The Pendulum of Christian Liberty

Is there a right way to 'do' church? One of the most interesting, and at times, frustrating elements of the New Testament is that Paul nowhere outlines what Sunday mornings looked like in his churches. Is this because his people already knew? Or simply because it wasn't important?

I think Acts 21:17-26 is really helpful in thinking through this question. Paul had been among the Gentile churches for a few years now, and he returns to Jerusalem. James hears about God's work among the Gentiles and rejoices, Paul hears about God's work among the Jews in Jerusalem and rejoices. As an aside, 'many thousands' in Jerusalem at that time must have been a significant minority, if not a majority.

Then, at the end of verse 20 and into 21 comes the showdown. James tells Paul, 'listen, in Jerusalem our Christians are zealous for the law, and they've got a bad idea about your approach to the law. What are we going to do?' Basically James is telling Paul that nothing has changed since Acts 15. What would you expect Luke to tell us next? That Paul opposed James to his face, like Peter in Galatia. But instead, he takes a vow, purifies himself, and goes to the temple. What ever is going on here? Surely Paul is not selling out?

First of all, we have to see that as long as the Gospel was believed, observance of the Old Testament law was not an issue. This wasn't akin either to idol worship, or the ice cold legalism in Galatia. It didn't swing either into licence or legalism. The culture of law keeping had submitted to the Gospel. James rejoiced that Gentiles were being saved, he knew they weren't keeping the law which shows us that these Christians did not believe that their law keeping saved them.

Secondly, and what struck me the most, was the example that Paul gives us about Christians and culture. We can keep any part, of any culture, as long as it doesn't counter the letter to the Gentiles in Acts 15. That is, any part, of any culture that isn't idolatrous, immoral or inhuman. Any loveless part of culture, or any part that might cause us to stumble is out. The problem in Galatia was that the law had become and idol, the problem in Corinth was that the cults had prostitutes. Neither of these things are an issue in Acts 21.

This is why i should, shouldn't and do, wear a coat and tie to church. There is no one culture that Jesus would show up in tomorrow and say 'yeh, this is it,' not even here in the Bible belt. God is no respecter of persons. At the loving, warm, mission minded, conservative Baptist church that i serve at at the moment, it's broadly expected that the men, particularly the leaders, wear a coat and tie on Sunday morning. Not everyone does, not everyone has to, but because of Acts 21, i do. I used to go to church in shorts and flip flops. was that wrong? A thousand times no. Does Jesus love me more now i dress like a lawyer on a Sunday morning? A million times no.

What we see in Acts 21 is the pendulum of Christian liberty swinging both ways. Christian liberty means, as long as you have Gospel central, and right, everything else is negotiable. Turn the lights down and the amps up if you want, or put on a tie and open up your hymnal. As long as the Gospel is central and preached, love Jesus and do what you want.

The centrality of the Gospel is important above all things. James rejoices of the salvation of law breaking Gentiles. Paul observes the law in Jerusalem. In all things they are bound only by the Gospel. In all things we must, must, be bound, only by the Gospel...