can only benefit from this love if we appreciate the cost and live a life of thanksgiving for the One who paid the price.  Most of the Hebrews perished in the desert, but God always secured a righteous remnant to ensure the successful outcome of his plan.

The Worship: The Hebrews were set apart by God.  They had to be reminded of their important position and commission.  Each newborn baby boy (just one week old) had to be cut by circumcision to mark the covenant relationship.  At Mount Sinai God gave his laws to Moses as expression of God’s holy character and his holy will for his people.  And they were to build a tent, later a temple, to symbolize Immanuel: God dwells among his people.  At the dead centre of the worship place was placed the Holy Chest, which contained the summary of the Law (The Ten Words) and the signs of God’s providential care: providing bread in the wilderness and providing a high priest.  So, again the covenant proves to contain gifts and obligations.  When God’s people walk with him, they will be blessed in incredible ways; if they refuse to put him in the centre of their lives, their kingdom will break apart and God will scatter them across the nations.

Dispersion: Remember that God started his plan with Abram after He had chased humanity from Babel into all the earth.  If Israel, God’s new creation (Isaiah 43: 1) should fail to embody His Kingdom, they too, would be scattered and dispersed among the nations.  Centuries later, after the true Son of Abraham had come to pay the price and conquer the prince of the world, God’s Spirit was poured out.  From then on, God’s new covenant community is sent out into the earth to reclaim it for the King of kings: from Jerusalem into Judea and Samaria, and from there into the whole world! For ultimately this covenant is not about the Jews or Israel and it’s not about us as members of ‘the true church’: it’s about God and His Kingdom.  Abraham, apparently, understood that, for he anticipated “a heavenly country” (Hebrews 11).  May the Kingdom of Heaven be manifested: first in our lives, but also in the lives of those whom we meet in our communities.

Even though this relationship is now radically renewed, to understand Jesus we must be familiar with the preceding history.  Much of the Gospel record will remain a mystery unless we view Jesus as the ‘Climax of the Covenant’ (N.T. Wright).  Even though God’s self-revelation is the clearest in the teaching and life of Christ Jesus, it would be a crucial mistake to disregard the preceding history, for it forms the backdrop and the context of his ministry.

God's Covenant with Creation

The Great Flood: Although all humans should know better, most of them ignored God.  It was the all-pervasive fragmentation which followed the Great Rebellion and catastrophic Fall in Paradise.  Sexual abuse and violence -resulting from selfishness and personal power- threatened to self-destruct human civilization.  So, God sent a great flood to make a new beginning.  Genesis 9 shows strong parallels with Genesis 1.  In a way, God makes a new creation, yet now He makes a covenant with his creation, promising its preservation and the restoration of His Kingdom. 

A covenant is a special relationship with God.  God reveals himself and gives his good gifts; consequently the recipients are obligated to respond in thanksgiving and service.  God makes a covenant with his creation.  He reminds all creatures that He is their creator, and He promises to be their provider.  Psalm 104, for instance tells us how God provides for all creation, therefore all creation is called to praise His Name.  If there were no gifts from God for all people, they would have an excuse not to seek Him.  Yet, they owe Him many things, so their responsibility is serious.

When Paul is in Athens, he addresses an audience that does not know (much) about the one true God.  Perhaps they considered themselves theological experts, but Paul uses their own monument (to the Unknown God) to show that they are ignorant of the true God.  He then quotes one of their poets, emphasizing that they already have a relationship with God.  Since God has created them, personally and as a people-group, He is –in a sense- their father.  And He is not like some human fathers who give life to a child and then refuse to provide for it.  Since God is (creator & provider) Father of all people, all are obligated to seek him so they may know him and serve him in the proper way.  They must respect the Good Father as the giver of all good things.  Therefore they must expect all good things from Him alone, and they owe him a life of thanksgiving.  In fact, they cannot understand who they are (for instance, in relationship to other creatures) unless they know their Father. 

It is important, though somewhat humbling for humankind, that God did not create the earth in the first place for our benefit but for his pleasure.  When humans, as responsible image bearers of God, fell into sin, all of creation was affected.  So, God made a covenant with all creation.  It was not just his purpose to save some people from an earth doomed for destruction but to redeem his creation!  Yet, God decided to use human beings to do so, not through environmental action groups but through a community of people who put God in the centre of their lives.  Christ is the firstborn of this New Creation: He is the one who placed the Father in the centre.  Our father Adam messed things up, but in God’s Son we have another Adam, through whom things are being restored.  Now, creation is still groaning for the day of deliverance, waiting for the sons of God to be revealed!  When humanity is purged of all evil, it can finally be God’s true Image so that God’s power and glory is seen in all creation.

