1. The Church is body of people, not a building.

“The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything.”  - Acts 7:24-25

“The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.” – 1 Corinthians 10:16-17

“For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body— Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit. For the body does not consist of one member but of many.” – 1 Corinthians 12:12-14

This all goes to say that you are not looking for a fancy building, but for a group of people who will challenge, encourage, correct, and edify you. As a member of this body, you are looking for a church that has a healthy balance of members (if it were only feet or only hands would be quite terrifying). If there is a healthy balance, then an extra nose will be appreciated instead of underutilized or overburdened.

2. The Church is bigger than a single congregation.

“And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all.” – Ephesians 1:22-23

“For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior.” – Ephesians 5:23

Christ is not the head of only one congregation. He is the head of the church, of all of the churches – in Ephesus, in Corinth, in Antioch, in Jerusalem – corporately. So the title of this series is a bit misleading: it should be pretty easy to find the church. But it’s a little bit harder as you search for the right congregation to join. (Of course, the “congregation search” doesn’t have the same ring to it, you know? Please forgive my imprecision. Maybe next time it’ll be “Congregation Exploration.” That way we can all feel a little bit like Dora and Diego.)

It's hard to find a new congregation. Unless, of course, you're in Atlanta, Georgia. Then you can go to the perfect church.

3. The Church is your family.

“While he was still speaking to the people, behold, his mother and his brothers stood outside, asking to speak to him. But he replied to the man who told him, ‘Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?’ And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, ‘Here are my mother and my brothers! For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.’” – Matthew 12:46-50

“Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God.” – Romans 7:4

“Do not rebuke an older man but encourage him as you would a father, younger men as brothers, older women as mothers, younger women as sisters, in all purity.” – 1 Timothy 5:1-2

Our interactions should be like that of family. If you were moving to a new place, who are the first people you would try to find? Probably your biological family. Christians moving to a new school should be searching for spiritual family first and foremost. When you are trying to choose a congregation, you are looking for one that is part of the family – one that does the will of God. You are also looking for a place that treats each other like family – that greets you as a brother or sister with love. (Though don’t expect too many holy kisses. That’s a little too intrusive into one’s personal space. Go with the side hug to be safe.)

The decision that you make about what congregation to join is very important (as well as when you’re selecting an on-campus fellowship). It will shape your spiritual life and your walk with God during your college career. Above all, remember that you need to be part of a congregation. As my minister Glenn Petruzzi put it, ”Saying we can be Christian without being part of a church is like saying we can be a husband without having a wife.” The church is an essential part of Christianity. Paul reminds those in Corinth:

If the foot should say, ‘Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,’ that would not make it any less a part of the body. And if the ear should say, ‘Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,’ that would not make it any less a part of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell? But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. If all were a single member, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, yet one body. The eye cannot say to the hand, ‘I have no need of you,’ nor again the head to the feet, ‘I have no need of you.’… Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it.” – 1 Corinthians 12:14-21, 27

You are an important part of the body and you desperately need the other parts of the body. Just as an organ can only survive so long in transport between one body and the next, you can only survive spiritually for a short time transitioning from one body to the next. That being said, you must do your due diligence to make sure that this new body is healthy and the right fit (with the right protein receptors and blood type and all that jazz). So most of all, as you search for a new congregation, remember to “be quick, but don’t hurry.”

This is a great small group exercise to prepare Christians for evangelism. When you’re sharing your faith with someone in the airport or someone on the bus, they ask, “Why do you believe in God?” or “Why would you believe the Bible?” Preparing these sorts of answers enables you to say confidently, “Let me tell you my top five reasons…”

So without further ado, I’d like to share my reasons for believing in God:

1. I do not think that matter can spontaneously come into existence. Although I believe in the Big Bang, nothing suggests to me that it could be self-caused. Interestingly enough, the Big Bang was actually once thought to prove God’s role in creation and was anathema to atheists who had previously believed in an eternal universe.

Although I believe in evolution, I don't buy abiogenesis. That is, I don't think life could have formed purely randomly in a steaming pond of primordial soup.

2. There are some things that evolution alone cannot explain, like how life came from non-life or what makes man different from the other animals. Even atheist evolutionary biologists recognize that they take some things on faith, I simply chose to put my faith into an all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-loving Creator instead of in completely unguided naturalistic processes.

