We are excited to watch Pastor Brian Brodersen interview Ed Stetzer as Stetzer shares on his latest book, Christians in the Age of Outrage, live on Pastors’ Perspective!

Watch the archive available here!

In 2010, a horrific incident happened in New York City. A woman was accosted by a man on the street. Another man named Hugo Tax-Yale stopped to help her, but he was then stabbed by the woman’s assailant. The woman ran off in one direction and the assailant in the other. Hugo fell to the ground and lay bleeding and dying. Many people walked past this man, but nobody stopped to help him, hours later, when someone finally stopped to check him, he was already dead.

Of course, the question that immediately springs to mind is: Why did nobody help him?

Did nobody notice that a man they were walking past was bleeding to death on the street? Were these people totally, morally devoid? There are two main sociological reasons why nobody stopped to help him, and both are troubling.

1) The bystander effect

This is when, for example, you see someone lying unconscious on the street, but because everyone else is just walking by them, you assume it is okay. You think to yourself, perhaps someone else is doing something about it? The amount of people on the scene diffuses individual responsibility, and so people tend to just ignore the situation.

2) The blasé attitude

This social phenomenon is most often seen in cities and centers of culture and civilization. The term “the blasé attitude” was coined by a German urban sociologist called Georg Simmel. He argued that, for people who live in the city, there is so much stimuli going on around them all the time, that they eventually have to shut down and begin to ignore everything that is happening around them in order to stay sane in their environment. They become “blasé”; they determine not to be affected by anything, because if they allow themselves to care, it will crush them. This leads to a highly individualized society where people look out for their own needs but not for the need of others. Because post-modern people, (particularly city dwellers) have so much stimuli to deal with every day, they subconsciously or consciously choose to ignore those around them who are suffering.

When we start to allow the “blasé attitude” to creep into our psyche, we begin to reduce the value of human life.

The example I gave in the first paragraph of how a man was allowed to bleed and die on the street in New York, while hundreds of people walked past him, is a perfect example of this. Of course, this incident reminds me of the parable of the Good Samaritan found in the gospel of Luke.

Let’s look at this parable below. Jesus said:

“A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘And when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’ ‘Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?’ The expert in the law replied, ‘The one who had mercy on him.’ Jesus told him, ‘Go and do likewise.’”

In this parable, the priest and the Levite are like our modern-day, well-educated, enlightened city dwellers. They have all of their well-thought out reasons for passing by the bleeding man: Perhaps their religious beliefs were a deterrent; perhaps they simply didn’t have the time, or perhaps they felt the bleeding man was a vagrant or of a different race. But whatever their reasons for not stopping, their actions show they simply didn’t think the bleeding man mattered enough to be helped.

Jesus highlights the kindness of the Samaritan. A race of people who were despised by the Jews, and yet in all their intellect, the priest and the Levite had allowed themselves to become blasé about the suffering of the man, while the Samaritan simply saw a fellow human in need and cared enough to help. Jesus quite simply ends the parable by saying, “Go and do likewise.”

When I think about the terrible suffering and human degradation in this world, I am tempted to become blasé. I don’t want to think about the reality of the suffering of the broken people in my city because it is too crushing for me. But I need to remember that there are things in life that I cannot be blasé about, because somethings are sacred. In a world that wants to laugh about everything (because if we don’t laugh, we might just cry) I want to remember that somethings are not funny. Somethings matter too much to be blasé about, such as human lives that I pass on the street every day. I want to remind myself to care.

In 2 Corinthians 12:9-10 it says: “But he said to me, ‘My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.’ Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me. That is why, for Christ’s sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong.”

I admit today how weak I am.

I find it hard to face the sufferings of those people I see on the streets, I want to be blasé because it seems easier. I want to let them be somebody else’s problem. But! Thank God, when I am weak, He is strong, He is strong in me. God called us to care about our “neighbors,” to love them as we love ourselves. But He has not left us to try and do it in our own strength; He has filled us with His strength and love and grace, so that we can pour it out on others.

