Act of Worship

<span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;line-height:200%;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;">John’s Gospel communicates that prior to Pentecost, the Holy spirit had not yet been freely given to God’s people (John 7:37-39), i.e. there is a chronological order to trinitarian work (Morrison, 2007, p. 36): the Son proceeds from the Father and the Spirit from both the Father and the Son. All three members of the Godhead are in agreement with such work as the one triune God. As such a chronological order subsists then, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit is dependent on Jesus’ death, burial, resurrection, and ascension (Morrison, 2007, p. 37). “In particular, without the cross, there would be no Pentecost” (Morrison, 2007, p. 37). Jesus’ ascension is deeply tied then to the coming of the Holy Spirit. <span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;line-height:200%;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;">John’s Gospel includes a farewell discourse by Jesus. John 14:15-31 is Jesus’ promise of the Holy Spirit who would serve as his ambassador. The Gospel of John already includes more explicit references about the deity of Jesus than the other Gospels; yet, Jesus’ discourse in these verses focuses significantly on the promised Holy Spirit. This post will offer an analysis of three overarching aspects found within Jesus’ discourse: <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-left:.75in;mso-add-space:auto; text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;line-height:200%;mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;">1)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; trinitarian work in the love among the three members of the Godhead, <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left:.75in;mso-add-space: auto;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;line-height:200%;mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;">2)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; the sealing work of the Holy Spirit, and <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left:.75in;mso-add-space:auto; text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;line-height:200%;mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;">3)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; the ambassadorial role of the Holy Spirit. <span style="mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;line-height:200%; mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;">These three aspects protrude from the text in a profound manner to support the concept of the Holy Spirit which proceeds from both the Father and the Son.

As we approach Ash Wednesday, my aim today is to discuss what the church might gain from observing the season of lent. Lent is not solely Catholic as many would assume, for there are many Protestant traditions who observe the season. It is also not insincere simply because it is tradition as others might assume. I have spoken often of the fact that sincerity has little to do with ritual or spontaneity. Sincerity, rather, is connected to the heart. Perhaps, this is to what Jesus refers when he says, “This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.” (Matt 15:8 ESV) This should surely highlight the corporate nature of spirituality; yet, it also points to a deeper matter than what is on the surface. Lent could certainly be surface-level for some people; for others, however, Lent could (and should for everyone in reality) be a sincere observance. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Lent is the 40-day season leading to Easter. The season is considered 40 days if Sundays are not included. Lent then begins Ash Wednesday and ends the Saturday of the Paschal Triduum just before Easter Sunday. Shrove Tuesday (Fat Tuesday in Western culture) is often lumped in with Lent but is actually just before Lent begins.[1] Its beginnings are born of a 2nd-century reflection during a 2-day fast leading to Easter; by the 3rd-century, fasting was expanded through Holy Week; and by the 4th-century, Rome developed a practice of a 3-week fast, which expanded throughout the empire and eventually became an observance of an entire season beginning the sixth Sunday before Easter. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The biblical background is diverse including the 40-day flood, Moses on Mt. Sinai, the spies in Cana, the Israelites in the desert for 40 years, most apparently Jesus in the desert for 40 days, and even his walking the earth for 40 days after his resurrection. There exists a variety of themes during Lent which are vital to the Christian life, e.g. reflection, a refocusing of one’s relationship with God, dependence on God, a reminder of humanity’s mortality, and selflessness. Knowing this information, I suggest that Lent is, in no way, a meaningless ritual, especially if one’s observances are sincere. If the observance of Lent is meaningless ritual, why then is the observance of Christmas or Easter not the same? Derived from this knowledge then, I have four predominant imperatives which we gain from observing Lent. [1] Shrove Tuesday is from the Latin absolve and is intended for the believer to reflect upon the current sins and struggles of which he or she needs to repent. Its evolution into “Fat Tuesday” is unbiblical, unhistorical, and a distortion of its intent at best.

A recent popular worship song has caused great controversy among worship leaders and churches. Cory Asbury’s “Reckless Love” has sparked debate far and wide. Arguments made both for the use of the word, reckless, are: 1)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; it is a metaphor; 2)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; from a human perspective, God’s love is reckless because it does not make sense; 3)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; the song does not speak of God himself but rather his love; 4)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; and many more. I do not intend to delve into discussion of this song itself or the use of the word, reckless, but I would like to discuss the broader topic of language in worship music. I would like to examine the pros and cons of modern vs. traditional and metaphorical vs. literal language. I do not mean to sway one way or another but merely to have us think about these issues as it relates to the message of the gospel as well as the context we minister in, which is disparate across the spectrum. To sum, I will discuss how to approach language in worship music, which, by the way, is nothing to be taken lightly.

A recent popular worship song has caused great controversy among worship leaders and churches. Cory Asbury’s “Reckless Love” has sparked debate far and wide. Arguments made both for the use of the word, reckless, are: 1)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; it is a metaphor; 2)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; from a human perspective, God’s love is reckless because it does not make sense; 3)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; the song does not speak of God himself but rather his love; 4)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; and many more. I do not intend to delve into discussion of this song itself or the use of the word, reckless, but I would like to discuss the broader topic of language in worship music. I would like to examine the pros and cons of modern vs. traditional and metaphorical vs. literal language. I do not mean to sway one way or another but merely to have us think about these issues as it relates to the message of the gospel as well as the context we minister in, which is disparate across the spectrum. To sum, I will discuss how to approach language in worship music, which, by the way, is nothing to be taken lightly.

A recent popular worship song has caused great controversy among worship leaders and churches. Cory Asbury’s “Reckless Love” has sparked debate far and wide. Arguments made both for the use of the word, reckless, are: 1)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; it is a metaphor; 2)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; from a human perspective, God’s love is reckless because it does not make sense; 3)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; the song does not speak of God himself but rather his love; 4)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; and many more. I do not intend to delve into discussion of this song itself or the use of the word, reckless, but I would like to discuss the broader topic of language in worship music. I would like to examine the pros and cons of modern vs. traditional and metaphorical vs. literal language. I do not mean to sway one way or another but merely to have us think about these issues as it relates to the message of the gospel as well as the context we minister in, which is disparate across the spectrum. To sum, I will discuss how to approach language in worship music, which, by the way, is nothing to be taken lightly.

A recent popular worship song has caused great controversy among worship leaders and churches. Cory Asbury’s “Reckless Love” has sparked debate far and wide. Arguments made both for the use of the word, reckless, are: 1)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; it is a metaphor; 2)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; from a human perspective, God’s love is reckless because it does not make sense; 3)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; the song does not speak of God himself but rather his love; 4)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; and many more. I do not intend to delve into discussion of this song itself or the use of the word, reckless, but I would like to discuss the broader topic of language in worship music. I would like to examine the pros and cons of modern vs. traditional and metaphorical vs. literal language. I do not mean to sway one way or another but merely to have us think about these issues as it relates to the message of the gospel as well as the context we minister in, which is disparate across the spectrum. To sum, I will discuss how to approach language in worship music, which, by the way, is nothing to be taken lightly.