Music, Mediation and the Modern Worship Leader: Part III

See Part I and Part II

Under what umbrella does a worship leader function? Though visually there can be an element of the priest in front of the assembly, what New Testament categories can we work with? Is worship leading a spiritual gift or a form of pastoral ministry? Or something else?

The way I see it biblically, the worship event has a few elements at play.

The Action: Right position before God, right proclamation of God (Part II)

The Atmosphere: Spirit and truth

The Audience: Heaven and earth

The Atmosphere

Beyond the particular act of worship, our worship must be placed within a broader context or atmosphere of “Spirit” and “truth.” The New Testament doesn’t have a lot to say about the musical aspect of worship. Jesus said the Father was seeking true worshipers who would worship Him “in spirit and in truth.” Paul’s teaching on music and song can be summed up in two complementary passages, which I think speak to what Jesus Himself said.

1.       Spirit – Ephesians 5:18-20

“And do not get drunk with wine, for that is dissipation, but be filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another in psalms, hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody with your heart to the Lord; always giving thanks for all things in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to God, even the Father.”

Here we see the context for music in the church is that of being (continually) filled with the Spirit. Singing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs is one outcome of the Spirit-filled life. (It also ties in with Luke I think, who emphasizes the speech acts of tongues and prophecy as signs of Spirit filling in Acts.) True worship is an overflow of the heart which spills out of the mouth. A heart that has been baptized in the Spirit cannot help but gush praise.

As worship leaders there can be a temptation to be filled with something else – our own sense of importance, an unbalanced performance mindset, or even just our own abilities. It’s so important to lead out of a place of being immersed in the Spirit. If I’m not being continually filled with the Spirit as a worship leader, I can easily pump myself dry.

I think understanding worship as a Spirit-filled activity can also help to place the role of a worship leader under the umbrella of gifts of the Spirit. Nowhere in the New Testament is music listed as a spiritual gift, but it is and should be a Spirit-filled activity. Like the other spiritual gifts, their purpose is to build up the body so it may be healthy and complete. It’s why these songs are directed not only to God but to each other.

Any other implications for worship in terms of being Spirit-filled?

2.       Truth – Colossians 3:16

“Let the word of Christ richly dwell within you, with all wisdom teaching and admonishing one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs, signing with thankfulness in your hearts to God.”

Here is a similar passage, but worship rises out of being filled with the word of Christ and has an instructive function. One of the main purposes of worship is to teach the truth of God, most clearly revealed in Jesus Christ. The sticking power of music makes it a powerful vehicle. Everything said or sung in worship must conform to the truth of Scripture.

With the understanding that the congregation is more likely to go home singing a chorus of a song than quoting the pastor’s sermon, worship leaders must take their teaching role seriously. Lyrics matter. Theology matters. The balance and breadth of the whole counsel of God must be considered. Music has the potential to plunge people into the deep mysteries of God – or we can float along on the foam of feel good superficiality. Worship leaders would benefit from working in concert with other pastoral leaders who are actively shaping the minds of the congregation with other forms of teaching and preaching.

So just how do we categorize the role of a worship leader? Does it fit better under spiritual gifts or pastoral leadership? In many ways music can be used prophetically, and as a worship leader leads a service they have many opportunities to speak to the congregation. So I see connections with the gifts of prophecy, encouragement, even discernment.  As a spiritual gift, it would fall into Paul’s guidelines for order in a service.

Music is also used didactically, so there is an element of the teacher or pastor there. Of course, there’s also the spiritual gift of leadership, and that is what a worship leader is doing. It’s not just about leading songs, but leading people through the means of songs, Scripture, silence, prayer, and other elements of liturgy. That is why I believe it is so important that the worship leader is working with and on the same page as other pastoral leaders. It goes beyond matching music to the sermon theme, but coming alongside the vision of the leadership and using the means of music to guide people in the direction of the bigger vision.

The Audience

We are used to saying that worship is for an audience of One. And there is truth to that. In worship we seek to please and honor God, not anyone else. But biblically, we are also to sing to each other. Worship falls into the “one another” category of church life.

1.       Heaven

This is the vertical dynamic. We worship God and God alone. We sing to Him, praise Him, pray to Him. He is our focus, our sole pursuit. We draw near to Him, lay our lives down before Him, offer ourselves heart, body and soul. The focus should be on elevating God and not any one person.