Today, let’s pray to God to give us strength to care more, not less. Let’s look at the people around us, and in the light of the Gospel, see them as our responsibility. Because they are our responsibility; we have been instructed to love them. Let’s stop ignoring and being blasé, and let’s remember that there are things that are sacred, things that cannot be pulled down into the mud of the mundane. Jesus Christ is sacred, and He died for us. Jesus is our good Samaritan; He didn’t walk by us when we were in need. He stopped and tended to our wounds. He paid for our restoration and is coming back for us. So let’s see the people we pass by on the street the way God sees them, and He sees them as precious enough to die for. He has put His love in us, so let’s share it in practical ways in our community today.

There is a bridge in Paris that joins the Louvre on the right bank of the Seine River with the Academy of Les Beaux Arts on the left. It’s a walking bridge with wooden planks as flooring, a few scattered benches and a handrail to lean on and admire the cityscape painted before your eyes. It’s known as the “pont des arts” but it used to be called by locals as the “pont des amoureux” or the lovers’ bridge. Couples would bring a padlock, pop the question or renew their vows, then kiss and click the lock shut on the fence as they toss the key into the river. My wife and I even attached a lock ourselves on our 20th wedding anniversary.

Through the years, this unofficial public display of love provoked structural damage to the bridge, and the City of Paris had to intervene. This was no easy job because love cannot be legislated as several renegade padlocks can be seen scattered on other Parisian bridges, resulting in several awkward solutions proposed with mixed results. Love has its way of triumphing.

Love is, in fact, a powerful force as it says in the NLT version of Proverbs 30:18-19, “There are three things that amaze me— no, four things that I don’t understand: how an eagle glides through the sky, how a snake slithers on a rock, how a ship navigates the ocean, how a man loves a woman.” It only seems ironic that a city like Paris, known for romantic love, has found itself in a struggle against lovers.

But what do we mean when we speak of love?

Over the course of time, love has taken on new meanings. When speaking about physical attraction, sexual desire or passionate longing, the word is instantly employed. From kids teasing their older sibling on her first date, to the anguished musician lamenting his broken relationships or even the scriptwriter preparing the next episode of a soon to be aired series—a vision of love is cast that we can recognize when we see it. For our world today, the intelligentsia doesn’t necessarily define love. Those who seem to be defining love are the ones Francis Schaffer said have now dominated philosophy in his book Escape from Reason:

“The interesting thing today is that as existentialism and, in a different way, ‘defining philosophy’ have become anti-philosophies, the real philosophic expressions have tended to pass over to those who do not occupy the chairs of philosophy—the novelist, the film producer, the jazz musician, the hippies and even the teenage gangs in their violence. These are the people who are asking and struggling with the big questions in our day.”¹

Various philosophers still reflect on love today, even if they aren’t always the voice we hear on the street, especially in France. One such writer who caught my eye at a bookstore this summer was Luc Ferry in his book the La Revolution de l’Amour (The Revolution of Love). In it, he describes love as the lasting force that has stood the test of time throughout humanity that motivates people to embrace life decisions creating what he calls a new humanism. He says, “The reign of consumerism and capitalism has created individuals who are abused and isolated, looking for new values. In spite of it all, we are witnessing the development of a new humanism, not founded on reason but on love.”² In the end, love or one’s perception of it, produces a new vision for life that will color concepts as old as faithfulness, integrity and purity. Or as Oprah says, it’s “your truth.”

Even though a Christian would have trouble claiming Ferry’s views as their guiding light, he does bring to the surface some interesting points in a chapter he calls “La tentation du christianisme” (“The Christian Temptation”). He reveals that one point in the new humanism that falls short, as all it does for the history of philosophy and religious culture, that chasm we call the resurrection. In Jesus alone, we find the eternal hope for love. Because death cannot destroy all that love has built in this life, because in the resurrection, we are physically reunited with our loved ones.³ In this, the New Testament believer would embrace his point of view, and yet there is more.

There is a bridge that runs from this new humanism founded in a popular notion of love, past its natural end in death to the ageless, divine love of the Gospel.

Jesus is the bridge.

He demonstrated a love that served to the point of washing His disciples’ feet. He loved until the end, even to the point of laying down His life to save us from sin and death. In fact, He loved us in His resurrection, because in rising from the dead, He gave us the chance to be united with Him in His love. Greater than a new humanism, Christ’s love has created a new humanity and hope that will one day join us with those we loved and who have passed on before us. In this, we can identify love’s greatest triumph, for the God who is love, demonstrated it by saving us.