3. This is very philosophical, but I see no reason that reality should exist as it does. Science can only tells us how the universe works, not why it works that way. Why should the laws of physics be constant? Why should matter continue existing? Science has no answer, but Christianity does, in Colossians 1:16-17:

“For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together.”

4. Another very philosophical reason is a variation on Anselm’s cosmological argument, something along the lines of what Joseph Porter wrote a couple years ago.

I also believe in inherent cuteness. The miracle of babies definitely contributed to my conversion. Seriously. How ridiculously adorable is this baby? (These are my maternal instincts kicking in.)

5. I believe in Love and Beauty and Goodness. In the atheist’s worldview, these are simply ideas that man has found evolutionary advantageous and are purely chemical processes in the brain. A total atheist worldview can only feature such ideals as shadows of what they truly are. But I believe there is something more inherent, more real to these qualities; when I say “I love you,” I mean a whole lot more than just “there are these hormones running through my body which signify physical attraction.”

So those are the primary reasons why I believe. What are some of your top five reasons? Share!

“We begin to notice, besides our particular sinful acts, our sinfulness; begin to be alarmed not only about what we do, but about what we are. This may sound rather difficult, so I will try to make it clear from my own case. When I come to my evening prayers and try to reckon up the sins of the day, nine times out of ten the most obvious one is some sin against charity; I have sulked or snapped or sneered or snubbed or stormed. And the excuse that immediately springs to my mind is that the provocation was so sudden and unexpected; I was caught off my guard, I had not time to collect myself. Now that may be an extenuating circumstance as regards those particular acts: they would obviously be worse if they had been deliberate and premeditated. On the other hand, surely what a man does when he is taken off his guard is the best evidence for what sort of a man he is? Surely what pops out before the man has time to put on a disguise is the truth? If there are rats in a cellar you are most likely to see them if you go in very suddenly. But the suddenness does not create the rats: it only prevents them from hiding. In the same way the suddenness of the provocation does not make me an ill-tempered man; it only shows me what an ill-tempered man I am. The rats are always there in the cellar, but if you go in shouting and noisily they will have taken cover before you switch on the light.”

But before Christians complain about its construction, we have to ask ourselves:

Are we loving our enemies?

Are we doing good to those who hate us?

Are we blessing those who curse us?

Are we praying for those who abuse us? (Luke 6:27-28)

Jesus didn’t say, “Love your enemies except when they are doing something offensive” or “pray for those who abuse you except when they hurt your feelings.”*

This sort of attitude is not helpful, constructive, or loving. A better analogy might be this: should Christians build a church in Hanoi? We bombed and killed many Vietnamese in the name of fighting communism (and atheism). Yet I doubt that these protestors would be as upset about that idea. It is easy to be more charitable to those who share your faith.

It is fine to say that the Muslim Cultural Center shouldn’t be there, or to say that it’s too offensive, or too soon, or too painful. So long as we say those things while expressing the love that Christ demands of us first! I haven’t seen a lot of love in the conversations on the subject. Sometimes loving just means listening to the other side! If people actually opened their ears to listen to those who are trying to found the cultural center, I think the discussion could be much different.

Daisy Khan, the executive director of the American Society of Muslim Advancement, said in 2009 on the O’Reilly Factor: “The closeness of the center to Ground Zero, first and foremost, is a blow to the extremists. And you know we Muslims are really fed up… of having to be defined by the actions of the extremists. You know, we are law abiding citizens, we are faithful people, we are very good Americans, and we need to project a different message of Islam – one of tolerance, love, and the kinds of commonalities we have with other faith communities. The center will be dedicated to promoting what it means to be Muslim, but also, what it means to be American.”

Many Muslims who support the center do so out of a desire to demonstrate that not all Muslims are responsible for 9/11 (just as all Christians were not responsible for the Crusades). While we can argue whether or not this is wise, discussing how it will affect the families of the men and women lost in the attack or the firefighters who died trying to save them, we shouldn’t take offense when we see the spirit behind the building the center. We can discuss rationally and reasonable if it’s a good idea; we can try to figure out a course of action that is charitable and loving and kind to all those involved. Even if they do build the center, Christians must remember Matthew 5: 39 – “But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.”