Yet too often, I see what I would consider an unhealthy spotlight on the “professional” worshipers on the platform. Of course, there are practical considerations. The band has to go somewhere, with some level of visibility in order to facilitate leading. But I’m concerned that there is nothing visually to remind us all of Who is really front and center in our worship. I think we could stand to experiment a bit more with our physical set up, including lighting, placement, and visual focal points.

2.       Earth

This is the horizontal dynamic. We are to sing to each other. In worship we declare God’s praise for a human audience as well. God is not a narcissist who needs to hear constantly about how wonderful He is. Praise is a proclamation that declares God’s wonders for all to hear, for the sake of spreading His glory. In worship we teach and encourage each other in the truths of who God is and who He has recreated us to be. We build ourselves up in the Lord and give opportunity for the operation of many different spiritual gifts.

In many modern worship settings, we have lost some of this horizontal aspect. Yes, everyone may be singing along, but the interpersonal dynamic is often lost to the performance dynamic. The focus is on the “stage.” A worship leader or team sings to the congregation. But congregation members rarely sing to each other. I’d love to see how we could incorporate more of this aspect in our churches. Maybe this necessitates a smaller, more intimate setting. Maybe sometimes we turn the mains down and let us hear each other. How can we make worship more participatory and less passive?

I think there are some practical, physical things that can be done in our churches along these lines. I also think more teaching could be helpful, both to worship teams and congregations, which would help the whole church understand that though there may be some people up on a platform, we are all in this together.

Some practical suggestions:

- Lighting: Keep lighting levels consistent between platform and pews. Tone down the use of spotlights on worship leaders or musicians, unless a "special" number is being done. There is still room for an aspect of performance in the church, where one person or group is presenting something audio/visual for the benefit of the congregation. But for regular congregational worship, perhaps more of an effort should be made to de-emphasize the distinction between platform and pew. 

- Placement of musicians: Are there other ways to place musicians? Along the side? Can the worship leader lead from off-center? (I realize that this may seem silly to some. What does it matter where someone stands? Yet the symbolism of space does have an effect, even subconsciously.) 

- Visual focal point: If there is no longer a cross somewhere front and center, could something else be used centrally? Can a cross be reintroduced? Could screens be located differently? Basically, is there anything else other than the worship leader that people can focus on? (Not that there should never be anyone standing or preaching or ministering in the center. But for what is supposed to be a God-oriented activity, it would be great to have a God-oriented focal point.)

- Sound: Incorporate more acoustic music or services. There are times when louder levels can be used effectively in the sense of "encompassing" the congregation, which I think can create an atmosphere of transcendence, the sense of being "lost" in the heavenly throne room of worship. But perhaps we should also give weight to immanence, the sense of God's presence among us as we worship and sing to each other. (Realistically, many modern buildings are not designed for unplugged acoustics. Voices can get lost in all the carpeting and curtains. I love going to older church buildings where the sound of the congregation singing fills and resounds off the very walls, with little amplification. We've traded that for the ability to amplify with electronic instruments. There are benefits and drawbacks to each set-up, but man I love to sing in some of those beautifully structured churches.)

- Format: Like the liturgical "call and response," are there creative ways (or perhaps previously discarded ways) we can involve the congregation in worship? How can we be more interactive? 

So in light of all this, how much of the spotlight should a worship leader be comfortable with? Though a leader often needs to be visible/audible in order to do their job well, we need to be willing to take a good look at whether we are pointing the way to God or whether we sometimes get in the way. 

More to come:

Some thoughts about how one person’s experience of worship influences others

Revelation: the ultimate model for worship?

Prophet or Priest? The finger of John the Baptist

Music, Mediation, and Modern Worship Leader: Part II

(See Part I here)

I’ve been suggesting that the modern worship leader is set up in a number of ways to function in a mediatory role. As I don’t dismiss the concept of mediation in the Christian life, I am willing to consider this as a biblically sound possibility. But I think I need to back up. Before we consider how the worship leader “leads,” what is it that they are “leading?” What is worship?

I know there are shelves of books written on this. And I could easily get sidetracked with all the fascinating information and opinion out there. But in broad brushstrokes, this is what I see happening in the Bible, both in the Old and New Testaments.  [Full disclosure: I am writing this in the midst of the everyday mess of life with 2 preschoolers, so you may not see as many direct Scripture references as I would ideally like to support my arguments with! That said, I am aiming to be wholly biblical. If something piques your curiosity, look it up for yourself!]

The ACTION of Worship: Position and Proclamation

What we generally consider “worship” has two dynamics at play, best expressed in by the two words “worship” and “praise.” There is definitely some overlap here, but the concepts are distinct enough biblically to treat them separately.