…

¹ Francis A. Schaeffer, Escape from Reason, Chapter 4, “The Leap,” IVP Classics, 2014 .
² Luc Ferry, La révolution de l’amour, “Introduction,” Éditions Plon, 2010.
³Luc Ferry,La révolution de l’amour, “Livre III, L’échec de la philosophie la tentation dh christianisme,” Éditions Plon, 2010.

I have watched, somewhat in awe, over the last couple of years the rise of Jordan Peterson on YouTube, through podcasts and other media formats (books, blogs, etc.). I haven’t always been sure how to classify him or categorize his ascent. He’s not a Christian, at least not in an orthodox sense. Though I’ve heard him self-identify as a Christian, he would make a distinction. He would probably call me, and others like me, a “fundamentalist.” In some respect, that’s not far off, though every time I’ve heard him use the term, it seems to be dismissively, if not pejoratively.

Peterson is a celebrity by accident. He did not aspire to notoriety, but he’s certainly achieved it in the last year. He currently has over 700,000 Twitter followers and 1.2 million YouTube subscribers. His most recent book, Twelve Rules For Life, has been an Amazon bestseller since it’s release in January (it’s currently number two after nearly six months). As I write, Peterson is speaking nightly, nationwide, to sold-out crowds, on what is an extended book tour. Tickets cost as much as $600 apiece. Also, he’s pulling in an estimated $80,000+ a month from Patreon supporters. The once clinical psychologist, a professor at the University of Toronto, has no reason to ever return to the classroom or his clinical practice.

As I said previously, I’ve been intrigued since I first heard of him. I began following him when he first rose above the radar over a controversial Canadian legislative bill in the fall of 2016. He has a lot to say, and much of it reverberates with Judeo/Christian tones. Which is precisely why Christians should take notice. In watching and listening to him, several things come to mind. Five of which beg more in-depth consideration.

Long-Form Monologue is Not Dead

For as long as I’ve been preaching (20 years next year), voices in our culture have been saying that preaching, especially long-form monologue, is dead. Those promulgating this perspective have told us that the collective attention span in the West has devolved. Americans, raised on 30-second ad spots and 22-minute television programs cannot handle more than 25-30 minutes of preaching, they say. Many of the same voices tell us that dialogue is essential for the 21st century westerner. “You cannot give a message from a platform; it needs to be a conversation in a circle.” Peterson proves that’s not true.

In the summer and fall of last year (2017), Peterson gave a series of 15 lectures, in the Book of Genesis, on the “psychological significance of the Bible.” He “preached” more than two and a half hours each time, to some 500 listeners, all of whom paid admission to come. He’s since promised that he will pick the series up again in the future with the Book of Exodus. If that happens, I’m certain of three things. First, he’ll need a larger venue. The 500 seat theater was already too small a year ago. His following has only increased. And the live audience pales in comparison to the millions of views the recorded lectures have received on Youtube. Second, he’ll charge a lot more for admission. By his admission, he’s an “evil capitalist.” Simple supply and demand will require much higher costs of entry. Third, his messages will not get shorter. Peterson loves to talk, and he’s found an audience of people who are longing to listen. In this he’s proved long-form monologue preaching is not dead

Westerners Are Interested in Scripture

Another cultural lie we’ve been told for the last 20 years: “The Bible has no place in our [post]modern society. We’ve advanced beyond its archaic ideas, views and teachings.” Really? Not only is that not true, it’s not true by a large factor.

Just this week (June 12, to be exact), Peterson’s first book, Maps of Meaning, came out in audiobook format. It’s more than 30 hours of audio, read, of course, by the author. It’s an instant bestseller. In print, it’s 564 pages. Much of it goes back to Scripture, and it’s significance. I guarantee that most of the consumers of this audiobook are males, ages 20-40.

Now, it should be noted that Jordan Peterson’s interpretive lens for Scripture is not something with which any preacher I know would be comfortable. He approaches the Scriptures from a purely allegorical and mythological angle. He does not believe in the inerrancy of Scripture. He does not use a historical, grammatical, interpretative method. As far as I can tell, he does not take the Scriptures literally, and he questions much of its history too. He is not an evangelical Christian. He is a Christian only so far as he sees value in the Christian ethic and the mythological narrative of the Bible. But, he’s gathered a large following of predominantly educated, millennial, male westerners. The very segment that Christians both need to reach and have had a hard time reaching over the last two decades. And the fact that he’s gained a devoted audience with this demographic leads to my final three considerations.

