How God Sees the Church

That God should have a different perspective on church than we do should not be all that surprising--that we should have a different one than him after he's spelled out his is another thing all together. We get more than a glimpse of how God sees the church in the Seven Letters to the Seven Churches in the Revelation. We can gain insight from other passages of scripture as well. Together they show us that God views the church as the body of Christ and the family of God; that he sees the church locally and collectively, in the micro and in the macrocosm.

Consistently, God sees and deals with the church as one entity in a locality, hence the title of most of the Pauline epistles and the nature of the letters in the Revelation. God sees the church seamless, like Christ's garment, made of individual threads, but bound into a whole without the use of artificial connections. No matter how much we'd like to apply the lessons from the Seven Letters to individual, denominational congregations, it is hard to get past the facts that each locality has but one candlestick, one superintending angel, and was addressed by one letter.

Doubtless, in each of those towns there were many churches meeting in many different houses, but Christ addressed them collectively. It is therefore not truly accurate to see any denominational or individual local church as the proper addressee of any of the biblical letters. It would be better to see each as addressing a city-wide church, a conglomeration of local houses of worship, at least that is how it would have been understood by the original audience. No house of worship is really "the church" anywhere.

If the church actually saw itself the same way Christ does, our identity would not be so pinpointed as to exist without reference to other bodies (and cross-denominationally) in our immediate area. We would not act as if we were islands in the storm, but see that Christ-life, real life, our life together did not end at the walls of our own congregation, as if we were the church in where ever we are. Would there even be enough angels to go around if that was the case for the seven (the entirety) of the church?

Good Church/Bad Church

If the letters to the Seven Churches in Asia represent, as I have posited, a representative communication to the whole church throughout all time, then at any given time there would have to be some good churches, some bad churches and some that are a mixed bag. I think that was what was intended to be communicated by Christ Jesus, and is what has, in fact, been observed throughout church history.

Good churches, as Christ sees it (modeled by Smyrna and Philadelphia), are not necessarily what the average Christian today would call successes. Afflicted, poor, weak, persecuted by false believers and the state are qualities that Christ attributed to those pleasing churches. Despite their apparent lack of achievement, they are affirmed by Christ and promised a good end upon his return. Makes one rethink his or her commitment to church growth and being a Christian success, doesn't it?

Bad churches, as Christ sees it (modeled by Sardis and Laodicea), are indifferent, self-satisfied, sloppy morally, and materialistic. They have forgotten the Word and are in danger of being forgotten by Christ upon his return. Do the descriptives mainline or historical pop to mind here? A reputation for being the living church certainly doesn't make one so.

Mixed churches, as Christ sees it (modeled by Ephesus, Pergamum and Thyatira), are those that would otherwise be good churches except for some glaring flaw. Of the three, I find Ephesus the most troubling. Its description would make it the poster child for thriving evangelicalism today, but its loss of first love has it endangered instead. Really, it's stunning, shocking, and for me, an evangelical pastor, dismaying. Can anyone really be sure that Evangelicals are Rapture ready?

The other two suffer from readily evident and similar problems: instead of rousting false teachers, they tolerate them. As a result, some church folk are enticed into idolatry and sexual immorality. Though we live in a time that values toleration, perhaps these examples tell us this is no time to go soft on fornication and homosexuality.

Rolling for Lucky Seven

The series of sevens in the first three chapters of the Revelation, however cryptic they may seem, are relatively clearly identified by John. When it comes to symbols, I think the tendency of creative minds is to dig for some deeper meaning despite any simple identification, even if given by the author! Perhaps that seems too superficial for inquiring minds. Anyone remember Paul being dead?

I think that tendency leads to error in interpreting the Apocalypse, and produces anything but an understanding of what John and Jesus clearly wanted people to understand. A simple, straightforward reading which takes the text for what it says and doesn't feel the need to go beyond is what actually produces sense. Though there are unidentified symbols and surreal narrative sections, I think, on the whole, the Apocalypse is more forthright than many let on. KISS.

Case in point: the interpretation of the seven lampstands and the seven stars. In both cases, the antecedents for the symbols are clearly identified (see also the Seven Churches). Yet, there are those who look for further mysterious meanings, which tends to so subjectivize the text as to make it incapable of dependably meaning anything to anyone. How can we read the prophecy and take it to heart if we're speculatively rolling the dice looking for lucky seven?

The Seven Spirits of God

When John tells us there are seven spirits before the throne of God, our first reaction might be a monotheistic gasp. The concept of a trinity in the Godhead is hard enough to understand and defend, a nonet is beyond the pale. Since John was certainly no pagan polytheist, what does the reference mean?

Isaiah 11:2 may yield some clues about the reference. To say that the prophet delineates seven spirits of God is way more than a stretch, but it certainly suggests something. It seems the one Spirit can be properly referred to by his various attributes. The apocalyptic designation would perhaps be better understood, in that light, as the sevenfold Spirit of God, understanding the seven as an idealized expression of perfection in every aspect of God, the Spirit's being. There are other spirits about beside God, but by this reckoning, none of them could be called sevenfold.

