Category Archives: Spiritual Formation

On the Use and Benefit of Tradition

church-zombie-tradition-1024x819

In my recent posts, I have addressed the use and benefit of the lectionary and of the Christian calendar respectively. I also discussed the season of Lent. Here in the “buckle” of the Bible Belt, these types of discussions necessarily raise the bigger question about the church’s interaction with larger church history and tradition. Given the fundamental roots of most churches in this area, there is unspoken antagonism, or almost hostility, to adopting or adapting anything from the great traditions of church history. We have “no creed but the Bible” as it is often stated. It’s almost as if people believe that there was Jesus and the Apostles and now there is us, and no one has ever tried to follow Jesus in between the two. This kind of attitude leads to a Christian experience that is largely ahistorical, ungrounded, and lacking in any kind of depth or richness. This is easily seen in the lack of definition, conviction, and identity among so-called Evangelicals in the larger American culture.

The bottom line is that every church, every community for that matter, has some kind of tradition, whether formal or informal, whether spoken or assumed. And to act as if this is not so is simply intellectually dishonest. Traditions are the building blocks of culture; they are how culture is passed on from one generation to the next. Without them, ideas, values, and habits would die out and fade away as if they never existed. We are traditioned creatures, and that is not such a bad thing. Traditions tells us who we are and what we value, and they form our identity as members of the community to whom those particular traditions belong.

Of course, not all traditions are good and/or beneficial. There are many examples throughout Christian history going all the way back to times of Jesus or even into the Old Testament where the traditions of men were placed above the commands and teachings of Holy Scripture, where they were used to enslave people and populations rather than lift them up into the godly life. The Old Testament prophets, Jesus himself, and the New Testament authors are all very specific in their critiques of the misuse of traditions. But this does not mean that we may simply disregard them as having no benefit. Even Jesus kept the traditions of His people as an upstanding Jew.

Now, when it comes to the Great Tradition, as it is sometimes called, there are basically three ways we can respond, which are not original with me but are helpful nonetheless. We can reject the parts that are out of date, inappropriate, and/or unhelpful. We can receive the parts that are still good, helpful, and uplifting. Or we can “redeem” the parts that can be useful and beneficial by changing what is bad and reframing what is good. Reject. Receive. Redeem. Or, said another way: abandon, accept, accommodate, but the meaning is essentially the same.

The parts that we reject are easily identifiable, and most, but not all, stem from the Roman Catholic Church, because that was the only church for the first 1500 years of Christian history. So, concepts like those that pertain to the pope or the virgin Mary or purgatory, for example, are all parts of church tradition that we rightly reject. The Reformers were quite specific in their attacks on the traditions of the Catholic Church with which they disagreed. Another example of a tradition that we rightly reject might be John Calvin’s perspective on infant baptism. There is much we can learn from the writings and teachings of Calvin, but we should rightly reject his teaching on that particular topic. There are others, which need not be enumerated, but suffice it to say that some traditions that we see in Church history are temporally bound, specific to a particular people in particular place and time, and these should be respected and understood while not being emulated. Still others are downright unscriptural and should be rejected altogether.

Some parts that we can receive are the historic creeds of the church, e.g. the Apostle’s Creed, the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, the Chalcedonian Creed, and the Athanasian Creed, and the insights from the historic ecumenical councils. There are also plenty of confessions and catechisms that have been passed down through the ages that still hold great value for theological education today. Southern Baptists themselves have their own version of this in the Baptist Faith and Message, first adopted in 1925, revised in 1963, amended in 1998, and revised again in 2000. Another aspect of the Great Tradition that we can receive are the writings of the great figures of church history, especially those that have withstood the test of time. From the patristic era, through the medieval era, the Reformation era, and into the modern era, there have been great Christian writers, thinkers, theologians, and pastors whose teachings are preserved for us in their literary works. As I pointed out above, we do not have to agree with them on every point, but there is still much we can learn from the timeless classics of the Christian faith. This is as true for the pastor, theologian, or professor as it is for the medical doctor, lawyer, grocery worker, or farmer who believes in Christ. If has often been said and it bears repeating that we should spend more time working through old books than we do sprinting through new ones.