God is Not Dead in Academia

Peterson’s rise informs us that the need for classically trained, academically minded Christians is greater than ever. This isn’t a new observation. Groups like Francis Schaeffer’s L’abri, more than 40 years ago saw this with prescient clarity. Ravi Zacharias’ International Ministries has sought to address it for more than 20 years. Christians in the 21st century western world need to think and speak the academically oriented language of higher education, and they need to enter academia as missionaries.

Many in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) fields are atheistic, or at the very least agnostic. The arts and humanities are almost worse. But that does not mean that God is dead among academics or in great academic institutions of the West. There are strong holdouts with well-reasoned Christian faith in the academy. But we need many more Christians to step into the academic sphere and “contend earnestly for the faith.”

It has been said that “the philosophy of the classroom in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next.” I think that’s true, and being that it is, Christians cannot vacate the academic domain. Especially when you consider, that many of the great universities of the West, were originally founded by individuals with a strong Christian faith.

In seeing this reality, I am more than a little discouraged by my own experience. Twenty years ago this week, I graduated from high school. And when I did, I didn’t enroll in college or university, partly because of the discouraging tone of Christian leaders I esteemed. More than a few of the Christians who influenced my decisions at that time exhibited a suspicion and distrust of higher education. I know now that was not a helpful attitude. Be that as it may, as the Church moves further into the 21st century, we must realize that we need to adjust, as our culture has changed.

Christians Need a New and Passionate Apologetic

The apostle Peter said, “Sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you.” This we are to do in meekness and with respect. The concept of an apologetic arises almost solely from this verse. The word translated “defense” in many English translations of 1 Peter 3:15, is the Greek word apologia. It could also be translated “give an answer.” Christians have been doing this effectively for 2,000 years. But the answers are always in response to the changing questions of culture.

The questions of culture change continuously from generation to generation. Every worldview endeavors to answer these questions coherently. The far-reaching growth of the Christian faith from the first to the 21st century proves, I believe, that it’s answers are the most compelling. That is a truth that will not change, even if the pressing questions of culture do. And though the specifics of those questions vary, at the level of abstraction, the most important issues of meaning and value all fall under five essential headings: origin, identity, purpose, morality and destiny.

After listening to his lectures, watching his interviews and reading his books, I think Peterson is seeking to address these issues apologetically. And it is fascinating to see that, like many Evangelical Christians, he does so with something of apocalyptic fervor. He is passionate about his convictions and exacting with his words. I’m convinced that many are attracted to Peterson precisely because of his well-reasoned, authentic and genuine message, which seems to explode from a grave concern that our culture is fast descending into an abyss. Like an Old Testament prophet, Jordan Peterson is sounding an alarm in the West. He sees an unseen force of gravity, pulling our culture past the event horizon, into an inescapable black hole. And though he has met stiff opposition, he does not seem to be backing down. Which shows, finally…

Strong Warnings and Stern Exhortations Are Not Unacceptable

In our über-tolerant culture, some things are not tolerated. Peterson’s emphatic warnings and clarion appeals are definitely on the blacklist. The applications of Peterson’s message are hyper-individualistic (he despises collectivism) and gut-checkingly challenging. There is no wishy-washiness in his exhortations. He is dogmatic in every sense of the word. That too is not tolerated by many in the West. You might expect this would be a turnoff for his mostly millennial followers. And yet his appeal only seems to be growing.

Since the rise of the seeker movement of the 1980s, Christian leaders have promoted a softer, life-coach spirituality. “Don’t call people out. Address the collective ‘you plural.’ Focus on felt needs. Don’t be direct. Be encouraging.” In many ways, modern American Christianity fits perfectly in the $10 billion a year self-improvement industry, right next to Tony Robbins, Deepak Chopra, Oprah Winfrey and even Jordan Peterson.

His book, Twelve Rules For Life, exists among other self-improvement titles, but it’s set apart by it’s bold and confrontational tone. “Stand up straight with your shoulders back.” “Set your house in perfect order before you criticize the world.” “Tell the truth—or, at least don’t lie.” He’s mocked by his critics for calling on people to clean their room. But when he says, “If you can’t even clean up your own room, who the hell are you to give advice to the world?” you can hear the echoes of Jesus, “First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s.” Or Paul, “If we would judge ourselves, we would not be judged.”