I think the best (or at least the most entertaining) piece I’ve read on the subject was from a blog I stumbled across a few of days ago. Courtesy of James Brett, a mother’s take on the situation:

“THAT’S IT!  I. have. had. E…NOUGH!  I’m sick and tired of you two arguing all the time.  You boys are entirely too old to be acting like this.

Islam, you’re 1400 years old and should know better than to wittingly aggravate your brother like this; and your “This is not actually Ground Zero — I’m not touching, I’m not touching” routine is not going to cut it this time, mister.

And you, Christianity, I can’t believe I’m listening to a 2000 year old whine and cry about where someone else wants to play with his toys.  This is a shared house, and what do you think gives YOU the right to control where everybody else goes and what they do there?!”

*Note that I don’t think that those who are starting the Center are our enemies or that they hate us. How much easier should it be then, for us to pray for them and love them and bless them?

The fact we have to face is this: that if we pursue theological knowledge for its own sake, it is bound to go bad on us. It will make us proud and conceited. The very greatness of the subject-matter will intoxicate us, and we shall come to think of ourselves as a cut above other Christians because of our interest in it and grasp of it; and we shall look down on those whose theological ideas seem to us crude and inadequate, and dismiss them as very poor specimens. For, as Paul told the conceited Corinthians, ‘knowledge puffeth up… if any man thinketh that he knoweth anything, he knoweth not yet as he ought to know’ (1Cor. 8:1 f. RV). To be preoccupied with getting theological knowledge as an end in itself, to approach Bible study with no higher a motive than a desire to know all the answers, is the direct route to a state of self-satisfied self-deception. We need to guard our hearts against such an attitude, and pray to be kept from it. As we saw earlier, there can be no spiritual health without doctrinal knowledge; but it is equally true that there can be no spiritual health with it, if it is sought for the wrong purpose and valued by the wrong standard. In this way, doctrinal study really can become a danger to spiritual life, and we today, no less than the Corinthians of old, need to be on our guard here.

But, say someone, is it not a fact that a love for God’s revealed truth, and a desire to know as much of it as one can, is natural to every person who has been born again? Look at Psalm 119 – ‘teach me thy statutes’; ‘open thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of thy law’; ‘O how I love thy law’… ‘give me understanding, that I may know thy testimonies’…

Yes, of course it is. But if you look back to Psalm 119 again, you will see that the psalmist’s concern to get knowledge about God was not a theoretical, but a practical concern. His supreme desire was to know and enjoy God Himself, and he valued knowledge about God simply as a means to this end. He wanted to understand God’s truth in order that his heart might respond to it and his life be conformed to it…

And this must be our attitude too. Our aim in studying the Godhead must be to know God Himself the better. Our concern must be to enlarge our acquaintance, not simply with the doctrine of God’s attributes, but with the living God whose attributes they are. As He is the subject of our study, and our helper in it, so He must Himself be the end of it. We must seek, in studying God, to be led to God. It was for this purpose that revelation was given, and it is to this use that we must put it.”

Just make sure that you aren't going to this guy for advice!
(photo from the New York Daily News)

The first way is to simply tell someone what to do. The adviser listens and comes to a conclusion on what the other person should do, and then says it.  This sort of advice can be helpful at times, and is probably the most common advice.  This is the type of advice that Eliphaz the Temanite gives in Job 22:21, “Submit to God and be at peace with him; in this way prosperity will come to you. Accept instruction from his mouth and lay up his words in your heart. If you return to the Almighty, you will be restored….”

Who wouldn’t give that advice? Submitting to God seems like a fine thing to do! Yet then in Job 42:7 God says, “My anger burns against you and against your two friends, for you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has.” Eliphaz and his friends are missing something important, even though much of their advice seems sound.

Sometimes sort of advice isn’t that helpful anyway: it might work when everybody gives you the same answer, but that’s rarely the case. A few of the people you talk to will say, “yes” and others will say “no,” so you can’t please everybody all at once. More importantly, no two situations are identical – what was successful in the life of the adviser might not work for someone else. Christianity is not a one-size fits all system; we follow the spirit not the letter of the law. Yet there is a danger in presuming to know what is the best path for someone else.

This is why it is often better to take the second approach to advice. Rather than telling someone specifically what to do, one can suggest certain facts or perspectives to consider. That’s the sort of advice that I received about my big decision: people asked, “have you considered this? ” or they told me “you should remember that.” This type of advice is helpful because it reveals the thought process behind a decision.  It gently reminds someone of important considerations that might sway their decision, without trying to decide for them. It acknowledges and trusts the good judgment of the one asking the advice.

