I recently heard a sermon from another church about the condition coined as Spiritual Amnesia. Reading Deut 8, the minister said that there were three ways to get Spiritual Amnesia:
- Through time you age or mature. (Spiritual Alzheimer’s)
- Get Hit on the head really hard.(Spiritual Concussion) This was explained as being hurt within the kingodm of God
- Deut 11:1 – Our Children, or even young Christians, were never taught Spiritual History
What followed next was a bit of truth, a bit of wishful thinking, a bit of eisegesis, and more than a bit of revisionist history. To be more accurate, it wasn’t so much revisionist history as selective history. I realize that in giving any message that certain choices have to be made to prove a point. However, certain information was categorically left out or minimized that shouldn’t have been.
From the text read, it’s important to note that the first two ’causes’ are not mentioned at all. There is nothing in this text that says that the Israelites forgot God because they became older. They is little, if any evidence that the Israelites matured in a good or bad sense at all. The fact that they have been in the desert for 40 years has nothing to do with it. They are currently being addressed by God, so being in the desert hasn’t caused them to forget God. The text does go on to describe how they could forget God, but more on that later on. First, I want to go off on two tangents and come back to the sermon as delivered and the text at hand.
Maturity a Problem? – A Brief Tangent
Aside from the non-sequitir, there is a point to be made that a person can believe he or she is mature without being mature. This is different than saying that as one gets older that they will naturally forget. The kind of forgetting that God is speaking of in Deut 8 has different roots than age-related issues. One way to believe you are mature is to measure how much you know against how much others know. Paul asserts in 1 Cor 8:1-4 that knowledge ‘puffs up’, but love is what builds. In this situation he is talking about the issue of eating food sacrificed to idols. Considering the rest of the chapter, it seems appropriate that the principle here applies to many situations. After all, if I can ‘legally’ eat meat sacrificed to idols, but refrain from it in order to preserve the faith of my brother, love truly is more important than knowledge.
Along those lines, I have seen many great minds that know the Bible quite well, but do not understand love enough to show the most simple kindness. I have seen Christians and non-Christians read hundreds of books and put their faith in either the number of books read, or in the knowledge gained from reading them. The point is that spiritual maturity is not only a matter of knowledge. (The best passage I have seen to describe spiritual maturity is Col 2:1-23.)
Spiritual Concussions – A Longer Tangent
In the text, God talks about how He has disciplined his people. There is no mention of the Israelites hurting each other, especially in regards to so-called discipling. Again, the text talks about causes of spiritual amnesia, but this is not one of them.
However, there is some merit to this point. When a Christian hurts another Christian, it can feel like a concussion, especially if the wound is deep. If you read through a list of symptoms for a concussion, most of them accurately describe the emotional feeling of being hurt by someone you trust. I actually like the term spiritual concussion for these reasons.
What do you do when another Christian hurts you? It depends really. Elders, Deacons, and other leaders have more severe punishments handed to them, but also stricter requirements to prove an accusation. In general, though, Matthew 18:15-17 is a good place to start for everyone, regardless of their position. Many times, the hurt is unintentionally caused and it can be cleared up very quickly.
Now those of you familiar with the ICC know that the situation of members being abused in various congregations was/is different. In some places, including most of the churches I was a part of, following Matt 18 with a leader was not safe if you wanted to maintain membership. If it ever needed to go beyond step one (talking to the person directly), you were basically writing yourself a ticket out. However, if the issue was between two members, the tie went to whomever was highest on the leadership chain. In the case of two members without a title, the situation was relegated to Bible Talk Leaders (with advice from Family Group or Sector leaders). Regardless of your present situation, I still think it is best to try Matt 18:15-17. If it goes to step two, insist that you have someone there you BOTH trust, not just the next leader up the chain. Both parties have to feel like the deck is not being stacked against them. It is my experience that in many places, the problem with getting issues resolved is more a function of no one (including leaders) wanting to hurt anyone’s feelings, that is why I generally encourage folks to try it, despite the past abuses. I attend a congregation where creating a ‘safe place’ is so important, that it is one of our stated objectives as a church.
I had two situations where someone came to me and said that so-and-so deacon is doing XYZ bad thing. I listened as they shared their hurt and frustration. One person stopped and said that he/she needed to stop talking about it. In both cases, I asked them if they had spoken to the deacon, and both answered in the negative. Before simply telling them to follow Matt 18:15, I acknowledged that they were hurt and assured them that they are not evil for feeling hurt. When I did encourage them to talk to the deacon directly, I pointed out that this person would honestly listen and desires feedback for many things. I offered to be a ‘reliable witness’ if the one-to-one talk did not go well. As far as I know, one person is reconciled with this deacon and the other is not. I do not know what the other is doing, but my offer still stands as long as they have spoken with this deacon, first.