1. Worship – Right Position Before God

“To worship” in biblical language is usually associated with someone bowing or falling down before someone who is greater, in acknowledgement of their greatness, in supplication, or in praise. (In the New Testament, the Greek word is proskyneo.) It’s a verb. It’s a physical expression, though often accompanied by some form of speech. It’s essentially a position.

In worshiping God we position ourselves rightly before Him. It’s not just about our physical bodies, though they can and should be used to express the reality of our hearts. In worship we fall on our faces before God and acknowledge that He is the Creator and we are the creature. We acknowledge our dependence, our submission, our absolute awe that He has positioned us to receive His mercy. We can’t get a clear picture of God or ourselves unless we’ve had that (figural, and sometimes literal) face on the floor experience before Him. It’s only from this position that everything else makes sense. It’s only from this position that we have anything worthwhile to offer back to Him.

Worship is also closely tied to the idea of sacrifice. What was Abraham on his way to do that dreadful day he went up the mountain with his only son? Worship. What is the clearest New Testament description of the Christian’s worship? To offer our bodies as living sacrifices. We look at how Jesus laid his life down for us, and the only right and fitting thing to do is offer our own lives in return.

Worship is the position of awestruck, wholehearted, living sacrifice. It’s a whole life thing, not a Sunday morning thing. What our mouths or hands express of this in a church service can go no deeper than our hearts are willing to enact in everyday life.

2. Praise – Right Proclamation of God

Praise is a proclamation, made with word or deed,  that commends and glorifies God. The Greek verb aineo is used only 9 times in the New Testament, mostly in Luke-Acts. The angels praise God at the announcement of his birth, and the shepherds respond likewise as they leave the scene of the manger. The lame man healed by Peter in Acts 3 praises God - walking and leaping and praising God!  The related noun epainos pops up 12 times, and it means commendation or praise. Praise is that which commends God. (I was rather surprised at the low frequency of the word praise in the NT, but then again, as Christians we get to bring in the whole exuberant tradition of Hebrew praise and psalmody, whose ultimate target is the work of Christ, and whose epic climax we shall see later on in the book of Revelation.)

When we praise God, we are usually making a verbal declaration or expression of His character and deeds. While God is the object of our praise, others within earshot are the subjects of praise. Sure, we can praise God all by ourselves (sometimes it is our souls that need to hear the truth again), but praise reaches its full intent when it has an audience. To praise is to tell! And what more powerful means of telling than the soul-gripping gift of music.

(Proclamation carries with it a certain weight of responsibility, which we’ll look at later when we explore what it means to worship “in truth.”

I think praise can also fall into that category of Spirit-inspired speech we see at work in Acts. “We hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!” (Acts 2:11) Praise is one of the prophetic speech-acts of the Spirit-baptized community. It is both an evidence of the Spirit transformed life and a form of witness to the world at large.

So what we are actually doing when we come together for “corporate worship” encompasses both of these concepts – placing ourselves in right position before God, and making right proclamation of God’s wonders. This is the core of whatever happens during “worship.” And this must be the basis for understanding both the role of the worship leader/team and the congregation.

We’ll unwrap some of the implications of this for the worship leader in another post…

Pentecostal worship – a multifaceted sacrament

We’ve seen the core, and all the songs we sing and the way we go about them must conform to this purpose. But one of the cool (and potentially complicating?) things about Pentecostal worship is that there is often so much more going on in the time of worship than congregational singing. Woven in and around the music are other elements which contribute to the whole sacramental experience of worship:

·         Songs of praise/worship

o   Planned/formal

o   Spontaneous personal expressions

·         Scripture reading

·         Prayer

o   All kinds (adoration, supplication, confession, thanksgiving, intercession, dedication, etc.)

o   Corporate (led by pastor or worship leader)

o   Individual (person-to-God, person-to-person, in the pews)

o   Altar call

o   SIDE NOTE: I think this aspect of Pentecostal worship accounts for much of the repetition in songs that we like (or don’t!) to do. Repetition allows for the words to move beyond praise/proclamation to be internalized in prayer. It’s essentially a corporate form of biblical meditation. Repetition is one type of meditation, and a way to open ourselves more fully to an encounter with God and His Word to us. It is not mindless repetition (though to those unfamiliar with the exercise, it surely can seem that way), but a movement into a musical realm of meditation and prayer.

