A couple of days ago, I encountered a video of a saxophonist performing a. . . memorable rendition of the hymn “Give Thanks with a Grateful Heart”.  At least, that’s what I think he’s playing.  I reposted the video with the comment, “The real reason why the Lord only commanded us to sing was to save us from bad church bands.  Not totally sure I'm joking.”

In all seriousness, I think there may be some truth to that.  I’m not sure that the performer-audience model of worship works well anywhere, but I think it has to work particularly badly in average and smaller-than-average churches. 

Across all denominations, the average church size is about 80 in attendance on Sunday morning.  If you want to put together a competent church band from the talent base of those 80 attendees, how successful are you going to be?  (Note, by the way, that churches of Christ are not a good gauge here.  Because of the practice of congregational singing, brethren have much more musical interest and ability than the norm.)  I’d guess you’d have a dude who used to play guitar in jazz band in high school, a woman of a certain age who gives piano lessons sometimes, and a girl in her late teens or early twenties who thinks she can sing. 

They could make music together, kind of.  You wouldn’t necessarily want to be in the same room with it.  If, perchance, they turned out to be pretty good, it wouldn’t be long before a larger congregation snapped them up. 

I’m not an expert, though I’ve watched some recordings online.  I would guess, however, that the attendee of the average church is subjected to bad music on a weekly basis.  The spotlight is not kind to people with marginal musical talent.

For churches of that size or smaller, congregational singing is simply going to work better.  Once you get people who are willing to sing (which is an American obstacle not generally present elsewhere), an 80-member congregation will be able to do so in an appealing way, even if the singers only have modest musical gifts.  The massed voices mask the flaws of any one voice (which, come to think of it, is a lovely metaphor for a church generally).  I’ve worshiped with lots of churches all across the country, but I can’t think of a single one where the singing discouraged me.

This is true not only for the average church, but even for the small one.  When I still lived in Illinois, I would preach once a month for the church up the road.  I believe the congregation has grown since, but back when I visited on Sunday evening, attendance would be in the teens.

Trying to get a band together from those brethren would have been a disaster, but you know what?  They could still make congregational singing work.  I didn’t dread singing with them.  I enjoyed it.

I think this illustrates the wisdom of God’s commandment to sing.  Acappella congregational singing scales pretty well.  Maybe it doesn’t compare to a Hillsong extravaganza, but singing “Our God, He Is Alive” with 1100 people has some power to it. 

However, it’s most important not for larger churches, but for smaller churches.  Even in the absence of standout musical talents (which usually aren’t going to be present in smaller congregations), congregational singing works.  It works here, it works in Africa (again, haven’t been, but have seen the YouTube videos), and I’d imagine it worked 2000 years ago.  Like everything about God’s plan for the church, it is suited to all places and times.

If you find yourself taking that for granted, go back and listen to the video at the top until you don’t.

For the past several years, one of the most hotly discussed political topics in our country has been the subject of immigration.  In America today, there are millions of people who, rather than being citizens of the United States, are citizens of somewhere else.  Even though according to the laws of the United States, they do not belong here, they have come here anyway, and many of them live for years or even decades in a country that is not their own.

I’m not up here to weigh in on that political debate.  Instead, I want us to remember that, even though they have been overlooked by both political parties, there is at least one other group of people living in the United States that doesn’t belong here either.  I refer, of course, to Christians.  Even if we were born and raised in the U-S-of-A, our citizenship is still in heaven, not here, and if we want to go there, we’d better put that heavenly citizenship first!

This always have been true of the people of God.  The Hebrews writer captures this idea beautifully in Hebrews 11:13-16.  Let’s spend the next few minutes unpacking this text, learning what it means for us to be strangers and exiles on the earth.

First, it means that WE SEE AND GREET THE PROMISES.  Our example here is Abraham and the patriarchs.  God gave them the land promise, the nation promise, and the seed promise, but all of them died before those promises were fulfilled.  Even though they would never see those fulfillments on earth, they looked toward them and welcomed them.

So too it must be for us.  God has made us many promises, but the greatest of them, the promise of eternal life, is something that none of us will see on earth either.  Nonetheless, if we want to walk in the footsteps of Abraham, we too must welcome this promise.  We have to look forward to it.  We have to greet it.

The only way for us to do that is through the word.  I’ve found that the older I get, the more the promise of heaven means to me.  We need to turn to the Scriptures constantly to reaffirm our trust and joy in that promise.  Every time we read about eternal life, we need to say, “That promise is about me,” and we need to remember the promise through every moment of our lives.  Let’s be sure that our eyes never turn anywhere else!