God loved his creation, the cosmos, so much that he gave Jesus Christ, His Son, so that through Him we might be saved and His Kingdom might be restored.  For the hyper-Calvinist it does not sound right that God should love the world.  He likes to read, “For God so loved the ones whom He predestined to salvation…”  One of our past pastors was also sympathetic to this warped theology.  “God loves the covenant people, those who are baptized in the genuine (reformed) church.  About the others, we cannot be so sure!” 

In China, the official churches all seem to have John 3:16 posted on their buildings, but the Chinese text reads, “God so loved the people of the world”.  One New Year’s Eve I was visiting a church service in the Yunnan mountains.  Scared by the fireworks outside, a dog followed his master into the church building.  As I sat near the back, I encouraged the dog to sit and stay.  I thought, “No matter what it says on the building, God loves you too!” and I remembered the passage that tells us “to proclaim the Gospel to every creature!” (Mark 16: 15)

In a small Canadian church congregation we wanted to celebrate its anniversary.  I was put on a committee to design a commemorative tile, but local culture prescribed that we accept the design of a sister who had been among the founding families.  Since church was all about ‘covenant’, she crafted a picture with an ark and a dove.  After we rubber-stamped the design, our pastor groaned with embarrassment, “It’s the wrong covenant!  We are children of Abraham!” 

Somehow we never did do much with the first stage of covenant history.  I guess we could not figure out how it related to the covenant we dearly loved.  Yet, if we take our mission mandate seriously, we must put it in its right perspective!

All people are recipients of God’s free gifts, and this gives us a starting point when we speak with those who don’t yet know God.  We must tell them about their Father, and remind them that they need to seek him and live with him.  He wants to use us to (promiscuously!) proclaim his Word to all people (groups), so that those who hear it may accept and believe that the earth belongs to God and that Jesus Christ is the King of the Cosmos.  After all, that’s what God’s first commission was all about: Fill the earth- not with human bodies, but with the glory of God- through a humanity that puts God in the centre.  That is the Kingdom of God!

Paradigm shifts

The first human beings knew that there is one personal Creator-God.  The Bible reveals to us where and when things started to go wrong.  The first humans already wanted to replace God to see themselves at the centre of the universe.  When the relationship between God and his image-bearers was broken through the human rebellion, all other relationships (intrapersonal: psychologically, interpersonal: socially, humans vs. nature: environmentally) experienced brokenness and serious trouble.  Nevertheless, God did not abandon his creation: He promised to preserve and protect it and to restore it in the end.  It’s about the Kingship of God: the universe belongs to God, and only when He is once again the undisputed Ruler will His Kingdom be restored.

We need to take another look at the triangle that I introduced in the previous post.  I’m sure improvements could be made, but simplicity has its advantages.  There is only One God at the top, but Satan uses many tricks, therefore I gave him the whole base line.  When people and people groups refuse to put God in the centre, they must substitute something else for Him.  Essentially there is only a limited list of options for suitable idols. 

·         In the early chapters of the Bible, people get into trouble by seeking power and glory for themselves: Lamech is a prime example, apparently followed by others who used power and violence to take whatever women they wanted for their personal pleasure.  In my understanding these warriors called themselves ‘lords of the earth’ or ‘sons of God’.  Their ruthless and destructive habits resulted in the Great Flood.  Self-worship, of course, was not wiped out with the Flood: people who live –first and foremost- for their own enjoyment and success still fit this category.  Many different desires may battle for the central place in life: wealth in the bank or in possessions, health or bodily perfection, food or drink, drugs or sex, travel or entertainment, career or business, prestige and public praise, or power over people.  In all of these things, “self” is in the centre of the human life.

·         Next, we read about people groups who begin to worship sun, moon, and other created beings.  In Egypt, it seems that shamans received powers from the spirits that they worshiped.  These spirits were typically associated with particular animals or other created things.  All such gods and spirits are virtual or real servants of Satan that promise certain powers or blessings in life.  Indigenous tribes, Hindus, and New Age adherents essentially worship such spirits of the world.  Most of modern Europe seems to have fallen prey to this form of neo-paganism, where Nature is once again worshipped as god. 