Most importantly, giving advice this way leaves open the opportunity for consideration without condemnation. In the first case, if a person ends up not taking the advice (which is invariably bound to happen because often advisers offer conflicting opinions), the adviser can feel offended, wondering why they were even asked for their opinion. Of course, an adviser may not know of other circumstances that have arisen or be aware of what suggestions other counselors gave. There is less room for offense with the second method.

We must always remember to ask others for guidance, for “a wise man listens to advice” (Proverbs 12:15). Yet we should also be mindful of how we give that advice. As J.R.R. Tolkien put it, through the mouth of the elf Gildor, “Advice is a dangerous gift, even from the wise to the wise, and all courses may run ill.” Then again, maybe we shouldn’t listen; Tolkien also told us, “Do not go to the elves for counsel, for they will say both yes and no.”

Wouldn’t a loving God make the world without suffering?

Wouldn’t a powerful God make people so that they were less sinful?

Wouldn’t a just God have a better system of punishment and reward?

None of these questions were, to my ears, very compelling. Another way to phrase these questions is, “If I were God, I would do x differently. If I were God, I would make x better.” When you put it that way, suddenly the pride behind such questions becomes obvious. We are saying that our own personal way of thinking is superior to that of the omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent Creator. Yet we are mere humans, trying to grasp the motives of God. It is extremely unlikely that we could get anywhere close to good answers regarding these questions, especially when we are so steeped in sin and stupidity.

If we see the back of the rug, we cannot conclude that the image on the front is ugly; we must wait until we see the front to conclude.

At the same time, these are valid questions to ask. The problem is how we ask them: instead of placing God in the dock, we can strive to exonerate him. We can ask “why might God do x?” We can develop reasons why the world could be the way that it is, even though we do not have a complete picture. In humility, we must acknowledge our limitations in knowing the purposes of the universe. As Christians, it shouldn’t surprise us if we struggle to provide a complete picture, for we see through a mirror dimly and must wait to see face to face. For now we know in part, we must wait to fully know (1 Corinthians 13:12). Under an atheist worldview, there is no reason to believe that we should comprehend the nature of the universe at this stage in our evolutionary development.

J.I. Packer offers an example that he applies to wisdom, but that I think it applies to most of these questions as well:

“If you stand at the end of a platform on York station, you can watch a constant succession of engine and train movements which, if you are a railway enthusiast, will greatly fascinate you. But you will only be able to form a very rough and general idea of the overall plan in terms of which all these movements are being determined… If, however, you are privileged enough to be taken by one of the higher-ups into the magnificent electrical signal-box that lies athwart platforms 7 and 8, you will see on the longest wall a diagram of the entire track layout for five miles on either side of the station, with little glow-worm lights moving or stationary on different tracks to show the signalman at a glance exactly where every engine and train is. At once you will be able to look at the whole situation through the eyes of the men who control it: you will see from the diagram why it was that this train had to be signaled to a halt, and that one diverted from its normal running line, and that one parked temporarily in a siding. The why and the wherefore of all these movements becomes plain, once you can see the overall position.”

My uncle’s complaints were the equivalent of asking, “Why did God move that train and not this one?” The problem is that no man is in the signal box; no man can have all the answers, not even Christian ones. We cannot see all of the movements or motivations. All we can offer are some possible glimpses into the signal box – that train would have crashed, this train would have arrived too early, this train’s crashing was necessary to prevent 50 more trains from crashing. We use the Bible and our reason and our experience to try to discern what the Master is thinking.

In the end, there is no way to prove what the conductor is doing is right. We have done our duty if we can provide plausible responses. From that point on, it is a matter of faith: you can assume that there is a Master in the signal box – directing the trains in a reasonable way – or you can guess that there isn’t – that the movements are arbitrary. Both sides rely on faith.

My uncle may choose to reject the plausible explanations I provided, but for my part, I will humbly acknowledge that I do not know everything. I am not in the signal box. I do not see God face to face. I am a sinful, fallen human being, so I cannot presume to know what an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving God would do. Any explanation I may give is a guess – a plausible guess – but a guess nonetheless. There is only one man who could ever definitely answer the question “what would God do?”