Second, if we are truly strangers and exiles, it means that WE SEEK A HOMELAND.  It’s hard not to have a homeland.  I think some of the most pathetic people on earth are refugees.  There’s been a war or a famine that has driven them from their homes, and so they’re living in a squalid refugee camp someplace else, counting the hours until they can go to where they belong.

That’s supposed to be us too.  We often sing, “This world is not my home,” but sadly, there are many Christians who are acting awfully comfortable in the refugee camp!  Our priorities tell us where our true homeland is.  Let’s think about the way we spend our money, our time, and our energy.  Would somebody who watched us for several weeks conclude that we were striving with all our might for heaven, or would they say that our hope was set on the things of earth?  Refugees are not content.  Refugees do not behave like they plan to stay indefinitely.  If that’s how we’re acting, maybe our citizenship isn’t where we think it is!

Third, if we’re strangers and exiles, WE DON’T LOOK BACK.  Here, let’s pay attention to the language of Hebrews 11:15.  The Hebrews writer doesn’t say of Abraham and the rest that they didn’t go back to the land they came from.  Instead, he says that they didn’t think of the land they came from.  This isn’t a passage about action.  This is a passage about the heart.

Let’s consider ourselves here.  We’re all here assembled in the Lord’s name.  Presumably, that means that we haven’t turned our back on Him and returned to Satan’s country, the dominion of darkness that we came out of. 

However, our hearts are another subject altogether.  Are we here because we think we have to be here, or are we here because we want to be here?  Do we hate our former sins, or do we long for them because we miss them terribly?  Are we pressing on toward Canaan, or are we looking back over our shoulders at the pleasures of Egypt?

If the latter, we need to pay attention to the writer’s warning.  He notes that if the patriarchs had wanted to go back, they would have had opportunity to go back.  So too for us.  Sometimes we sing, “I know the Lord will make a way for me,” but I am confident that if our hearts love sin, the devil will make a way for us too.  People who want to go back will get the chance.  Only if our hearts are right will we inherit the promises.

If that’s the way we live, though, the Hebrews writer says it will have two important consequences.  The first is that WE HAVE GOD FOR OUR GOD.  Specifically, the text says that God is not ashamed to be called their God.  That’s an idea that we could stand to think more about.  There is one way that we can live that will make God proud of us, that will make Him happy to claim us as His own on the day of judgment.  On the other hand, there’s another way that we might live that will make God ashamed of us.  He will look at our disgraceful actions and say, “No, I don’t know who they are.  They don’t belong to Me.” 

We might think that a Christian would have to behave pretty badly to make God ashamed of them, but in reality, the shame-causing activities are the things that we just got through studying.  If we don’t see and welcome His promises, God will be ashamed of us.  If we take earth for our home instead of seeking heaven for our home, God will be ashamed of us.  If we constantly think of the sinful life we left behind, God will be ashamed of us, and wouldn’t that be an awful thought?  Obviously, the personal consequences are terrible, but even beyond that, God has given me so much.  I don’t ever want to be somebody who makes Him feel embarrassed and ashamed!

Finally, if we are strangers and exiles on the earth, WE HAVE A CITY PREPARED FOR US.  First of all, note that this is the ultimate evidence that God approves of us.  Rest assured that nobody He is ashamed of is going to dwell in His presence for eternity!  Instead, we will be there to glorify Him, which shows His conviction that we do, in fact, glorify Him.

Second, the preparations that God and Jesus make show us that we don’t have to fear disappointment.  You know, if we spend our lives seeking the things above instead of the things on the earth, but there actually is nothing waiting for us above, that would stink!  In Paul’s words, we would be of all men most to be pitied. 

However, we don’t have to worry about that.  We have reason to believe that God is, and if God is, God is faithful.  If God is faithful, when He tells us that we have a city prepared for us, we can trust Him.  Whatever we go through here to get there, it will be worth it!

Psalm 112 examines the blessings that come to the righteous.  This looks like a psalm with three verses and a coda, with the end of each verse being the “forever” statements of vs. 3, 6, and 9.  Each verse explores different aspects of the blessedness of the righteous.  V. 1 is about offspring and wealth, v. 2 is about enlightenment, generosity, and justice, and v. 3 is about confidence reflected in generosity.  By contrast, the coda describes the envy and ultimate failure of the wicked.

Psalm 113 is a call to praise God.  It defines His praise in terms of who (His servants), how long (forever), and where (from the rising to the setting of the sun).  The remainder of the psalm explains why this praise is justified.  God is great and lofty, and He uses His power to bless those who are in need. 

Psalm 114 is a snapshot of God’s care for His people during the Exodus.  It observes that He went with His people as they left Egypt.  He showed His dominion over creation by parting the sea and the Jordan, and by making the mountains quake.  The psalmist then sarcastically asks all of the above why they’re running away and jumping up and down.  Because of this, he calls all the earth to tremble before God, who is so powerful that He can even turn rock to water.