·         People love power, and it is in (enforced) allegiances to tribes, countries, or empires that they are able to get great power.  Such empires and their governments or leaders usually insist on being treated like gods.  Perhaps we should label the left-hand bottom of the triangle ‘self and society’, for it includes forms of nationalism and communism.  It also includes societies that place their cultural traditions essentially above the revealed will of God.  When people are prepared to sacrifice their lives for the benefit of their country, community, or tribe, this reveals the true nature of their god.

The Bible warns us that people are not necessarily Christians when they know the right doctrine or if they call Jesus their Lord; they must demonstrate that Jesus is their Lord!  People may presume to be disciples of Christ, but only when they begin to ‘talk and walk’ like Him is there evidence that they are truly His disciples.  This also requires that they continue to grow in this direction.  If people live their daily lives as if there is no God, they are living as atheists, regardless of their claims.  If people appear to live exemplary self-sacrificing lives in order to get applause from people or from gods, this will not give them credit with God Almighty.  True Christian behavior seeks to live a life of thanksgiving in awareness of God’s amazing grace!

In China the cultural centre has shifted from family and community (under Confucius) to the emperor, and then to the Communist Party.  Today, the younger generation clearly focuses on “self”.  That is why today most families are broken and now many working young people stop sending money home to their families at home.

In Europe the cultural centre shifted from gods and nature spirits to God.  Later humanity dethroned God, putting man and his achievements in the centre.  Even though most of Europe appears to be very secular, Nature has in many ways replaced God.  Already in the late seventies I noticed how many formerly devoted (reformed) Christians started to focus most of their time and energy on nature study and preservation.  Some may applaud this as good neo-calvinism, but in effect God had already been pushed from the centre.  Good fruit is only produced when people and communities remain solidly rooted in Christ.  When Christians no longer care about reading or studying the Bible, they cannot hope to have a redeeming impact on the world.  Shamanism and spiritual healing quickly try to fill the void left in a society that has abandoned God. 

In the States we may recognize a shift, first from God to the Federation.  Recently, however, it has become quite evident that also here we find a shift from society to self.  Anybody who has followed the economic developments and the causes for the recent depression will recognize that the wealthy citizens care much more about their personal wealth and freedom than the national economy and security.  As the government tries to clamp down on selfish forces that are destructive to the federation as a whole, I wonder if there is really that much difference between China and The States.  Yet, neo-paganism also takes its toll in North America.  It is here that “The Lion King” teaches us to learn from indigenous tribes and their spirit worship to restore the harmony with our natural and spiritual environment.  It is here that NASA scientist James Lovelock proposed that we view the planet as a living organism, called “Gaya”, which will take revenge when its wellbeing is threatened.  “Gaya” will use natural disasters to fight against the cancerous growth of human population, just “as a dog shakes off its fleas.”

bijdrage voor het N.D. (verkorte versie)

De Vloek van Bileam en de Krisis in Ons Vaderland

We zijn bezig met twee Bijbelstudies.  In onze thuisgroep behandelen we Exodus; in een andere gemeente het Boek Openbaring.  Toen we Mozes’ schoonvader tegenkwamen, hebben we de Bijbel maar eens nagelezen over Midian en de Midianieten.  Jethro prees de naam van Israel’s God, maar zijn volk Midian zocht de vloek voor Israel.  Toen Bileam voor Midian op stap ging om God’s volk te vervloeken werd hij echter tegengehouden door zijn eigen ezel.  Daarna werd hij door God gedwongen om een zegen uit te spreken over Israel.

Toen heeft Bileam een list bedacht.  Midian moest hun sexy meisjes en verleidelijke vrouwen maar naar het kamp van Israel sturen; daar zouden de mannen wel voor vallen.  Zodoende zou God’s volk hun eigen God verlaten, Sex als god vereren, en daarmee God’s woede op hun hals halen.  De list werkte en een groot gedeelte van het volk werd door God zelf gedood.  Bileam’s list werkte later ook in Pergamum in Klein Azie.  De afgod heeft hier een andere naam gekregen, maar Koning Jezus zegt dat het nog steeds de vloek van Bileam is! 