Lastly, some aspects of the Great Tradition that we might redeem include things like the lectionary and the Christian calendar among others. These would fall under the category of devotional and ministry practices, both those for individuals and those for communities. The question of how the Spirit forms us into the image of Christ is not a new one. Faithful Christians throughout the ages have walked the same path of Christian discipleship that we are called to walk today. Certainly the challenges may be different in our cultural context than it was in theirs, but the principles and values have remained mostly the same. We are still called to grow in Christ-likeness, to advance the Gospel in our neighborhoods and around the world, and to love each other as Christ loves us. And we can learn a lot from the beliefs and practices of those who have gone before us.

The Great Tradition of the church is the norma normata (the norm that is normed), and Holy Scripture is norma normans non normata (the norming norm that cannot be normed). Yes, we should hold fast to  the doctrine of Sola Scriptura, but we cannot allow that belief to devolve into nuda scriptura. If we can learn to drink deeply from the springs of Christian tradition, instead of isolating ourselves in the now, then I believe that we will find our faith experience to be more enriched and more robust, than what is currently on offer in the Christian culture of today’s churches.

For further study, see:
Williams, D.H. Retrieving the Tradition and Renewing Evangelicalism: A Primer for Suspicious Protestants. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1999.

Also updated in:
Williams, D.H. Evangelicals and Tradition: The Formative Influences of the Early Church. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2005.


On the Season of Lent

Yesterday, February 14th, marked the annual cultural commemoration of Valentine’s Day. It is a day that is supposed to celebrate romantic love and affection, and it is usually expressed through the giving of flowers, candy, cards, and the like. And there is nothing wrong with that; however, for Christians, this February 14th also marked another holiday, namely Ash Wednesday. Ash Wednesday marks the beginning of the season of Lent, a 40 day period of preparation for the celebration of Holy Week climaxing in Easter. This preparation is usually characterized by repentance, confession, fasting, and acts of service.

Since most churches here in the area do not observe Lent, or if they do they don’t have a traditional Ash Wednesday service, my wife and I attended Ash Wednesday Mass at Blessed Sacrament Church, so that we could participate in the imposition of ashes, where a cross is marked on a worshippers forehead with ash. In the Bible ashes are most often a symbol of repentance, contrition, even mourning; a pentitent person would mark themselves with and/or sit in ashes to show outwardly their inward emotional state. Ashes also symbolize our mortality, as in the stanza, “Remember that you are but dust and into dust you shall return.” During Lent, we remember our mortality, because Jesus took our mortality into himself at the incarnation. He went to the cross to die, even as we all will die someday, and he rose again to new life, even as we all shall be raised. This life is passing, short, and fleeting, but our eternal hope rests in the immortality of Jesus in his resurrection.

Repentance means to change one’s mind, and it implies an intentional turn from sin to godliness. However, what is missing in this definition is that true repentance is motivated by godly grief over our sin. (2 Corinthians 7:10) During Lent, we try to see and feel our sin the way God sees it, so that we can appreciate the atoning death of Jesus even more. He who knew no sin became sin for us. So, in repentance, we acknowledge our sin as the abhorrent afront it is before a holy God. We turn away from it in righteous disgust as we learn to truly desire godliness in our character and behavior.

Lent is also usually accompanied by fasting. And Jesus did not say “If you fast”; he said “when you fast”, implying that He assumed that fasting would be a regular part of Christian discipleship. (See Matthew 6) Fasting is a timeless and valuable spiritual discipline, but our cultural aversion to anything uncomfortable and our insatiable need for self-indulgence has caused us to neglect it altogether. Yes, fasting challenges us to throw off the insanity of our cultural slavery to consumerism, to give up our creature comforts, and to forsake our dependence on stuff for the sake of Christ.

Now, when it comes to fasting, the specifics of the fast are ultimately irrelevant; whether you fast one meal or one whole day, whether you do it every Friday or not, or whether you give up something other than food. The goal of fasting is to free us from our dependence on things and to cultivate our dependency on Christ. I am giving up coffee for this Lent season, and if you know me, then you know that coffee is vital part of my morning routine. I am not a morning person, not even close. But I have chosen to give up this creature comfort, this practical addiction, for the 40 day duration of Lent, because as my body aches for the fix of caffeine, so my soul should ache for communion with the Spirit of the living God.