·         Prophesy

o   Declaration/edification for the body done by worship leader, pastor, or congregation member

·         Acts of response/dedication

o   Physical expressions of worship

o   Altar call

·         Spiritual Warfare

o   Deliverance

o   SIDE NOTE: I’d love to hear what others think about the connection between worship and spiritual warfare.

What other elements have you seen working in tandem with worship?

In Pentecostal churches, worship is multifaceted. It’s often a matrix for the operation of Spiritual gifts. It goes far beyond “setting the mood.” At its best, it gives opportunity for the Spirit to move in ways very particular to a congregation or situation.

With all of this in mind, the worship leader, especially in the type of service I’m describing, does much more than lead songs. 

Music, Mediation and the Modern Worship Leader: Part 1

I am not entirely comfortable leading worship. It’s a role I have grown into over the years, and while worshiping God through music is one of my most favourite things to do, there are aspects of worship ministry, especially as a worship leader, that I am still thinking through and working out in practice.

Most recently, I’ve been thinking about the concept of mediation as it relates to leading worship. Picture this quite familiar scene: one musician on a raised stage, often in a spotlight of some kind, flanked by a symmetrically arranged team of other musicians, backed by giant words on a moving background, speakers blaring out to the masses that remain somehow distant in the dimmer lighting. This is modern Sunday morning worship. The worship leader is tasked with the job of bringing people into the presence of God, of “leading” them in worship. And many people’s experience of worship rises or falls with this individual leader. In some way, whether we realize or it not, the modern worship leader has been set up in a mediatorial role, a bridge between the people and presence of God. Is this good? Is this bad? Is this biblical?

The Mediatorial Nature of Christian Life

We Protestants, and especially evangelicals, would be quick to emphasize that there is only one Mediator between God and humanity, Jesus Christ. And we would be right, speaking in terms of salvation. There is no other person, entity or reality that makes the connection between heaven and earth. Jesus Christ, Son Incarnate, is the only reality in which this connection occurs. But we would be naïve to assume that all of Christian life is a pure, unmediated experience of spirit to Spirit. Christianity is not an ethereal religion that excludes our physicality. Jesus is fully human, just as he is fully divine. And he meets us in our own physical humanity. So what am I saying?

I see a few main areas of Christian life in which mediation plays a role. All of these have their source in Jesus, the Mediator, whose presence within us and within the church and in the world is now mediated by the Holy Spirit. But the Holy Spirit does not simply provide us with an invisible link to heaven, or stop at an inner witness. His work is often quite tangible, and we access it through a physical reality.

1.       Witnesses (Source: Jesus the Faithful Witness, the Firstborn from the Dead, the Spirit-Baptizer)

These are the real people Jesus entrusted his gospel and mission to. Without people telling His story and passing it down, person to person, how could anyone else hear and respond to the good news? Yes, we’ve all heard stories of Jesus appearing in dreams and other miraculous occurrences. But Jesus primarily commissioned his followers, who in the power of the Holy Spirit make him present to those around them, in word and deed. At a larger level, there is the historical, worldwide community of witnesses, the Church, which makes Christ known and present. We meet Jesus through other humans’ words and actions – their testimony, compassionate touch, acts of service, prayer, etc. – not to mention the operation of the fruit and gifts of the Spirit in the body of Christ. The work of Christ on the earth is continued through his Body, with all its very “human” parts.

2.       Word (Source: Jesus the Living Word Made Flesh)

The Bible is a real book, Spirit-inspired, but written by real humans in real languages. The canon of Scripture as we know it was itself mediated by a community of witnesses led by the Spirit. God speaks through this holy book, a physical reality. In preaching we are confronted with the Word of God as proclaimed through the words of another witness. Scripture is our main source of truth about God and ourselves, and our main channel for hearing God speak.

3.       Water and Wine (Source: Jesus, Crucified and Risen)

Baptism and Communion. Two ordinances instituted by Christ, means of grace - signs which participate in that which they signify and provide a real benefit to their participants – that involve body and soul with the physical symbols of water, bread and wine. They do not confer salvation, yet they are Jesus-mandated opportunities for a grace encounter.

So I do not reject the idea that there are persons and other physical realities (such as the Bible, water, bread, wine) that in some way mediate our encounters with God. After all, Christ’s mode of presence in the world today is largely through his Spirit-indwelt church. On the basis of His perfect work as our Mediator, He invites us to participate in His mission of making God known.

So what about Worship? Does it function as a mediator of God’s presence in the Christian life?

In worship (meant here in its more limited sense of congregational worship - the regular gathering of believers to praise God together, usually with music) we are also given the means of an encounter with God.