Deze zaken zijn essentieel en aktueel in de kerk vandaag.  Ik kan er wel van huilen als ik zie hoeveel van onze nichten in Nederland -vaak nadat ze hun geloof in Christus hebben beleden- gaan samenwonen met een ongelovige vriend.  Hoe komt het dat jonge mensen die belijden dat de belangrijkste relatie in hun leven hun band met Jezus Christus is, ondertussen hun lijf en leven geven aan mensen die God niet willen zoeken en zijn liefde in Jezus Christus niet willen aannemen?  Als mijn beperkte observaties betrouwbaar en representatief zijn voor Christelijk Nederland, dan heerst er een krisis-situatie waar ons Christelijke vaderland geen raad mee weet. 

Wat is de reaktie van Christelijk Nederland eigenlijk?  Wordt de huidige trend nog wel als een krisis-situatie erkend?  Zo ja, wat wordt er aan gedaan?  Wordt er wel gemeenshappelijk weerstand geboden, of is de strijd al opgegeven?  Hoe worden bezorgde ouders en grootouders bijgestaan?  Worden er landelijke gebedsdagen georganiseerd?  Worden er Facebook akties gehouden, met een vereniging van mensen die beloven dagelijks te bidden om Bileam’s vloek weg te nemen?  Willen we wel in de bres te staan voor God’s Koninkrijk, of zijn we bang voor kritiek en minachting van binnen en van buiten de kerk- wellicht van onze eigen kinderen? 

Er moet een daadwerkelijke en zichtbare steungroep zijn die onze jeugd bij staat in hun dagelijkse strijd.  Een dochter klaagde dat ze in haar omgang met onkerkelijke mede-studenten vaak als “freak” werd gezien: ‘Biologisch-organisch moet er wel wat scheef gegroeid zijn in jonge vrouwen die geen interesse lijken te hebben in intieme relaties’(buiten het huwelijk, met onkerkelijken).  Wat we vroeger van homofielen dachten, zo denkt de massa nu over onze jeugd die sterk wil staan in de wapenrusting van God.

Laten we samen bidden...

Aize, een Nederlandse Canadees in China

A Different Model

It appears to me that the Bible’s view of morality does not fit the “do’s and don’ts approach” of cultural traditions.  It is more complex than a set of clear restrictions, and yet it is very simple.  Parents and church leaders have often struggled with passages as “Everything is permissible!” or the fact that what is good behavior for the strong may be damning for the weak.  How can the prayer of Jabez be good in the time of Judah’s sons, while James would have condemned it as “seeking to serve one’s own pleasures”? 

In simple terms, the Bible calls us to put God in the centre of our lives.  We must love the Lord our God with everything we have; for one hundred percent!  Typically, we like to dilute this command to reserve a good place for ourselves, but Jesus will not let us get away with that!  A lawyer approached him, asking him for the key to Heaven.  Jesus made it clear that only when God is our only and true centre can we (theoretically) keep the Law.  This will make us look differently at Samaritans then or Muslems now.  As we have argued before, nobody can consistently live a perfect God-centered life.  Personal pride would be one way to let us quickly slip and fall.  Most people would not even try, for “nobody can be perfect” or “we are all sinners anyways”. 

If the cultural-traditional does not work, we must adopt and consistently apply a better model.  If the

circle represents our life, we must arrange (and keep arranging) it to bring and keep God (and God alone) in the centre of our lives.  Of course we can use the “do and don’t” approach for little children, but as they get older we may no longer entertain questions, like “Where in the Bible does it say that I am not allowed to do that?”, or “Prove to me from Scripture that this is what I must do (to be saved)!”  The core questions must be “Do we really know God- in his perfect holiness and his amazing love?” and then, “Do we really seek God, to love Him with everything we’ve got, and follow the teaching of Jesus and the apostles as fruit of thankfulness?”

It seems to me that questions regarding church attendance, living common law, and seeking or maintaining most intimate relations with people who reject God’s love would be answered differently than they often are.

Slip sliding away!

If you study sociology or anthropology, you realize that church communities function to a large extent like any local or sub-culture.  Especially a relatively close-knit church community will maintain a (largely informal and unwritten) code of conduct which must be followed by those who care to be accepted and respected by the community.  Some things must be done, while others may not be done.  These rules of conduct are enforced by social pressures ranging from frowning and gossip to shaming and shunning.  In serious cases the church member will be treated as godless unbelievers, so that they may no longer participate at the communion table.  When Jesus spoke with the (Samaritan) woman at the well, he was moving into the “shall not” territory of the Jews.  Jesus, however, seemed to show little respect for local cultures if they functioned as obstacle to his ministry. 