The season of Lent is also usually accompanied by acts of service or charity, as we seek to become more like Jesus. He spent his time ministering to the bottom rungs of society, the sick, the lame, the blind, the demon possessed, and we are called to be His hands and feet in the communities and neighborhoods we live in. After all, He said, “whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.” Some people choose to give the money that they would have spent on whatever they chose to give up to charitable or Christian causes. Whatever you choose to do, the teaching of Jesus is clear, do it in secret without seeking the praise of others, “and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.” (Again, see Matthew 6)

Lent is an invitation to follow Jesus, once again, as He journeys toward the cross. Along the way, we seek to become more like Him, to be set free from “the sin that so easily entangles”, and to soak in anew our need for a savior, for His atonig death and His lifegiving resurrection. There are no rules, regulations, or requirements for its observance, only freedom in the Spirit as we seek to allow the Spirit make us more like Jesus. It is a time to renew once again our repentance from the way of the world and our embracing of life in the Spirit.


On the Use and Benefit of the Christian Calendar

Every church has a calendar, and by that I mean that every church has an annual rhythm of seasons that defines their corporate life together. Every year, churches tend to observe the same set of holidays, seasonal emphases, remembrances, and milestones. Now, in most low church or free church traditions, especially here in the “Bible Belt”, these annual rhythms are usually indistinguishable from the civic, cultural, and sentimental holidays celebrated in the larger culture, so, in the final analysis, we would have to acknowledge that this type of annual calendar cycle is not distinctively Christian.

We celebrate our American civil and patriotic holidays, like Independence Day, Memorial Day, Veterans Day, Flag Day, or Presidents Day. We remember the Hallmark holidays, like Valentine’s day, Mother’s Day, Father’s Day. We even commemorate holidays for history and heritage, like Halloween, Thanksgiving, , Columbus Day, or Martin Luther King’s birthday. And these are not bad or wrong things to remember or celebrate; they are unique to our cultural and historical identity, but, are they making us more like Christ? By marking our year by this calendar, are we growing in our understanding of the person and work of Jesus, and are we conforming our identity and values to his?

Of course, there are two Christian holidays that we celebrate every year, those being Christmas and Easter. However, it seems their Christian meaning often gets lost in the unbridled consumerism of our culture. These historically Christian holy days have become more about Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny, Christmas trees and other seasonal decorations, exchanging gifts, egg hunting, and having holiday parties, and their Christian significance is relegated to a 1-2 hour Church service, if that. So, is there a way to reckon our yearly and seasonal cycles in a way that is more centered on the person and work of Jesus Christ? Is there a way to move the Gospel from the periphery of our remembrances, our celebrations, and our commemorations to the center of them?

I would submit that there is, and I would also submit that the church has been following this annual seasonal cycle for the vast majority of its existence. For most of church history, Christians all over the world have followed the Christian calendar or the Church year. This is a calendar that begins four Sundays before Christmas with the season of Advent, proceeds through the seasons of Christmas and Epiphany, continues through the seasons of Lent, Holy Week, Easter, and Pentecost, then ends with the celebration of Ordinary Time which climaxes on Christ the King Sunday. This annual celebration of the Gospel focuses our celebration, remembrances, and commemorations on the person and work of Jesus Christ, and as we repeat it every year, it forms us more and more into his image. It conforms our values, our priorities, and our perspectives to those of the Kingdom of God.

This is what might be called the spiritual discipline of time. Richard Foster has the best definition of spiritual disciplines in his book Celebration of Discipline: The Path to Spiritual Growth. He describes the spiritual disciplines as a way of assuming a posture of submission within which God can do his sanctifying work. In other words, they are God’s way of putting us where God can work within us and transform us. The Disciplines can only get us to the place where something can be done; they open the door to life in, with, and through the Spirit.