Among all the nuanced and subjective shades of grey that are 21st century western culture, the objective contrast of white on black is refreshing. And though I in no way want to make Messianic allusions, Jordan Peterson’s rise is a reminder that when Jesus had ended the sayings of the Sermon on the Mount, “…the people were astonished at His teaching, for He taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.”

^{Above photo of Jordan Peterson credited to Time Magazine}

It is an interesting time that we live in. People are more connected than they have ever been yet more isolated than ever as well. We literally have thousands of “friends” in our pockets whom many of us interact with on a daily basis. Yet the depth of our relationships are exceedingly shallow. As I was thinking through this, I had a visual of social media as an ocean vast as the Pacific but an inch deep. It may look impressive from a distance, but no matter how far you wade in, you will not find depth of any kind.

I recently read a couple articles about the correlation between social media and isolation, one was by NPR and the other from Psychology Today. Both articles were pointing out the vicious cycle of isolation and anxiety, saying isolation produces anxiety and depression, then anxiety and depression cause people to isolate farther. This is a destructive circle we can get in, and contrary to what one might think, these articles showed that social media not only does not help, but fuels this cycle.

The article in Psychology Today said this:

“The relatively modern phenomenon of social media and its associated technology adds a new dimension to loneliness and anxiety by offering the young person a way of directly quantifying friendships, viewing the friendship networks of others for comparison, and providing immediate information about social events. You can compare your own popularity with that of your peers, and manage that adolescent ‘fear of missing out’ (FOMO) by continually monitoring what’s going on socially. So it’s easy to see how technology use can take the place of more traditional social interaction and provide a yardstick for one’s popularity – or more significantly, one’s feelings of loneliness and alienation.”

The NPR article references a study from the American Journal of Preventive Medicine that showed that people who visited social media outlets more frequently (58 or more times per week) had more than three times the odds of perceived social isolation than those who visited less than nine times per week. They hypothesize the cause as follows: “You might watch all these interactions where it seems like everyone else is connecting…That could lead to feeling excluded. The images of other people’s seemingly perfect vacations, homes and lives, even though those are not likely to represent reality, can make you feel like you’re missing out.”

So, we are living in the middle of this tech era, ruled and governed by social media outlets of various descriptions, who are all promising friendship and community, but are bearing the bad fruit of isolation, anxiety and depression.

However the reality is, social media is not ultimately at fault, and social media is not evil. The true problem is so much deeper, and it is not new; I would like to make the case that you can trace it all the way back to the beginning of humanity, and then I want to show that Jesus is the only solution!

So I have five points that I hope will provide some clarity on this subject of our need for and struggle with community.

1. Community is in God’s very nature.
2. We were created FOR community.
3. Sin broke (and breaks) community.
4. Jesus redeems us TO community.
5. The Church IS community.

1. Community is in God’s very nature.

The God of the Bible is a Triune God. He reveals Himself as such from the start. Genesis 1:26 says, “Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness…'” As The New City Catechism so eloquently states in questions two & three:

“Q: What is God? A: God is the creator and sustainer of everyone and everything. He is eternal, infinite, and unchangeable in his power and perfection, goodness and glory, wisdom, justice, and truth. Nothing happens except through him and by his will. Q: How many persons are there in God? A: There are three persons in the one true and living God: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They are the same in substance, equal in power and glory.”

The implications of God’s Triune nature are vast, one of the most significant of which is that it means God Himself not only is in community, but that He Himself IS community. God, in His very nature is a loving community from eternity past. And from that communal nature, He created us, His image bearers, as communal beings. Which brings us to our next point.

2. We were created FOR community.

God is a community of love, and He created us to live in loving community. In Genesis 2:18 we see a glimpse into the mind of God as He was creating humanity: “Then the LORD God said, ‘It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.'” This is why isolation is damaging, as the studies I referenced show, isolation produce anxiety and depression, because it is not good that man should be alone! Community is our created intent, so when we are not living in it, we do not thrive. The nature of the community God created us for is twofold. It is 1) Loving (as I mentioned) and 2) Shares purpose or mission.