This is entirely biblical:

The LORD inhabits the praises of His people. (Psalm 22:3)

Wherever two or three are gathered, I am there. (Matthew 18:20)

Draw near to God and He will draw near to you. (James 4:8)

The act of our coming together as a people called by Jesus is powerful.  And what we do together when we gather, and how we do it, is significant. Quite simply, that is what “liturgy” is. The word literally means “the work of the people,” and basically refers to the structure and elements of a church service. More narrowly, it is used to describe the very deliberate and more formal structure of services in what we would think of as “liturgical churches” (i.e., Catholic, Anglican, and other mainline churches.)

Every church has its own liturgy, formal or otherwise. Some are very intentional. Others, sad to say, are not. One of the best understandings of what “The Liturgy” is is the participation of the congregation in a reality that is bigger than themselves – the story of Jesus Christ. Some churches go to great lengths to immerse their people in the symbolism of that story.  This symbolism can be reflected in a variety of ways, from the shape and design of a sanctuary, displays of art (or lack thereof), selection of music, the placement of pulpits, altars, crosses and Bibles, and even the arrangement of where people are located and in what position. We are symbolic creatures, and our symbols say a lot about who we are. Being intentional about our symbols is key.

Many modern evangelical expressions of church have taken more of a pragmatic approach to the structure of Sunday worship. Our choices are guided by practical issues of audio/visual equipment, and perhaps – more than we know it – by modern performance culture.

As I spend more time reflecting on my role as a worship leader, I’ve been thinking about what the structure and set-up of our services says about us, and ultimately about God.

The worship leader as mediator?

What I find interesting is that the modern worship leader is probably one of the closest things we have to someone acting in the role of mediator in our services.  As Protestants, we reject the notion of “the priest,” the special leader who is in a position of mediating God’s presence or grace in a way no one else is authorized to or capable of. Indeed, pastors have gone to great lengths in recent years to show that they are “one of us.” They have done this not only in their communication methods, but also in other ways, such as dressing like the rest of us, moving pulpits down from the platform to the main level (or choosing a simpler podium), walking among the congregation, etc. We’ve seen many pastors and speakers get down off the platform to connect on a more even level with their congregation.

Yet at the same time, the worship leader (or team) has been elevated, quite literally. What do we often see? What symbolism is at work?

-          Worship leader front and center on a raised stage

-          Performance lighting which illuminates “the band” and often leaves the congregation in darkness

-          The cross on the back wall, which used to be a focal point of the church, is often obstructed by the screen for projecting song lyrics and other visual matter

-          Sound levels which make it impossible for people in the congregation to even hear the person singing next to them

-          Song selection which highlights the skills of the leader or band but which are difficult for congregational participation

-          All eyes are on the worship leader and their expression of worship

-          There is a distinction (physical/spatial) between the worship leader/team and the rest of the congregation, resembling the “concert” distinction of performer and audience.

[As a side note: I’ve been in churches, most recently in the chapel of my Anglican seminary, where the musicians are up near the front, but off to the side. Both the organist and the piano/guitar players led from the side of the room. You also see this in many of the older arrangements of choirs. The front center is reserved for the altar. It certainly is a different dynamic. ]

Possible results:

-          Just the physical set up of this scenario places a lot of emphasis on what the worship leader is doing. A lot of pressure can thus be put on the worship leader (intentionally or not) to create the best worship experience for others. They must lead the way, and if they don’t, how can the church hope to follow?

-          People rely on the worship leader’s skill or expression of worship to “jumpstart” their own.

-          Separation/distinction between worship team (performers) and congregation (audience). The congregation’s role can become more passive and less participatory, less communal and more critical. What happens “up there” is more important than what’s going on “in the pews.”

-          People come to “consume” a worship experience (what can I get out of this?) rather than “be consumed” and join in offering themselves wholeheartedly to God with their fellow worshippers. Much of an individual’s experience of worship rises or falls with individual worship leaders. People have a hard time worshipping when the leader does not worship in a style or to a degree of perfection that other individuals prefer. (This speaks to a wider church/cultural issue – there is simply no longer a standardized or universal “hymnal,” or collection of songs which everybody knows. Worship has spread across the musical spectrum  and individuals in the congregation respond best to their own musical history and preferences.)