Psalm 115 contrasts the power of God with the powerlessness of idols.  It opens with an appeal to God to glorify Himself, not His worshipers.  The psalmist then marvel at the nations, who don’t know where their god is or what he is doing, with the psalmist’s own certainty of God’s dwelling place and omnipotence (the second half of v. 3, “He does whatever He pleases,” is the Biblical definition of omnipotence). 

The psalm then points out how helpless idols are by comparison.  Even though they have human features, their abilities don’t even measure up to the abilities of people.  As a result, those who trust them will become like them—dead and helpless.  The psalm concludes by inviting Israel to trust God.  He has helped them before, He is sure to bless all who trust Him, and He is mindful to preserve those who praise Him on earth, both by giving them children and by protecting them.

Psalm 116 rejoices in God’s help.  It notes that He heard when the psalmist cried out to Him, even though he was at death’s door.  He did so because of the grace and mercy that are part of His nature.  The psalmist’s soul is able to rest because of how completely God protects him.  Mankind might not be trustworthy, but God is.  The psalmist then promises to praise God and pay his vows to Him.  Because God’s holy ones are precious to Him, He protects them from death, which allows His servants to continue to worship Him.

A few days ago, Jared Saltz posted a link to a monologue by newscaster Chris Hayes.   In the monologue, Hayes called out his bosses at NBC for failing to support Ronan Farrow’s investigation of Harvey Weinstein because Weinstein was powerful and had many friends.   It’s easy to “take a stand” when doing so will cost you nothing.   It’s hard to do so when you know there’s a price tag attached.

This is every bit as much an issue for preachers as it is for journalists.   There is a temptation to rail on from the pulpit about the abuses of X denomination, or about Y sin that no one in attendance practices.   However, when it comes to the spiritual problems that you know the brethren actually have, you’re silent about those.   

Preaching like that is extremely popular.   All of us love to hear about the things we’re doing right and somebody else is doing wrong.   However, it probably makes the preacher in question a false prophet, even if he’s only lying by omission.

By contrast, addressing problems in the congregation have is a fraught exercise.  People who believe that you are "preaching at them", whether correctly or not, are likely to get mad at you about it.  Indeed, if they are powerful enough, you might find yourself looking for someplace else to preach! The example of David in 2 Samuel 12 is easy for Christians to praise but difficult to emulate.  It's much easier for brethren to walk the path of Ahab in 1 Kings 18, and preachers know it.

It might seem, then, like the right answer for preachers is to burn their bridges every three years and move on, but I don't think that's necessarily correct either.  Yes, preachers are called to proclaim, but we also are called to persuade.  Preachers who focus on proclamation at the expense of persuasion are speaking truth, but they may well be missing out on speaking truth in love.  That doesn't glorify God either, and it is likely to intensify the preacher's usual struggles with cynicism and self-righteousness.

Perhaps we can define the work of the preacher with the congregation as earning the right to speak hard truths.  As much as I grind my teeth at the progressive rhetoric of "safe spaces", it is nonetheless true that people won't listen unless they feel safe.  They have to believe that you are convinced of their value before they will hear a critique of their behavior from you.  You aren't the one who gets to decide whether you are speaking the truth in love.  They are.

Among the preachers whom I most admire are those who have worked for decades with the same congregation.  Such longevity is nearly always proof of getting the truth-in-love balance right.  A church deprived of the truth for a long time will dissolve or apostatize.   A church exposed to loveless truth will run off the proclaimer.  It’s not surprising, then, that these long-time preachers nearly always end up serving as elders too, revealing a knack for navigating relationships both in their families and in the congregation.

Sometimes preachers are faced with Pilate’s-hall moments, in which either they boldly proclaim the truth or they do not, and they suffer the consequences either way.  May such men choose to honor Christ, whatever the cost!  May we also be wise, though, in preparing the way for the gospel, in serving our brethren with selfless love.  That way, when the time comes for us to preach hard truths, they will accept them rather than rejecting both them and us.

Several months ago, I preached on the passing of the miraculous spiritual gifts.  After services, Jeff Nicholson and I had an interesting conversation about the gift of prophecy, and he suggested that it might be worth devoting a sermon to explaining what those miraculous gifts were. 

After rolling that around in my mind for a while, I decided that Jeff was right.  Often, we don’t study this because we don’t have any of those gifts today, but I think that’s a mistake.  Let me explain.  Usually, when we encounter somebody who believes the miraculous gifts still continue, we address their confusion by going to 1 Corinthians 13 and explaining that the gifts faded with the completion of the written word.