God’s design for community is that we would live in loving harmony with Him and with one another. Serving and obeying God, while preferring and complementing (completing) one another. Additionally, God’s community has, from the start, always revolved around shared purpose or mission. In Genesis 1 we see that God called our first parents not just to be fruitful and multiply, but also to subdue the earth, have dominion over the creatures and tend to the garden. If our first parents would have walked in this, humanity would live in paradise and harmony! But you know the story. Genesis 3 comes along and everything starts to fall apart. Our first parents sinned against God and against one another. Hence point number three.

3. Sin broke (and breaks) community.

In Genesis 3, the account of the fall, we see a systematic deconstruction of our created intent: The Serpent arrived and called the command of God into question, and our first parents began to doubt, or disbelieve, God’s word, which led them to betray their mission. Rather than caring for creation, they abused it, using it for their own selfish gain (eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil).

Their disbelief and their rejection of their purpose caused the community they were created for to begin to break down. They rebelled against God, which broke communion with Him. Rather than walking with Him, they hid themselves from Him out of shame. Then rather than loving and preferring one another, they turned on one another! The man blaming the woman for their rebellion (shocking, I know).

From that point on, as we read through the grand narrative of scripture, and of history for that matter, we see this pattern over and over: Community broken by sin. Sin breaks community because, as I mentioned, in order for community to work, its foundation must be love.

But sin, at it’s core, is selfish, and selfishness is the antithesis of love. We could talk about this on a large scale, in reference to nations waring against nations, or political parties, or social and racial conflict. All of which are examples of community that is broken by sin.

But let’s bring it a bit closer to our personal lives. Returning to what I mentioned in the start of this article. In this age we live in, we are increasingly isolated because the spirit of our culture is individualism, independence and success, where the end of all is being successful, wealthy, powerful and glamorous. The narrative we are fed is watch out for “#1.” Do whatever it takes to succeed, love yourself, work yourself to the bone to advance your career because it’s a dog-eat-dog world. It is this godless philosophy that drives us away from true community. We are so “busy” with our own lives that we do not make time for real community. But we have this pseudo community that is social media, which gives us the illusion of friendship but with no real personal investment, no sacrifice and no love. And as I said in the start, we are beginning to see the fruit of this broken system.

This is the great tragedy of our existence, the struggle between our God-given need for community and our inherited sin nature that rules us apart from Christ. So what is the answer? JESUS.

4. Jesus redeems us TO community.

If the problem goes all the way back to creation, sin breaking communion with God and community with one another, then the solution needs to resolve the root of the problem, not just the symptoms. Queue Jesus.

Romans 5:12-16 shows us that Jesus came to this earth to undo the work of Adam, our first father. Jesus, as He walked on this earth, was the first man who ever fully and perfectly lived out our created intent. He had unbroken communion with the Father; He did not rebel against Him. He selflessly loved those around Him. He fulfilled the mission and purpose of God without wavering. And finally, Jesus gave Himself up freely to the cross to pay the penalty for our sin; He went to the grave and was raised by the power of God, victorious over sin and death once and for all. So now, as you and I place our faith in Him, we share His identity and are freed from the power of sin in our lives. Through the work of Jesus, God restored our communion with Him by breaking down the barrier of sin, freeing us from the prison of our destructive selfishness, so we can love Him. And consequently, He saved us TO a redeemed community as He adopted us into the family of God. See Romans 8:14-17.

In short, by the grace of Jesus we are set free to walk in our created intent. Though we will not do it perfectly, in Christ we are able to live in communion with God, community with one another, fulfilling the mission and purpose of God in our lives. This is what it means to be part of the Church.

5. Church IS community.

When we understand the Gospel in this light, it changes the way we see church. Church is not something we do on Sundays; it is certainly not a building. Church is the community of God’s people who commune with God together and share HIS mission.

We see this lived out in the snapshot of the early church in Acts 2:42-47. For them church was not a once or twice a week thing, it was day by day meeting in the temple and in one another’s homes. They were receiving teaching. They were fellowshipping. They broke bread. They prayed. They had all things in common, sacrificially giving to one another. They praised God and had favor with all the people, and God added to their number day by day those who were being saved. This type of community is hard; it takes sacrifice and time. It takes a shifting of priorities. But this is what it means to be a part of Christ’s church. This is the very thing Jesus commands us to do.

” A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another. By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another” (John 13:34-35).