And the need for a spiritual discipline of time has never been more pressing than in today’s fast paced instant gratification seeking culture. In our world, we do not know how to wait for anything. We rush from one experience to the next hardly allowing the time and space necessary for the significance of those experiences to soak into our souls. The seasons of the Christian Calendar force us to slow down and to sit in the grand narrative of Gospel of Jesus Christ week after week, Sunday after Sunday.

In the final analysis, the holidays and occasions that we choose to remember reveal our true values and priorities; they tell a story that reveals the most fundamental realities about who we understand ourselves to be. As Christians, our identity is to be grounded in and conformed to the identity of Jesus Christ. We are Christians first and foremost, and all other claims that attempt to form our identity must come second. Observing the Church Year tells the story of Gospel as the controlling narrative for who we are and what we are called to do, and as we cycle through it year after year, we hopefully move deeper and deeper into it’s mystery. May we rediscover this historical discipline as we seek to be made more and more into the image of Christ.

For further study, see: Emerson, Matthew Y. On Objections to the Church Calendar. The Center for Baptist Renewal, posted 2.15.18.


On the Lack of Deep Biblical Preaching in the Church Today

teaching_preaching_church_teachers

When I was in seminary, it was pretty commonplace to hear my fellow classmates lamenting the lack of deep biblical preaching in churches today. These were pastors, teachers, and missionaries in training, and, certainly, their passion for the preaching office in the church is to be lauded. However, I think that in our zeal for deep preaching, it would be easy to develop an overly critical attitude when listening to sermons being preached. Nevertheless, as listeners, we must be discerning of what we hear. The difficulty is that the very concept of deep preaching is somewhat nebulous. What makes a particular sermon deep? What are the defining characteristics of a deep sermon? It is probably easier to define what deep preaching is not as opposed to what it is, so in that regard, what follows are some guidelines for identifying what deep preaching is not.

Deep preaching is not a seminary lecture. Preaching is not the time for an information dump of all that a preacher knows about a given passage. A seminary lecture has as its primary purpose to educate and to inform, and it is set in a classroom setting that is focused primarily on learning. Now, while these purposes certainly overlap with that of a sermon, they are still two quite distinct entities. A sermon must be catered to the audience and context for which it is intended, and it must be more than the dissemination of information.

Deep preaching is not a lesson in Greek or Hebrew. Studying the original languages of Holy Scripture is certainly a valuable, and I think it is a necessary resource for sharpening a pastor’s understanding of a given passage. But the pulpit is not the place to be giving vocabulary lessons. Use the original languages to inform your study, but then translate that meaning into the sermon in a way that people who have never been exposed to the original languages can understand. And don’t try to pronounce or include words from the original language in order to impress people with how much you know.

Deep preaching is not locked in the past. Here again, historical analysis and socio-cultural insights are important and helpful for understanding a given passage, and as those details serve to make the meaning of the text clearer, they can and should be included in the sermon to help listeners understand the text. However, a sermon that remains in the past and never brings the meaning forward to the present is not deep. It is merely a history lesson.

Deep preaching is not unnecessarily complex. All of the above leads us to this, that deep preaching is not complex for the sake of being complex. Literary, linguistic, historical, and cultural details all must serve the ultimate purpose of making the meaning of the text clear. Certainly some passages and genres are more demanding than others making the various contextual details necessary, but, ultimately, everything that is said and done in a sermon must relate to overall meaning of the text and serve to make it clear.

Deep preaching is not interested in self help, nor does it seek to entertain. This is perhaps what my seminary peers were concerned with in their laments, but ultimately the purpose of a sermon is not to give helpful advice for life, to make people laugh or feel good about themselves or their lives. The purpose of a sermon is to present listeners with the risen Lord Jesus Christ, to point them to the Gospel and their need for a savior, and to be the avenue the Spirit uses to call people to repentance and faith.

Now, let me be clear, I love studying the literary/grammatical and historical sociocultural contexts of the Bible, but expository preaching must not content itself with what the Biblical authors once said. No, it must move forward to what the Spirit is saying. So, in that light, let us move on to what deep preaching is.