In conclusion, it is better to be wronged for doing the right thing, that to be proven right by doing the wrong thing. This is better summed up with the adage, “The ends do not justify the means.” In 1 Cor, Paul asked whether it was better to just be wronged than to settle disputes in court. I agree with the sentiment. It is never justified to sin against a person just because they sinned against you. It doesn’t keep me from praying for justice, but God has already stated that it is his business to justify his people and avenge those who have been harmed. It is our responsibility to find a way to forgive.
I say this as someone that has been hurt in many ways intentionally and unintentionally. I have followed Matt 18:15 to all parties I believe have hurt me. Some were easy, I got an apology and a sincere commitment to change. Some were not easy, they denied doing anything wrong. One person even blamed others while listing off the things he or she did right. This still hurts. However, I am confident that I did the right thing. I have no regrets on how much I spent flying around the country (and to Europe).
Back to the Text
Forgive the indulgence of the two tangents, I thought it was necessary that the first two points have some validity, even if they are not related to Deut 8. I try to be as fair as I can and give credit where credit is due. However, as a part of pointing out how to do good exegesis, I believe it is important to also point out how to avoid sloppy exegesis. I intend on doing this with all my teaching articles, because I have personally made a commitment to God and myself that I want to base what my actions on good exegesis. Feel free to submit corrections to me and I will revise accordingly.
In Deut 8, we see that God is speaking to his people through Moses. He urges the Israelites to obey God and his commandments. He encourages them to remember the great things God did for them in the wilderness. He also reminds them of the discipline of God designed for humility. He also reminds them of the promise of God in regards to the good land they were about to conquer. He warns them against forgetting God when they have enjoyed the benefits of the land for some time. Specificaly, he warns that it will be easy to think that they made everything by their own strength and not through the power of God. He also warns them that if they forget God, they will not survive long in this new land.
Before this, in Deut 7, God, speaking through Moses, is telling the people that they will possess this land and encouraged them to destory all idols and to not be intimidated by the people in the land they will conquer. After this in Deut 9, the Israelites are furthered assured that the Canaanites will be driven out and are warned to give credit to God, instead of their inherent righteousness. This is a rough summary created with the help of John Gill’s Exposition of the Bible, but enough that it should suffice.
Notes about the Sermon
Warnings to remember and warning to not forget make Spiritual Amnesia a fitting title for a sermon about this passage. Similar warnings and encouragements to remember the deliverance of God are made in the New Testament (Ephesians 2:11-13 and others). It is true that as Christians, we are tempted to forget God.
Looking at the text, what are some reasons for this? Deu 8:11 says that one way we can forget God is by not obeying Him. Another way we can forget God (Deu 8:12-17) is to take pride in our accomplishments and our comfort. Lastly, we can forget God when we go after other gods (Deu 8:19). Faced with warnings to remember God, He provides a ways to remember Him. Deu 8:6 says that the Israelites should continue to obey God and his commandments. The Israelites are also encouraged to remember that they were saved from slavery in Egypt (Deu 8:14) and that he provided for them in the wildernes (Deu 8:1-4, Deu 8:15-16). Lastly, he also reminds them that God disciplines his people as a father disciplines his children (Deu 8:5).
Without going into more detail, let’s look at the three points originally asserted in the sermon:
- Through time you age or mature. (Spiritual Alzheimer’s)
- Get Hit on the head really hard.(Spiritual Concussion) This was explained as being hurt within the kingodm of God
- Our Children, or even young Christians, were never taught Spiritual History
Looking at the content of the passage, it becomes clear that points one and two are nowhere to be found. Even though the points may be valid, they are irrelevant to the text presented. Unless a Scripture is introduced to tie this somehow to Deu 8, these points should be rejected. In listening for this, I wasn’t satisfied that these were related somehow. In fact, what I heard was the speaker’s opinion about the pitfalls of false maturity and the dangers of overreacting to being hurt by other Christians. Again, these points may be valid and the perspective given was informative and presented with conviction (though I do not share his opinion on these matters). However, they don’t relate and no tie to the text was given, so those two points are filed away as ‘neat to know’ but rejected as useful for this text.
Point three, however, does relate and the speaker did a good job of tying this in. We can forget God by forgetting what He has done for us personally and for your congregation. The speaker talked about his former life before he became a Christian and how his life changed. It reminded me of my story and how God delivered me. It also reminds me that we all have a story of how God saved us from a life of sin and death and brought us to a new life. When I first became a Christian, I wrote down what my ‘old’ life was about and how my life had changed. I refer to it often when I forget what God has done for me.
From there, the speaker went on to talk about the great things God is doing through the speaker’s congregation. Apparently, wherever he is going, folks are asking about how his congregation does various things. He continued the encouragements to specific individuals and the the congregation as whole.