However, I think there’s yet another way to handle the issue.  Typically, these people have had experiences that they say are miraculous. However, when we compare their experiences to the Scriptural record, their “miracles” invariably don’t measure up.  In order to make that argument, though, we have to know what the gifts actually did.  With this in mind, let’s spend our evening considering the first-century gifts.

The first gift that I want to look at is the gift of TONGUES.  We see the apostles employing this gift in Acts 2:5-6.  It’s clear here that the apostles aren’t speaking in a prayer language or in the language of angels.  They are speaking in the foreign languages that these visitors to Jerusalem knew.  That’s what the gift of tongues did:  it gave people the ability to speak foreign languages they had not learned.  This gives us a test that we can use with those who claim to have the gift of tongues today.  People who can’t miraculously speak in foreign languages don’t have the gift of tongues.

Next, we logically come to the gift of INTERPRETATION OF TONGUES.  I think the text that gives us the best insight into this one is 1 Corinthians 14:10-13.  Notice first of all that Paul is talking about “languages in the world”.  It’s clear that he connects the gift of tongues to speaking foreign languages.  However, his words also highlight a weakness of the gift of tongues.  I can be jabbering away at y’all all day long in Russian, but unless somebody can speak or understand Russian, my miraculous gift of tongues is pointless.  That’s where the gift of interpretation came in.  It allowed either the speaker or an audience member to miraculously understand and translate foreign languages.

Third, let’s consider PROPHECY.  This is a unique gift because it appears to have not one but two main manifestations.  We see the first in Acts 11:27-28.  Here, Agabus uses his gift of prophecy to predict the future.  Let’s notice three things about this prediction.  First, it was specific.  Second, it was falsifiable.  Third, it was fulfilled.  These specific, falsifiable, and fulfilled predictions are characteristic of the true gift of prophecy.  By contrast, the so-called prophets today make predictions that are either a) not fulfilled (anybody remember Harold Camping predicting the end of the world in 2011?) or b) so vague that they can’t be falsified.  Anybody can predict that hard times are coming, but hard times are always coming!  It’s meaningless.

Second, in addition to foretelling the future, the gift of prophecy was used to forth-tell the word of God.  Look at how Peter describes the prophetic work of Jesus in Acts 3:22-23.  Clearly, God’s people are supposed to obey God’s prophets.  Indeed, it is their ability to predict the future that tells us when we should listen!  On the other hand, any prophet who can’t correctly predict the future can safely be ignored.

Now, let’s turn our attention to the gift of HEALING.  There are many Scriptures we could examine here, but let’s look at Acts 3:7-8, the story of Peter healing the lame man.  Once again, pay attention to the characteristics of this healing.  First, it’s a healing of a man everybody knows is sick.  The lame man isn’t a ringer.  Second, his ailment is obvious.  It’s not like one of his legs is longer than the other.  The dude can’t walk!  Third, Peter heals him instantaneously.  Thus, the gift of healing was the instantaneous cure of a publicly known, obvious illness.  That’s a test that every healing in the Bible can pass, but no modern day “healing” will.

The gift of MIRACLES was similar.  For our example here, consider what Paul does in Acts 13:8-12.  Once again, take note of the spectacular nature of the use of this gift.  We start off with Elymas the sorcerer, a man who can see perfectly.  Everybody knows he can see.  Then, Paul curses him, and he loses his sight.  This too is obvious to everyone.  It’s not like Elymas would fake being blind in order to make Paul look good!  A miracle, then, is an obvious working of God in the world with no natural explanation.  Throughout the New Testament, we see the enemies of Jesus and the gospel being unable to explain away miracles.  They might say that Jesus was casting out demons by the power of Beelzebul, but they couldn’t deny that he was casting out demons.  Any true miracle today would be equally undeniable.

Let’s wrap things up by looking at a couple of gifts people don’t usually claim to have today.  The first is the gift of KNOWLEDGE.  I think the best explanation for this gift comes in John 14:25-26.  Note that we’ve seen part of this before.  The Holy Spirit teaching the apostles all things was the gift of prophecy.  On the other hand, the Spirit bringing to their remembrance all that Jesus taught, I think that’s the gift of knowledge.  It was supernatural total recall of spiritual teaching, especially the teaching of the Lord.

Finally, we come to the gift of WISDOM.  Normally, when we think of Biblical wisdom, we think of the wisdom of Solomon, but that’s not really how the gift manifested in the New Testament.  For instance, look at Luke 21:14-15.  Basically, the gift of wisdom was the gift of winning debates.  Jesus was able to make His opponents look like idiots, even though they weren’t, because He had the spirit of wisdom.  Similarly, in Acts 6, the people who want to argue with Stephen aren’t able to withstand the spirit and wisdom with which he is speaking.  People with the gift of wisdom never lost an argument!