Jump Start # 1782

1 Samuel 8:5 “and they said to him, ‘behold, you have grown old, and your sons do not walk in your ways. Now appoint a king for us to judge us like all the nations.”

Our passage today is the desire of Israel to have a physical king to lead them. God was their king, but He was in Heaven. Other nations had a palace where the king sat on a throne. When they went to war, their king led the troops. These other nations had a visible leader and Israel wanted that. Samuel, the priest was old. His time was about up. His sons were dishonest and not serious about their responsibilities. The nation did not want Samuel’s sons to continue in his role. It was time for a change and it was a good time, they thought to introduce a king. This plea upset Samuel. It upset God. God saw it for what it was. He declared that they have rejected me from being their king.

Biblical history shows us that Israel got what they wanted, a king like all the nations. A few stood out as being loyal to God, but most were concerned about their position and power. The kings were corrupt, idolatrous, and self serving. Israel wasn’t the better because of her kings. Their kings led them away from God.

That expression, “like all the nations,” has been a warning sign for those who want to change and be like others. Parents have taught their kids not to do what everyone else was doing. When it comes to God’s church, we don’t follow the shakers and movers in the religious world. Our eyes are set upon the Lord. That has kept God’s people true to the book and faithful to our purpose.

However, even among us, things can become trendy and we can follow the latest fads within our fellowship. This is not always bad. A good idea ought to be shared and if it works and is true to the book, others ought to take a look at it. But sometimes, we do things because it’s the latest and we copycat each other without a good reason. This is nothing new. For generations this has been going on. For instance, look across the nation and notice that just about every congregation for years has met twice on Sunday, a mid-week on Wednesday and had a spring and fall Gospel meeting. That’s how it’s been for most of us for as long as we can remember. Just about every one did the same thing. Once in a while, you’d find a congregation that had mid-week on Thursday, and people would note how odd that seemed.

Powerpoint became the latest technological revolution and everyone had to get that. Great. I love powerpoint. Use it all the time. But some small rural congregations were getting this that didn’t have the people who could understand it, operate it, nor was it used very much. Why then did they get it? Were they convinced by someone that they had to have it? Was this a move to raise the bar in the teaching or was it simply keeping up with everyone else? And in many places, the protector hangs from the ceiling collecting dust and is never used.

Improving and changing how we do things is not wrong. The alternative is to stay with things long after they are no longer useful nor helpful. I knew a congregation that had a Sunday night singing on the first Sunday that followed a first Monday of the month. It was very confusing. It wasn’t the first Sunday of the month. It was the first Sunday AFTER the first Monday of the month. I never could get it straight. The reason was a long time ago, the first Monday of the month is when they had an evening to do evangelism in the neighborhood. They decided to have a singing on the following Sunday. This sounds good, but they dropped the Monday evangelism long ago but kept the singing. Instead of having the singing on the first Sunday of the month, it was the first Sunday after a first Monday. I told people it had to do something with the full moon.

Many congregations now have two preachers. Gospel meetings have been shortened. Many are meeting just once on Sunday. For some, it’s a longer service than what they used to have. Some incorporate two sermons in that one service. All of these things are helpful and good if there is a reason behind it. Some will change things just because others have changed things. There are congregations that have two preachers and you wonder why? It’s not the size of the congregation, the work load, or they are doing more. It seems that having two preachers is the latest fad and they want that. A church with two preachers ought to be doing more than what they could do with one preacher. If the drive behind getting a second preacher is so the other preacher only has to preach once on Sunday, that seems to be a waste of money and talent. With one preacher in the pulpit, the other preacher ought to go help a small congregation that doesn’t have a preacher. Instead of doing less, they ought to do more.

Every congregation is presented with unique opportunities and challenges. What works for one place may not work for another. Thought needs to be put into what and why we are doing things. Is it wrong to copy what another place is doing? No, not if there is a reason where you are at. Just to copy something because someone else is doing it, or because it’s different, may not make sense nor be necessary where you are at.

The needs of one congregation may not be the same needs as another place. Careful thought must be put into what our people need and what will help them the best. Just wanting to be like another congregation isn’t a good reason to change things. People, relationships, and attitudes are some things that cannot be copied from place to place. What works in one place may never work in another place.

Behind all of this was a discussion I had recently with someone who wanted to know how a two-preacher church works. He was interested. I was shocked. Where he preached could barely afford him. It was a small place. Why, then do you need another preacher, I asked. His response was classic. “Isn’t that the way most churches are going today?” It allowed me to share with him some thoughts about why we do what we do. I think he got it. He changed his tune about needing a second preacher. He also learned, “the way most churches are going today,” isn’t what he ought to be interested in. We then talked about the needs of the congregation where he preached. The community. The demographics of the group. Ideas started flowing. He was now looking within rather than looking at what others were doing. There seemed to be a fire that was lit within his heart. He had ideas and plans and goals and was so excited. He dropped the talk about a second preacher. That was no longer necessary.

Green pastures…quiet waters…a table before our enemies—the shepherd knew. We must know our people and must know what works for them in teaching the Gospel and strengthening souls.

Roger