Deep preaching is focused on the text. Let the main thing be the main thing, and the main thing in preaching is the text of Holy Scripture. It is the text that is inspired by the Holy Spirit, it is the text that the Spirit uses to touch hearts and change lives, and it the text that ultimately holds up Jesus as the author and finisher of our faith. In the sermon, pastors should not be giving their opinions or addressing their favorite soapboxes or hobbyhorses or whatever may be the hot topic from the news cycle that week. As Paul told the young pastor Timothy, “Preach the Word!” (2 Tim. 4:2)

Deep preaching is geared toward life change. The Bible refers to it as edification, but all that really means is that preaching is for the purpose of making more faithful disciples of Jesus Christ. That should be the goal in all we do from pulpit to piano to parking lot, to equip people for living this thing called the Christian life. Ultimately, we know that true life change is brought about by the Spirit, and the Word is His sword. Preachers are the handles of that sword as they faithfully proclaim the Spirit inspired message of Holy Scripture week in and week out, so that the Spirit can do His work of transforming sinful human beings into the image of Jesus Christ.

Deep preaching comes from a place of personal conviction. If a pastor has not been personally touched, convicted, comforted, challenged, or changed by a particular passage or sermon, then he should not be preaching it. This means that in addition to historical and literary study of the text, the preacher should be spending time in those classic word centered spiritual disciplines, i.e. meditation, prayer, and fasting, so that the truth of the Scripture is burned into his very soul. Preaching from a place of Spirit led conviction yields spiritual power, authenticity, and real life to the sermon being preached. If you want your listeners to be changed by the sermon you are preaching, then you had better be changed by it too.

See also Edwards, J. Kent. Deep Preaching: Creating Sermons that Go Beyond the Superficial. Nashville, Tenn.: B&H Academic, 2009.


On the Spirit and the Word

Title: On the Spirit and the Word
Church: Redeemer Church, La Mirada, CA
Date: Pentecost Sunday, May 27, 2012


On Persistence in Prayer – Part 3

32948-kneeling-prayer-1200_1200w_tn.jpg

I have recently been considering Jesus’ teaching on the topic of prayer. In my last post in particular, I looked at Luke 11 and the parable of the friend at midnight, and I concluded that Jesus is calling us to a persistence in prayer that is general in scope, a persistence in the spiritual discipline of prayer, itself. Our Father is not the kind of God who needs to worn down, pestered, or annoyed into answering our prayers. He is an essentially good and trustworthy father who knows what His children need before we even ask him, and he delights in meeting the needs of his children.

Now, in chapter 18, just seven chapters later, Luke presents a parable that would seem to negate that very conclusion. In Luke 18:1, Luke states that “Now he told them a parable on the need for them to pray always and not give up,” and he goes on to relay the parable of the unjust judge in which a widow repeatedly goes before a local magistrate seeking justice against her “adversary.” Ultimately, the judge concludes that “because this widow keeps pestering me, I will give her justice, so that she doesn’t wear me out by her persistent coming.” (v5-6) If we assume that this parable relates to the practice of prayer in general, then we have no choice but to conclude that perhaps we need pester God into giving in to our requests.

This is exactly the assumption that we must reconsider in this passage: is Luke and, by way of implication, Jesus telling this parable to illustrate something about prayer in general? I think not.

Luke often arranges the teaching and parabolic material of Jesus topically, and he indicates the topic usually at the beginning of a new section. So, in Luke 17:20, Luke begins a new section about “when the kingdom of God would come,” and this section dealing with the coming of the kingdom begins in 17:20 and extends all the way until Luke 18:8. (Remember, Luke did not originally have chapter divisions). Then, in Luke 18:9, he begins a new section in which “He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous and looked down on everyone else.” This informs us that Jesus is not addressing our practice of prayer in general, but he is addressing a very specific kind of prayer, i.e. the prayer for the coming of the kingdom.

Secondly, in order to understand the exact nature of the widow’s request, we have to see her in light of the first century world in which Jesus lived. In Jesus’ day, women were essentially powerless, and, if their husband died, then they were left without many options for survival. Most likely, this widow was not allowed to inherit her husband’s property. So, her only options were to remain with her husband’s family where she would probably be treated as a servant, or to return to her family and repay her dowry to her parents. If she could not do either of these, she would probably be sold as a slave for debt. She was faced with homelessness, poverty, and starvation. So, her request to the judge “give me justice against my adversary” is a once-in-a-lifetime request, it was unique to her situation, and it was not something she would repeat ever again. Her situation is desperate, and she is powerless to change it.