When I pointed out that many Christians don’t believe the Scriptures are inerrant , a great number of Christians do believe in evolution, numerous Christians don’t believe in original sin, some Christians don’t believe in hell, and even more Christians believe in conditional immortality, my uncle was just flabbergasted. To each one of my points, he would say, “well, most Christians do believe that.”

Granted, I don’t know how many Christians hold these unorthodox positions. I haven’t done a survey on them. Over the past two millennia of Christianity, these are undoubtedly minority opinions. However, the fact is that Christians disagree on these issues. The unifying feature of Christianity is in it’s very name – Christ. It is by our faith in Christ that we are saved, not our faith in creationism or the Bible or hell or the apocalypse. One cannot reject the Christian faith based on their distaste for any one of these doctrines. So these are not the issues that we should argue with atheists.

We're supposed to be preaching for Christ, not against Darwin.

If Joseph Porter had argued with me about the earth being 6,000 years old, I would have never become a Christian. I’ve done extensive reading on the subject and would have probably laughed in his face if he had brought the subject up. Instead, we argued about Christ and sin and redemption – the key doctrines of Christianity, the essentials of the gospel. I know of people who have left church entirely because their peers sneered at their beliefs regarding one of these disputable matters. (Granted, the person who left was probably in error for leaving over such an issue, but imagine what a difference it would have made if they were reminded of Christ’s love instead of berated for valuing science.)

That is what Christ commands us to do: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

We are supposed to teach people to obey what Jesus’ commands, not insist upon particular doctrines that don’t affect one’s life as a Christian. Of course, these are all issues worth discussing and debating among Christians, and which are fun to debate in forums like blog posts and pub nights! But we cannot let these disputable matters take precedence. When we preach these things instead of the gospel, we are putting other doctrines above Christ. If we are talking to atheists, we should preach sola evangelium – the gospel alone.

Although my mom has not-so-fondly nicknamed two of my cousins “Birth” and “Control,” they gave me an amazingly intuitive answer to my uncle’s question. People always say that having children taught them a lot about God, and after this weekend, I definitely understand.My cousins and I were playing a rousing game of duck duck goose, when one of them – Casey, age 8 – decided to sprawl out all over the floor instead of just sitting in his place. This unfortunately led to my stepping on him by accident when I was running around, and I apologized and asked him to sit up straight. Sometimes God makes the first stages of our sin hurt, but that pain is supposed to be a warning to stop what we are doing. The first time, Casey listened to me, but a few minutes later, he was sprawled out again. As another cousin, Adam, ran around the circle, he had to jump over Casey to continue the game. Then, Casey intentionally grabbed Adam’s leg to try to trip him.

At this point, I realized it was time to discipline Casey. I stopped the game and asked him to sit up straight. He wouldn’t look me in the eye, and he stopped responding to my questions. I tried to explain to him why tripping someone was unacceptable – there was a glass table next to us, and Adam could have easily hit his head on it if he had fallen. I attempted to convince him why it was dangerous to be laying on the floor instead of sitting up normally – did he like getting accidentally stepped on? But Casey would not listen, so finally I had to deliver an ultimatum: either he would sit up straight so that we could safely play the game, or he couldn’t play at all. At that point, he yelled that he didn’t want to play and ran out of the room.

I wasn’t a megalomanic recklessly asserting authority over the game. I simply saw that Casey’s behavior could easy cause someone to get hurt, and I knew that I needed to prevent that from occurring. Playing the game was not a reward I could arbitrarily met out. I wanted Casey to play, but if he was going to jeopardize the safety of himself and those around him, I had to remove him from the situation. Although God wants everyone in heaven, He can’t allow people unrepentant of their sin to ruin it. In the end, it is we who choose to make Jesus Lord over our lives. Casey was the one who chose to walk away when he didn’t want to do what I demanded. All God asks of us is to respect His authority and do what He asks. Ultimately, His yoke is easy and His burden is light.

So when God tries to discipline us with our sin, how do we respond? Do we listen the first time and then fall back into it? Do we throw a tantrum because we don’t want to listen? Do we walk away from Him because we’d rather follow our foolish whims? Or do we humbly respond because we recognize God’s higher wisdom and concern for our safety? When we appreciate sin for what it is, and understand God’s authority, it’s fairly intuitive that heaven simply shouldn’t be a reward for everyone. It suddenly makes sense that it is only to those “who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God” (John 1:12).