That is generally verified by John's introduction of the the sevenfold Spirit in conjunction with the unnamed God on the throne (the Father) and Jesus Christ, the firstborn from the dead. The sevenfold Spirit is therefore part of a trinitarian formulation identifying the God who is controlling all that is about to be unfolded prophetically. As the Father and Son are perfect and united in purpose, so too with them is the oft forgotten member of the trinity, the Holy Spirit, united in purpose and perfect as well.

Between John's introduction and latter apocalyptic references to the seven Spirits of God, the attributes that seem most in focus for the Apostle (as opposed to those Isaiah highlighted) are omniscience and omnipresence. God on the throne is timeless (he was, and is, and is to come) and his sevenfold Spirit before him is likewise always present in the always present. The light of his perfection (lamps) always emanates from the throne room of God to the farthest places, illuminating the deepest darkness of space, time and spirit, bringing all within clear sight (eyes) of the God who sees all.

Another Sneeze in the Evolutionary Flu

It was as if I heard an "achew!" When I saw this article's heading my interest was piqued, so I read it and this, this, and this (incomplete). My conclusion: more hype over theory that 1) hasn't withstood scrutiny yet, and 2) misses the point-- it's not so much the chemical compounds that are the issue (they are a very big issue), but the massive information coded by them and the apparatus for replicating it.

Of course, this says nothing about why such processes are not observed to be happening in the life friendly environment of nature today. Having to have a controlled environment, prepared and maintained by intelligent people in white coats, to demonstrate a possibility always puts the proponents of chance in a quandary.

I'm sure bright, informed minds familiar with prebiotic chemistry will weigh in with further study and analysis in the coming weeks, but in the mean time, I wouldn't let the headline get me either too nervous or giddy. I suspect that soon, scientists will develop the antiprebiotic for this particular strain of evolutionary flu. Guzunheit!

The Seven Churches of the Apocalypse

In the first verse of the Apocalypse, John identifies the intended audience of the prophecy as the servants of Jesus Christ. That is a broad and universal designation which refers to the Church, the entire corpus of the body of Christ, everywhere at any time. In fact, all those who are servants of Jesus Christ, living and the dead, are the Church of the Firstborn

In the formal epistolary salutation starting in v. 4, John specifies his audience as the seven churches in the province of Asia. In doing so, he was not suddenly shifting his perspective from the broad to the specific (i.e from everywhere to the province of Asia), but was introducing symbolism to refer to the same audience he mentioned in v.1. The seven churches in Asia represent the entire church of Jesus Christ.

When a numeric like seven is repeated descriptively, as it is in v.4 , there is no way to miss its obvious symbolic implications. Throughout the scriptures, not just in the Apocalypse, this number is used to indicate completeness, or entirety (e.g. this). Seven days completed creation, seven has stood for completion in regard to God's work ever since. The only question to answer in regard to the symbolism of v.4, is to what entirety or completion does it refer?

I would say the force of both references (v. 1 and 4) is meant to convey that the address is to all the church throughout all time. That discounts the preterists viewpoint, for the scope was not limited to the Roman persecution of the ancient church, but addressed to the church throughout the ages covered by the prophecy. When the final judgment and the resurrection are mentioned as a piece in the continuum, how can can such a narrow time frame be justified?

Furthermore, it discounts interpreting the letters to follow as successive ages of the Church, for the churches are addressed corporately as a whole in chapter one. True, they will be dealt with in isolation from each other in the body of the letters to follow, but contemporaneously--distinct but at the same point in time. Whereas the seals, trumpets and vials have a time progression built into them (one is broken, blown, poured after another) the letters do not. They were sent out at once, together, to be read by all simultaneously.

The seven churches are both real and representative. Real in that there were seven such churches in John's day that faced issues such as written about in the letters. Representative as demonstrated by the symbology: not of periods of time, but of differences in the character of typical local churches which make up the one church universal. The seven churches, then, is merely a synecdoche which refers to the entire church through all time. 

Grace at the Bottom of the Well

Amazing grace, how sweet the sound... yeah, but do we understand the sound? What is grace anyhow?

We can believe it's divine assistance, a helping hand from God. I can't do this by myself, but by God's grace I can, it's my vitamin G!

We can believe it's divine amnesia, the sea of holy forgetfulness. When we aren't doing too well obeying God, we have an elven cape woven of grace that conceals us from a watching eye-- like a big cardboard cut out of Jesus to hide behind when we go into the holy of holies.

We can believe it's divine artifice, a trick of God that outsmarted the Devil, who never saw it coming. Presto, chango, the sinner is now a saint! What accusation can hold up against that? The evidence disappears as fast as the charge is made before the God who judges the heart.

I don't know if it's truly possible to understand grace with words alone. It's a something in the heart of God, whom words are not adequate to describe. Attempting to define or describe the heart of God will always leave us wanting.

Experience may be the best teacher in this matter. I don't think we understand grace until we have grasped it in desperate hands and dangled over the depths upon it; until we have exhausted all our efforts at depending on ourselves and still haven't found ourselves delivered into the lap of God.

Like one trapped alone at the bottom of a slippery well with nothing but one's self, one's wits, and in the end, no hope whatsoever, so are we before God. Exhausted and utterly hopeless we can do nothing but accept our fate. At that place, the tap on our heads, reveals a rope lowered from the nail scarred hand of a Savior. Grace is what we discover at the bottom of the well.