Lastly, just like in Luke 11, so here we must recognize that Jesus is using a rhetorical technique called “from the lesser to the greater”; he is making a “how much more” argument, and he is doing so by way of contrast and not comparison. It is patently obvious in this passage that we are not supposed to identify God with the unjust judge, since the passage tells us twice that he neither feared God nor respected men. The God of the Bible is fair, good, and just. He treats all people equally; He blesses those who call upon him in faith. No, God is not like the judge in this passage.

So, hear Jesus’ conclusion,

“Listen to what the unjust judge says. Will not God grant justice to his elect who cry out to him day and night? Will he delay in helping them? I tell you he will swiftly grant them justice.” (vv6-8)

In the final analysis, Jesus is teaching us to pray always as he taught us in The Lord’s Prayer, “May your kingdom come,” and not give up hope. He is coming soon. “Amen, come Lord Jesus!”


On Persistence in Prayer – Part 2

“Lord, teach us to pray.” (Luke 11:1) A seemingly simple question, but what is striking is that the disciples must have known how to pray. After all, they were raised in a Jewish religious system that placed a significant value on prayer. Nevertheless, when they compared their experience to that of Jesus, they couldn’t help but conclude that there must be something that they were missing out on in their practice of prayer.

And Jesus’ answer to the disciples’ question is the Lord’s prayer, a text that is probably not completely unfamiliar to most. (Luke 11:2-4) So, in lieu of an extended discussion on all the clauses of this “model prayer”, we may simply conclude that Jesus’ understanding of prayer was grounded in His relationship with the Father which He had by nature as the Son of God, and, in the gospel, that relationship is extended to us by grace through faith. We may now bring all of our needs and concerns to God in prayer, because He has become our Father and we have become His children. (On this, see my post: On the Lord’s Prayer)

Jesus’ answer to the disciples’ question, however, doesn’t simply stop with the model prayer. He goes on in this passage to describe what kind of a father God actually is, i.e. a good and trustworthy Father who responds to the requests of his children. This much is explicitly stated in Luke 11:11-13; this much seems reasonably clear. The difficulty, though, lies in between these two seemingly clear pieces of Jesus’ answer, and this being the “parable of the friend at midnight”. (Luke 11:5-8)

5 And he said to them, “Which of you who has a friend will go to him at midnight and say to him, ‘Friend, lend me three loaves, 6 for a friend of mine has arrived on a journey, and I have nothing to set before him’; 7 and he will answer from within, ‘Do not bother me; the door is now shut, and my children are with me in bed. I cannot get up and give you anything’? 8 I tell you, though he will not get up and give him anything because he is his friend, yet because of his impudence he will rise and give him whatever he needs. (ESV)

On a first reading, it might seem that Jesus is suggesting that, when we have a particular need or concern, we ought to persistently bring that request to God in prayer until He responds. After all, isn’t that what the friend in the parable had to do to get his neighbor to give in to his request? And doesn’t Jesus say that it is because of the friend’s persistence (cf. v8, so NASB, NET, NKJV, HCSB) that causes the neighbor to rise and respond to his request.

However, there are several exegetical and theological problems with this “persistence” interpretation