In and of itself, this is not a bad thing. It is necessary for a minister to encourage their congregation. My minister encourages ours. Taking this sermon by itself, there is no real cause for alarm outside of a ‘gut’ feeling that something is not quite right. But though I suspect it, it is not fair to state it as a danger without more evidence to do so. Basically, I think that the speaker is implying that his congregation’s method is the best or only correct method. I base this from the habit of doing this in conjunction with warnings against churches that have ‘compromised’ the message or ‘compromised’ discipleship and many other things. But this is getting away from the sermon and will be mentioned in another post.
I also thought it was good to remind folks of the good that the former ICC accomplished. I remember praying for a church to be planted in Ulan Baator because there had been little missionary activity there in hundreds of years. I remember when our mission team stayed in Moscow during the coup. Two missionaries my father funded left Kiev and never went back. In addition to that, the ICC policy of getting nationals to lead a church as soon as possible helped add to the long-term stability of these churches. I remember what it was like to visit members from overseas and having an instant connection with them through similar experiences and beliefs. All in all, it felt like a wonderful and exciting time.
However, in presenting our history, it is important to mention the high and low points. There are lessons learned at every turn. For example, it is important to mention the Churches of Christ in the 50’s and start our unique history with Crossroads. Despite whatever you think of Chuck Lucas, I don’t doubt that his original intention was to evangelize college campuses and to expect members to be actively engaged. However, it is important to note that Crossroads separated itself from the ‘Boston Movement’. There were good and bad things about that separation and it shouldn’t be kept a secret. Later on, mainline Churches of Christ stops listing our churches in 1987. We should mention that. Why? Because it needs to be addressed in order to explain and discuss why the talks in Abliene in two successive years are important. Along the way, we should also talk about how we had so many people leave that we were starting to show net losses in church membership all over the world. Why? It says something about who we were at a given time in history and speaks to our needs now. It is not fair to present the positive things of our history without talking about the issues. Neither is it fair to talk about obvious issues without discussing the good that was done. The Henry Kriete Letter was an event that had good and bad effects. Only discussing the bad does everyone a disservice. Why did it have the impact it did? Why is the health of some churches in question? Why are some churches doing better after it came out?
The Conclusion of the Matter
So what is to come of the lengthy commentary on a sermon? Well, I intend to take my time with God more seriously. It is really easy for me to take pride in my accomplishments in myself and my church and rest on them. I don’t want to become some arrogant know-it-all that convieniently never spends much time with God. There are already enough scribes and Pharisees to last a dozen lifetimes and I do not want to be another one. I have allowed the idol of a busy life to interfere with my relationship with God.
As far as my thoughts on the sermon as delivered, there are biblical problems with it. The delivery was entertaining and engaging, but outside of the exhortation to remember the good that God has done, it was not really close to the text given.
I realize that most people do not analyze a sermon to this detail, but I don’t think it’s wrong to do so every once in a while. Nothing or no one is too sacred to examine when there is a difficulty. As long as you are honest and fair to yourself, the speaker, and the message, a lot of good can come from it. When I have struggled with messages in my church, I analyzed them the same way and was encouraged and challenged to find that I really did need to listen to what was said. I was wrong and the Bible clearly supported the speaker’s message.
Why go through all this? I’m beginning to hope again. Seriously, I am really beginning to hope again. When I think back to what was accomplished through fear, control, and naviete, I can only imagine what can be accomplished with love, respect, and wisdom. I dream about a worldwide fellowship with folks inside and outside the old ICC. I dream about sponsoring missionaries with no regrets and being encouraged by what individual members can do to share the gospel message. I look forward to a day when it is just as important to baptize someone as it is to help a young Christian mature. I also look for a time when Christians will start using the gifts and talents God has given each person. I hope for a day when the churches I used to attend stand for something besides an object lesson in hubris.
I hope for a lot, I know. But I know it’s not going to happen by waiting and it’s not going to happen by cosmetic change. It will take repentance, prayer, fasting, and a mustard seed of faith wrapped in love. And it starts with me.
PostScript
I read that icocinfo.org has linked to this article. In emails I received and thoughts I’ve had since writing this, I felt the need to address a glaring omission on my part.
In considering the good the ICC did, I ignored the consideration of doctrine. In essence, what good is it to reach the entire world with the wrong message? The Latter-Day Saints have reached more countries than the ICC ever did, and most of their missionaries are only active for two years. (I have LDS in my family.)
In expressing what I hoped, I tried to imply, but didn’t state directly, that I hoped doctrine would change. I consider the doctrines that supported the fear, the contol, and the naviete of members in need of dismantling and there were many. I also consider the doctrines of salvation, the trinity, and Arminial tendencies to be largely okay. I contend that many of our bad practices and doctrines came from bad exegesis. For example, problems with Matt 28:18-20 (only disciples can be baptized) and Matt 11:12 (Forcefully advancing) could be easily seen with the use of another good English translation. In any case, I hope to continue writing about good and bad exegesis in order to deal with areas of doctrine.