One time I brought a visiting friend to our evening worship service.  He had come in his blue jeans.  We were a bit late, so we ended up in the front pew.  I had hoped our visitor would be welcomed and experience the love of God, and that he would realize that God must also be the centre in his life.  The only thing I remember from the sermon was the fact that the preacher made sure to mention that wearing blue jeans in church is a terrible thing! 

On another occasion, in a different reformed church, I had a friend who loved to go to church with us but argued he could not go, as he could not leave his little dog at home.  I knew it was a quiet dog, so I told him he should come and bring his dog.  So, we sat in the back pew (to avoid unnecessary distractions): the dog on the pew between the two of us.  Nobody objected or made a problem.

If you want to be accepted and respected in a community, you must know and respect its local culture.  The children in the community are taught to adhere to the prescribed behavior pattern to avoid trouble and to please parents and pastor.  However, as children get older, they are likely to spend more time in other, usually more secular communities.  Here they will face different expectations for proper conduct, and so choices must be made.  If they were trained as people-pleasers, they will probably adopt a dual lifestyle of hypocrisy or they may abandon ‘that good old religion’ altogether.

In recent times most reformed churches, unless they exist in traditional, rural communities, can no longer function as closed, tight-knit communities.  Even if the pastor keeps preaching about the evil world ‘out there’ and the fake churches that are all around, he cannot prevent exposure to other cultural communities, which threaten to contaminate their own subculture.  And so, the scene is set for shifting boundaries.  Here are some examples that apply to the churches to which we used to belong in The Netherlands:

a)                  When I was a child most of our churches would publicly preach against the sin of “watching TV on Sundays”.  This was –for them- in the black area.  In the diagram I pictured it as a 6-pointed star.  Ten years later nobody talked like this anymore.  Almost everybody had a TV by then, and hardly anybody argued against its use on Sundays.  “Sunday TV watching” had been moved from the black area (“thou shalt not”) to the gray area (“you may”).

b)                  While we lived in The Netherlands, it was a well-established rule that everyone must attend two services per Sunday.  Twenty years later, however, I found that the second service was poorly attended.  Although the morning service enjoyed a ‘full house’, the afternoon service had most pews either empty or half-full.  More and more members felt that they should sacrifice the second service to have more time for rest and relaxation or family and friends.  “What is wrong with churches that meet only once per Sunday? If it’s ok for them, why do we have to go twice?”  Why was there such a sudden and dramatic shift?  Did so many people become less godly, or is there less hypocrisy now, since the social pressure has been lifted?  Apparently the cultural norms have shifted, as indicated by the 4-pronged star. 

c)                   When we left The Netherlands to go to Canada (some thirty years ago), it was still the established cultural norm that “living common law” was living in sin.  Apparently, this has been the view of the church throughout the ages.  Ten years ago I noticed that (perhaps) most of the church’s young people no longer saw a problem with living common-law.  Apparently the practice has become so common now that few, if any, councils raise objections or pursue church discipline.  “When your own children live that way, and you love them, would you want to see them pushed out of the community through discipline?  Should we not try to understand their needs and appreciate their choice to serve God in a different way?”  In the past the New Testament word ‘porneia’ referred to “sexual relationships outside marriage”, but now people wonder what marriage actually means.  “At least our children don’t sleep around!  They are committed to their friends!”

d)                  The latest development, from my limited perspective, is the growing practice for young people, even after their profession of faith, to live together with an unbelieving friend. 

Balaam was unable to pronounce a curse on the people of God, but later he was able to bring God’s own curse on them.  How?  Through sexual appeal and opportunities offered by godless Midianites.  By introducing personal and intimate relationships (‘of one flesh’) between God’s people and those who worshiped other gods, God was pushed from the centre of people’s lives.  This then threatened the whole community: God’s Kingdom was at stake!  It worked in Midian, and centuries later it worked again in Asia Minor.  Thank God we have a written record of these events and Jesus’ personal warning for the church of Pergamum.  Yet, many seem to be fooled again: Satan still uses his old tricks to destroy the Kingdom of God!

My observations and deliberations bothered me greatly, so I decided to write a letter to the editor of the “Dutch Daily” newspaper, which used to be the national newspaper for our churches.  It was rejected.  Apparently, my short article was poorly written or composed, and it did not deal with any new or interesting issues.  (If I wanted to write, I could share something about the problems of the church in China!)   Apparently, the battle had been fought and lost, and the editorial committee saw no need to bring it up again.  Well, it may be due to my lack of research skills, but I have found little evidence of a real battle on this issue.  The front of the church may show a strong reformed theology with solid historical confessions, but the backdoor was left wide open for the Enemy to come in and destroy the church like a vicious cancer in an otherwise good-looking body.