  1. In vv. 5-7, Jesus is asking a rhetorical question similar to the question he asks a little later in the same passage in vv. 11-12. In both places, the question is simply “would any of you do something like this?”, and in both places, the implied answer is “No!” Just as no father would give their child something that is harmful like a snake or a scorpion, no person in Jesus’ day would act like the friend in this parable.
  2. Jesus confirms this when he describes the friends actions as “impudence” (v.8, so ESV). Now, a quick survey of the major translations reveals quite a bit of diversity in the translation of this word even though, most translations opt for something like “persistence”. The problem is that this is the only occurrence of this Greek word in the entire NT, a hapax legomena, and when we look at the uses of this word outside of the NT, it is reasonably clear that it never means anything like persistence. It always carries a negative connotation of something like shamelessness, impertinence, impudence, ignoring of convention. It describes a lack of sensitivity to what is proper, or a carelessness about the good opinion of others (so BDAG).
  3. Lastly, Jesus is making an argument from the lesser to the greater, a how much more argument, and he is doing so by way of contrast and not comparison. In other words, if this sleeping neighbor will respond to the embarrassing, culturally inappropriate, shameless request of his friend, then how much more will God certainly respond to the appropriate and legitimate requests of His children. The parallel question in the passage, which we alluded to earlier (v. 11-13) drives this point home: God will certainly give His children good things when they ask Him.

For these reasons, it is unfortunate that translators and commentators continue to import the idea of persistence into this parable. Jesus is not calling us to be more persistent (read insistent) in our prayers; rather, he is calling us to grow in our faith and trust that God is a good father who responds to the needs of His children when they bring them to Him in prayer. If this is so then, one cannot help but wonder if there is not some other scriptural warrant upon which we might base a theology of persistence in prayer. In this regard, some turn to the “ask, seek, knock” saying in 11:9-10.

9 And I tell you, ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. 10 For everyone who asks receives, and the one who seeks finds, and to the one who knocks it will be opened.

The imperatives in this saying – ask! seek! knock! – are in the present tense, and in the original language, this usually refers to a continuous action. So, the HCSB translation “keep asking… keep searching… keep knocking” is not completely unwarranted. However, it would be wrong to conclude that repetition in asking, seeking, and knocking is what causes it to be given to or opened for us, especially in light of the preceding parable of the friend at midnight. In light of what we said there, it seems more likely that Jesus is saying that we should keep on asking, seeking, and knocking because we can trust God our Father to give and to open. In other words, the cause-effect relationship does not flow from prayers voiced to answers received, but the other way around. God’s fatherly goodness should motivate us to keep on asking, seeking, and knocking.

So, we may need to reconsider our definition of persistence in prayer. Most of the time, when people think of persistence in prayer, they think of the repetitive bringing of the same request over and over to God until He gives us an answer. However, this definition simply doesn’t reflect what Jesus is teaching in this passage. Further, the path between this kind of “persistence” and sinful insistence would seem to be quite slippery indeed. No, I think Jesus is envisioning a different kind of persistence – one that is more general in its scope, one that is grounded in faithfulness to the spiritual discipline of prayer itself, one that is motivated by our fundamental belief in God’s Fatherly goodness. In other words, Jesus is calling us to a persistence that is characterized by the regular bringing of all our requests to God in prayer, always trusting in Him to respond to our needs as a Father.

For further study:

Sermon: Lord, Teach Us to Pray! (Luke 11:1-13)
Series: The Parables of Jesus
Church: Redeemer Church, La Mirada, CA
Date: June 19, 2011

See also Snodgrass, Klyne. Stories with Intent: A Comprehensive Guide to the Parables of Jesus. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2008.


On the Lord’s Prayer – Part 1

Title: How, then, should we pray? (Matt 6:9-15)
Series: Lord, Teach Us to Pray
Church: Wynne Baptist Church, Wynne, AR
Date: May 16, 2010

 


Slow To Write

"let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger."

lovegavehope

Just another WordPress.com site

Jared Cornutt

Pastor | Speaker | Writer

Denny Burk

A commentary on theology, politics, and culture

G3 Ministries

Events + Resources for the Local Church

Biblical Reasoning

Biblical and Systematic Theology According to the Scriptures

RetroChristianity

Reclaiming the Forgotten Faith

SBC Voices

Southern Baptist News & Opinion

Lucid Theology

Thoughts on words, books, theology, and life.

Baptist21

A pastor-led voice for Baptists in the 21st century

Center For Baptist Renewal

The Personal and Professional Blog of Phillip Powers

The Pastor's Well - Pastor Well

The Personal and Professional Blog of Phillip Powers

Articles - AlbertMohler.com

The Personal and Professional Blog of Phillip Powers

The Gospel Coalition

The Personal and Professional Blog of Phillip Powers