What I see happening here is the worship leader being set up in a mediatorial role. I am not ready to say all of this is bad, but I do want to really think through what all of this means. As worship leaders, many of us would express our roles along these lines: to lead or bring people into the presence of God. Most of the imagery we use in describing this role comes from the Old Testament priesthood and practices of the Levites. They were specially selected by God to “perform” the worship of the people, to sacrifice and praise on their behalf. They often led the charge into new territory as the head of the army or start of a procession. While this imagery has much to teach us about the nature of worship, I often wonder whether this alone gives us a balanced picture of the church’s worship, and the role of its leaders in this aspect of church life.

So what’s a worship leader to do? Embrace the mediatorial role as one of the Spirit’s gifts to the church? Throw down the mic and bring back the hymn book?

There’s a lot more to explore, but I think this post is long enough for today! These are my (somewhat scattered) observations on current worship leading culture, and some of the pitfalls I see inherent in this set-up. I want to think through these issues intentionally, biblically, and in community. I’d love to hear from others in worship ministry.

Next I’ll look at whether this mediatorial role has some benefits and how it can best be put to use, and also other instructions and examples of New Testament worship which need to be given just as much consideration.

Thoughts? Objections? Suggestions? Please comment!

Single-handed Theology: Master of Kitchen Studies

Newborns and toddlers (especially in combination!) really do hinder the study of theology in the traditional academic fashion. What mother of preschool children has time to read scholastic works, let alone make cohesive comments on the internet about them? Sometimes I get a little depressed thinking about it. I started a great commentary on Revelation back in the spring. . . the bookmark is still there in chapter two. My eschatological ponderings have wandered off into an apocalyptic explosion of diapers and dishes. Most of the books I've been reading are short on words, big on pictures. (Wait, maybe I'm on to something . . . an illustrated theology series perhaps??)

All of that to say, I must remind myself that theology, the study of God, is not limited to academia. God is the same God in the kitchen and the classroom. And if what is said in the classroom cannot apply to the kitchen, then maybe it's not worth saying? Don't get my wrong. I love theology. But I love God more. And I'm learning to pray like never before, because it is more important to be connected with Him than to thoughts about Him. I'm learning to look for him, especially in the unlikely places. (I'd love to hear Luther or Barth or NT Wright discuss theology after a day at home with the kids, wouldn't you?) This is a different kind of degree I'm pursuing, and that's ok.

And when the fourth consecutive reading of The Little Engine That Could is complete, and the children are both (miraculously!) asleep, then maybe I'll dig out that commentary again . . . Who am I kidding? I'm having a nap!

~lg

A bit of Barth

Dogmatics in Outline

Karl Barth

Chapter 20: The Coming of Jesus Christ the Judge

-          Barth spends a lot of time talking about his concept of time

-          NT talk about the coming of the Son of man, ie. coming on the clouds of heaven, lightning – “metaphors of ultimate realities” (133)

-          Good quotes:

o   "The miracle for both the Church and the world is that “this goal of hope does not stand somewhere and we must laboriously build the road to it . . . Not that we must come; it is He who comes” (133).

§  We cannot create the circumstances which will lead to Christ’s coming. It is all His doing, His coming.

o   "Jesus Christ’s return to judge the quick and the dead is tidings of joy. ‘With head erect,’ the Christian, the Church may and ought to confront this future. For He that comes is the same who previously offered Himself to the judgment of God” (134).

§  To ponder: Knowing that Christ has already taken on the judgment of God in His first coming, what will the nature of His judgment be at His second?

§  It is the same God – this should give us confidence and comfort.

~lg

"Why Every Calvinist Should be a Premillennialist"

Article: "Why Every Calvinist Should Be a Premillennialist"
John MacArthur

(from a talk given in March 2007)

John MacArthur

-          A Baptist and a 5-point Calvinist

-          Fundamentalist, inerrancy of Scripture

-          In dispensationalist camp, although with some differing views

-          Against Roman Catholics, against ecumenism

-          Cessationist

Thoughts:

·         An accurate understanding of the future of Israel is “the cornerstone of biblical eschatology”

o   “The key to eschatology is Judeo-centrism which alone provides the cohesive base for the integration of the various features of biblical prophecy.”

·         Abrahamic and Davidic covenants are yet unfulfilled for Israel

·         God’s promises to Israel are “unilateral unconditional sovereign gracious promises to Israel.” “[T]hey will be fulfilled by an elect people in the future whom God will enable to repent and believe.”