Maybe my uncle just needs to have some kids of his own to understand.

Just as wearing glasses will alter our vision for the better or worse, viewing the world through a lens will shape our perceptions of reality.

It is so easy to forget how biased our view may really be. J.I. Packer explains:

“We do not start our Christian lives by working out our faith for ourselves; it is mediated to us by Christian tradition, in the form of sermons, books and established patterns of church life and fellowship. We read our Bibles in the light of what we have learned from these sources; we approach Scripture with minds already formed by the mass of accepted opinions and viewpoints with which we have come into contact, in both the Church and the world… It is easy to be unaware that it has happened; it is hard even to begin to realize how profoundly tradition in this sense has moulded us.”

It is uncontroversial that our understanding is shaped by our experience. My own experience within the churches of Christ has made me view attending church services three times a week as normal. While I can recite Acts 2:38 by heart just from having heard it in sermons, other people might have Romans 10:9 roll off their tongues. My perception of what it means to be a Christian has been dramatically shaped not only by scriptures, but also by the behavior of those with whom I fellowship. The small culture of which I am a part gives me a strong lens through which I view the question of what it means to be a Christian. One reason for me specifically to be cognizant of this lens is it is too easy for me to become judgmental when someone falls outside of my perception of the norm by only attending services once a week.

Phoebe definitely would have been carrying this Bible around Rome and Cenchrea.

My general concern is that we often forget the lenses with which we approach the scriptures. A modern day Christian may view reading the Bible on a regular basis as essential for Christian life. Yet when we look at the early church, not every congregation had a copy of 1 Peter or Hebrews. For the vast history of Christianity, most Christians were illiterate and couldn’t read the Bible at all. Did that make them any less Christian? Of course not.

I fear that the availability of the Bible (would you like it NIV, KJV, ESV, or Message? In dark leather for the “real men” or hot pink for those Christian teenage girls?) and the recognition that it contains timeless truths about God has made us forget all of the ways in which it is inaccessible.

The Bible was written by men almost 2,000 years ago, to specific churches with specific needs. Sometimes it says things which seem almost contradictory. For example, where Ephesians 2:8 says, “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast.” James 2:24 says “You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.” The word that the NIV translates as “works” in Ephesians is the same word translated as “what he does” in James. This means that one verse tells us that we are not saved by works, while another says we are justified by what we do. (The difference between being “saved” and “justified” is another important question.) Of course, the consistency becomes obvious when you realize that Ephesians was addressed to a congregation plagued by Judaizers who wanted justification through the works of the law, whereas James is addressed to people who reduce faith to intellectual assent without any practice.

I fear that too many people come to the Bible looking for answers to their questions instead of seeking the way the apostles answered the questions of their time. When we take the Bible out of context, we are going to promote confusion and inaccurate answers. Granted, there are verses that are universally applicable and can be read and understood without doing an in-depth study. Galatians 5:19-21, for example, gives a list of sins that is easily understood. But many verses are not as clear-cut or as obviously applicable today and their use tends to lead toward eisegesis instead of exegesis.

In “How Can the Bible Be Authoritative,” NT Wright explains that:

“The whole Bible from Genesis to Revelation is culturally conditioned.  It is all written in the language of particular times, and evokes the cultures in which it came to birth.  It seems, when we get close up to it, as though, if we grant for a moment that in some sense or other God has indeed inspired this book, he has not wanted to give us an abstract set of truths unrelated to space and time.  He has wanted to give us something rather different, which is not (in our post-enlightenment world) nearly so easy to handle as such a set of truths might seem to be… we have come to the whole Bible, looking for particular answers to particular questions.  And we have thereby made the Bible into something which it basically is not.”

The Bible is not a science textbook; the epistles do not (always) give us a universal law that can be applied and understood in every context. Instead, it is a collection of advice directed at specific people in a specific time. We should not assume that we can understand all of it when we are in a totally different cultural milieu. We ought not pretend that God gave us the Bible to slice and dice into neat little answers to all of our modern questions. Rather, we should ask ourselves, what was Paul trying to convey to the people of his time, and what message should that have for us? Granted, I am not always perfect at this. But in general, I want to strive to take off my glasses of American Protestantism and try to view things through the lens of Paul’s time.