Tradition and the Will of God

We all learn from people whom we trust.  Some atheists may claim that they only believe the things that they have seen or the things they can verify by personal observation.  Yet, nobody can live this way and still function in society.  We all rely on others to teach us, and we can only learn if we –to some degree- trust our ‘teachers’ to tell us what is true.  Yet, as we grow up, we must come to a stage where we look beyond our trusted teachers and put them to the test.  When children go to school they will hear things that –in some way- will contradict the things they learned at home. So, they must compare, contrast, and choose which lessons from their parents to keep and which to discard.  Some people, even in old age, keep quoting all the things their fathers used to say.  However, as fathers we don’t have the perfect insights and we do make mistakes.  Hopefully we learn from our mistakes, and we grow in God through the renewing of our minds. 

Also in our relationship to God, we must grow and mature.  Recently we baptized a couple that had originally come to Christ through Mormon teaching; only later did they recognize that Mormon teaching does not line up with the Word of God.  As pastors and preachers, we do may miss at times the biblical balance and even allow idols to co-exist with God.  Therefore every member is called to spiritual maturity and to compare the teaching and the preaching in the church with the Word of God.  When churches and their leaders cannot cope with critical questions from their members, they are in danger of ‘hardening of the categories’ and fossilization of the church.  If we insist our teenagers accept everything we say or believe without any personal processing or evaluation, we train them to be people-pleasers, rather than God-pleasers.

After we were branded heretics by one church and rejected for membership by two of the neighboring churches, we were welcomed in a rural reformed church nearby.  The elders had all read my book and concluded that it did not espouse any heresies.  Yet, I studied at a nearby seminary, and so I had to look for opportunities to get some practical experience.  First I was allowed to preach in a local (secular) seniors’ home.  That was pretty safe, for most attendees were deaf or demented and many would sleep during the delivery of my carefully crafted homilies.

About a year later I was allowed to also teach a catechism group.  I was warned from the start not to get myself in trouble (again).  I was happy teaching the young people.  I was glad that many felt comfortable to share their personal convictions and their doubts.  I was careful not to jump to quick condemnation, yet I challenged and urged them to keep God at the centre of their lives.  Things went fine until in the Spring I had a (routine) visit from an elder visiting my class.  At the time I was dealing with the Ten Commandments; that night we discussed the Second Commandment.  The church-approved textbook argued that we may not have anything in our worship (services) that is not instituted in the Bible, such as: praying to mother Mary or the saints, burning of candles, and liturgical dance.

I explained that the Bible clearly teaches that we can only pray to God.  Therefore, we may not pray to any creatures.  Yet, the Bible does not forbid the burning of candles or liturgical dance.  So, we cannot place all four examples on the same level; the first two are forbidden, while the latter two are expressions of worship style.  “I have never pushed our church to use candles in a Christmas service or to introduce liturgical dance, but we cannot condemn other churches for doing so.”  For the brother elder, however, this was not good enough.  So, after the season had ended, I was summoned to a meeting.

I was urged to maintain the harmony in the church by upholding the traditions.  Yet, I argued that we may never confuse the revealed will of God with human traditions.  Again, I was branded the trouble-maker, but I insisted, “If you want me to teach our young people the Word of God, I love to serve.  Yet, if you want a teacher to enforce the church traditions, you ought to find a traditionalist”  For a while the pastor tried to reconcile me to the council’s will.  He maintained, in line with (the wording of) the Heidelberg Catechism, that God’s Law forbids us to introduce any elements into the worship services that have not been prescribed in the Bible.  I disagreed.  When Paul addresses the Corinthian church, he does not say, “Who gave you the idea to speak in tongues during the worship service?  Where did God institute such a practice?”  Rather, he used a functional approach.  He was not after Law-keeping, but after Church-building.  So, he said, “Speaking in tongues without proper interpretation does not build the church.  Therefore, you ought to keep it out (of your worship meetings).  Apparently, Paul had a different approach about worship do’s and don’ts!

So, I concluded, “It seems to me that you claim to bar candles and liturgical dance from worship on the basis of the Law of God.  Yet, in reality you abuse the Word of God to bolster your traditions.  You make God’s Word say the things you want to hear, thereby judging other churches.”  If tradition rules, God can no longer be in the centre; this too, is idolatry!