·         The issue is the theology of sovereign election

·         Good points here:

o   “To believe that the church somehow has earned the promises given to Israel because we pulled it off on our own and Israel did not, that kind of thinking is foreign to our understanding of sovereign grace. Do we fail to grasp that we as a church exist only by divine sovereign grace and that we are no more able to believe than the Jews were able on their own to believe?”

o   “The New Covenant is not a reward for their faithfulness, it is given in spite of their unfaithfulness.” 

~lg

Dear Dispensationalism, We Need a Break

I have come to the end of Holdcroft’s Eschatology, glory be! I am so glad to have that out of the way, but I think it was necessary to push through to the bitter end, just so I could say I gave it a fair chance.

Unfortunately, this relationship with dispensationalism has seemed doomed almost since the beginning, at least since I started to evaluate where we stood with each other. It's funny what happens when you actually start talking...

Chapters 1-3 are foundational to Holdcroft’s presentation of futurism, and to the way he interprets Scripture. Chapters 4-14 detail the different “events” and “periods” of the end of the world, from the Rapture to the Final State.

By the end of Chapter 3, I was already in disagreement with his theology and hermeneutics. My disagreements with the rest of the book were just detail. 

So, why can’t I accept dispensationalism? Though hermeneutics does come in to play somewhat, what it boils down to is Christology. The Christology of dispensationalism is insufficient. It limits Christ’s incarnation, death and resurrection to a certain period of time on earth.

Since Holdcroft does not actually interact with Christology, or any other streams of theology for that matter, it was through his understanding of the identities of Israel and the Church that I discovered just how “low” his view of Christ is. Much of dispensationalism rests on the distinction between the Church and Israel.

The Argument

If you’re the nosy type, feel free to listen in on this argument we had in the margins of Chapter 2: Eschatological Identities.

Page 20

Holdcroft:

“The church and national Israel are fundamentally different bodies, with each existing under its own covenant.” Now he says that God extends Christ’s new covenant to all humankind, but “to the Jews not under the new covenant, the old Abrahamic covenant still stands.”

Me:

I disagree. Didn’t Jesus fulfill the Abrahamic covenant? Wasn’t the whole point of the Abrahamic covenant that through Abraham’s seed (Jesus), all the nations of the earth would be blessed? How is the Abrahamic covenant still in effect?

The Abrahamic covenant was about land, offspring and blessing. All of which I see fulfilled in Christ. God promised place for his people to dwell, so that He could come and dwell in their midst, and through them that all peoples on earth would be blessed.

Well, the land, and specifically the temple, all point to Jesus. Jesus is the new temple, the location of God’s presence is now through Him. So why does God need a particular parcel of land anymore where He can show up?

The offspring were meant to be a holy people, set apart for a purpose to show God’s glory. We all know they fell short, but Jesus fulfilled everything that Israel as a nation failed to do. Jesus is the fulfillment of Israel, He is Israel as Israel was meant to live. Yes, the Jewish people are important because it is through them that Jesus came, and through them and their history that we understand who God is and what Jesus did. But the purpose of offspring was not just to have lots of kids…the goal of the offspring was Jesus!

And blessing. Again, fulfilled in Jesus. He is the One through whom all peoples can be blessed.

Of course, the OT hints at all of this, but only after Jesus came do we see what it was all really about, that it was really about Him. So I would say the Abrahamic covenant lives on in Christ, but it doesn’t run in a parallel track to the New Covenant. It doesn’t exist in the same way it did before Christ. It doesn’t exist now apart from Christ.

Holdcroft:

“Since God provided Israel with the Old Testament (or covenant), and the church with the New Testament (or covenant), these actions provide ample precedent to expect that God will supply the people of the millennial kingdom with their own testament-covenant.”

Me:

I guess this is basic dispensationalism. God acts in different ways in different dispensations, holding people of different times (and in the case of Israel, ethnicities), to different standards in their dealings with Him. But to me, this demotes what Jesus came and accomplished to just another method in a long line of methods. His is just one of many covenants. I would argue that He is THE covenant, all the OT covenants were really about Him, and He fulfilled them, He supersedes all other covenants. There will be no new covenants after Him, because God has ultimately and decisively revealed Himself and the way we are to relate to Him in Christ. Otherwise, what’s the point of Jesus?

Are you saying that the Old Testament doesn’t apply to the church? And the New Testament doesn’t apply to Israel? That seems crazy. And I really don’t see how this is “ample precedent” for God dropping another new covenant during the millennial kingdom.

Page 25

Holdcroft:

“Scripture distinctively portrays Israel as a perpetually enduring nation of people uniquely favored of God with the promise of land as an everlasting possession.”

Me:

I think these promises were redefined in Christ. I think He is the ultimate goal, not a means to another goal, ie. a nation in a strip of land.

Page 26

Holdcroft:

“The chosen descendants of Abraham who comprise national Israel are the objects of a sovereign God’s special favor in His unconditionally guaranteed covenanted promises. The effects of these promises continue into the realm of the everlasting, and they include a land, a king, a restored and regenerated people, and even after the horrors of tribulation, a guaranteed count of survivors of the flesh and blood offspring of Abraham.”

Me:

Again, I think these promises are redefined in Christ. He is the promised King. There is no need now or in the future for an ethnic Jew to be sitting on some throne as a king.

Page 28-29

Holdcroft:

These Abrahamic blessings are still awaiting fulfillment, and the time of their fulfillment will be the millennium.

“In that day [in the millennial kingdom] when national Israel’s survivors accept their Messiah, they will enjoy all the political and earthly advantages of the Abrahamic covenant. “

Me:

So Jesus wasn’t the fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant? Isn’t this going backwards?

Is the literal futurist Millennium invented as a necessity because national Israel hasn’t yet experienced these “political and earthly advantages”? Futurists see these promises as unfulfilled. But what if God fulfills His promises in a radically different – and better! – way, unimaginable until God revealed Himself in Jesus?

Holdcroft:

The new covenant predicted by Jeremiah in 31:31-34 is Israel’s millennial covenant. “Jeremiah does not speak of the new covenant that Christ provided for His church. The two “new” covenants should not be confused.”

Me:

Really? 2 New Covenants? Is one better than the other? Is Jesus not the plan for the Jews?

Holdcroft:

“This covenant will provide the spiritual basis for the transformation of flesh and blood Israelites into penitent and devout millennial citizens, and prepare them for eternity in the new Jerusalem.”

Me:

Oooh, so the millennium is like a 1000 year purgatory for the Jews, so they can prove they are worthy of entering the new Jerusalem at the end of it all!

Holdcroft:

“Israel’s future new covenant is quite different from the Christian’s present new covenant.”

Me:

AAaaaggghhhh….. I disagree! Are we – Jews and Gentiles – not joined in one family? Does not all the true seed of Abraham have a common destiny in Christ? Hasn’t God “planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect” (Hebrews 11:40)?

Page 32

Holdcroft:

“The unbelieving Jew still retains God’s promise of an earthly land for him or his descendants.”

Me:

But why? What is the point of this earthly land?

Page 37

Holdcroft:

Speaking of Jesus’ time on earth: “God’s desire for the Jews of that day was that they enthrone the incarnate Christ as their Messiah, but they failed to do so. […] Since what Jesus offered was rejected, the fulfillment of God’s plan now awaits the kingdom age – the millennium.”

“The Jews of Jesus’ day could have directly entered into the kingdom, just as in Moses’ time the people could have entered the promised land a few days after leaving Egypt.”

Me:

You have got to be kidding me. This misses the whole point of the incarnation, the cross. It was never God’s intent for Jesus to be installed as a political Messiah over national Israel in 33 AD, for the establishment of an earthly kingdom. This is horrible Christology!!!!!!!!!!!!

You’ve probably heard enough by now. My poor margins are a mess. I finished this chapter extremely frustrated. The rest of the book, and the rest of Holdcroft’s interpretation of Scripture, are all tied in to this particular form of dispensationalism. 

Conclusion

I tried to give futurism a fair chance, I really did. I tried to see the theological logic of dispensationalism, to wrap my head around this particular way of reading the Bible. But at the end of it all, I simply cannot accept the theological, and especially Christological, premises of dispensationalism, at least the way Holdcroft presents them.

I guess dispensationalism and I have been in one of those relationships that existed by default more than anything else. But now I see how different we really are. Irreconcilably so, perhaps. We need a break. I need some space, to clear my head, to think, to see what other fish are out there in the eschatological sea.

It’s not you, it’s me. No, actually, I think it is you.

~

So where do I go from here?

-          I need to explore different ways of understanding the distinction and connection between Israel and the Church.

-          I need to explore different ways of understanding how the biblical covenants are related to each other. (Covenant Theology?)

-          I would like to do some study on Romans 9-11, a section I have always found tricky. I want to check out several commentaries, perhaps from different traditions/perspectives.

-          I would also like to hear some other dispensationalist voices, to see how they differ from or conform to Holdcroft’s view. I am still open to someone explaining dispensationalism in a way that has theological integrity, especially when it comes to Christology.

~lg