J. R. Peyton
Saturday, January 14, 2006
THE INFLUENCE OF THE SECOND COMMANDMENT ON EARLY PENTECOSTAL MOVEMENTS
Exploding into the 20th Century, a movement unlike anything anybody had seen for over two thousand years, Pentecostalism, leaped to center stage with 500 million adherents by curtain time for the 20th Century. Starting with one woman, Agnes Ozman, who on January 1, 1901, received her personal Pentecost,[2] Pentecostalism has succeeded in defying all odds, all opposition, all criticism, and all persecution, to become the fastest growing religious movement of all times.[3] Pentecostalism has arrived in the form of classical Pentecostals, Charismatics, neo-Pentecostals, third wavers, and renewal Christianity. However else they may be different, they do share three major tenets of faith: glossolalia (Charismatics and third wavers do expect spiritual gifts, but do not anticipate that all will participate in glossolalia), premillenial expectation of Christ’s return, and divine healing.[4] It is upon these three issues that the expanding world of Pentecostalism turns.
“The growth of Pentecostalism… has been phenomenal.”[5] This growth has caught the attention of the church world, and they have begun to ask the much-needed question, “Why?” While it is not the intention of this paper to exhaustively answer this question, it is the intention to examine the role that the Second Commandment[6] has played in the Pentecostal explosion of the 20th Century with a brief look at the Pentecostal community perspective; to examine what role, if any, the Second Commandment played in the first decade of modern Pentecostal movements; to compare Pentecostal acceptance in the 20th Century between North and South America; and to learn some lessons from the information presented.
A Pentecostal Perspective of Community
In spite of their unity on issues like premillinialism and glossolalia, there often seems to be little else upon which Pentecostals agree. For example, the Pentecostal perspectives on the Church are many. Much ecclesiological reflection was carried out in connection to the question of authority in the Church, and Pentecostals were born to rebellion against any authority but the Spirit. Therefore, the Pentecostal experience did not yield a single ecclesiological teaching, and a wide variety of traditional forms of Church government can be found among Pentecostals.[7] This lack of a universal idea of the church prevented a common perspective on what constituted the church and whether church was only praying, singing, and preaching, or could church also include feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, and loving one’s neighbor? Early ecclesiology was “…an area of Christian Theology often minimized and taken for granted...”[8] and left, for the most part, to individual interpretation.
North American Pentecostals, specifically, normally think, first of all, in terms of individuals and the individual infilling of the Holy Ghost. It is only upon secondary reflection, did they acknowledge the possibility that whole communities can also be converted, and therefore outward behavior may affect acceptance.[9] North American Pentecostals of the early 20th Century were prone to consider first the spiritual well-being of the individual, while Catholics (universally at that time) were prone to consider first of all the spiritual well-being of the community [church].[10] This can attribute for much of the success of the universal Catholic Church throughout the late19th and early 20th Centuries.
The initial concern of a movement indicates where the emphasis really lies. If the movement insufficiently recognizes the prismatic significance of their point of departure, then this point of departure affects the entire theological construct, and they will inevitably de-emphasize other theological constructs.[11] In other words, the church must consider the individualistic nature of their early 20th Century North American Pentecostal roots, and, by recognizing the biblical path from which they (or their ancestors) deviated, they can find the path to Second Commandment ministry and renewal. If this analysis is correct, one would do well to engender serious theological reflection on the relationship between Ecclesiology and Soteriology, as well as a more authentic understanding of the relationship of pneumatology to Ecclesiology and Soteriology. In other words, it would behoove Pentecostals to take another look at how they do ‘church’ and what constitutes ‘church.’
Community in the First Decade of Modern Pentecostal Movements
Unfortunately, “The… extensive documentation for saints’ mundane social lives simply is not available.”[12] Herein lies a major obstacle to this vein of research, and therefore must be done with an abundance of circumstantial evidence. There is no shortage of legitimate records of the vast volume of “classical Pentecostal” church services. “Meetings followed daily and nightly… Prayer was held day and night… No one would be likely to complain about all night meetings… That meeting lasted for over three years, going on day and night without a break…”[13] “The services ran almost continuously. Seeking souls could be found under the power almost any hour, night, and day…”[14] “…she personally conducted twenty-one services per week for the faithful…”[15]
What little we can surmise from diaries, letters, and autobiographies is that Pentecostals attended church 6 or more times each week, and at least partly it was because it offered a time of rewarding fellowship.[16] So one can see, while the focus was upon individual salvation, the emphasis upon individual salvation did not preclude the services from having the added (unforeseeable to some) benefit of community, even though initially fellowship was discretely denied in regular worship meetings.[17]
It is worth noting that Wacker claimed, “The [Pentecostal] revival never had much of a social program…”[18] This will be especially important when we see the perception of Pentecostalism in South America below. “Jeffery Gros, a Roman Catholic ecumenist… commented that ‘Pentecostals [in Latin America] don’t have social programs, they are a social program.’”[19] This difference, as I will postulate below, gives rationale to the explosion and fizzle of revival throughout the first two decades of Pentecostalism in North America and the general rejection of its postulations. Wherever Parham went, he left behind people who believed that they had been transformed by a powerful encounter with the living Christ.[20] Unfortunately, he rarely left them with any sense of community or continuity in the form of a church or fellowship group. “Despite [Parham’s] heartening beginning, committed supporters were few, and within several months Parham’s ministry [once again] had disintegrated.”[21]
This is not to say there was no community at all. For wherever there are humans they will seek out community with other like-minded folk. Officially, however, fellowship and community were worldly and unnecessary. Part of this must have been secondary to the belief in the imminent return of Jesus Christ for the Church. Wacker argued that while there did not seem to be much fellowship outside of church services, it can be found if one looks behind the verbiage of the time. For example, while “baseball was out… faith homes were in.” [22] Wacker theorized that a week at a faith home replaced the recreation and fellowship once enjoyed during a week at the beach. A day spent at campmeetings in “…earnest devotion to God” was often spent enjoying and consuming “…baskets containing the fat of the land.”[23]
Few ever stopped to think about the effect this stifling of community, and consequently upon Second Commandment[24] ministry, could have on the Pentecostal movement around the country. Kurt Berend, with the benefit of 100 years of hindsight, offers the following example of the effect of community involvement and acceptance. He researched two churches and the towns in which they were built (Canaan, New Hampshire, and Jefferson, New Hampshire) from the Harvester (Pentecostal) movement, that was only found in the Northeastern part of the United States. Berend’s opening point in this dialogue is, “Several factors other than tongues speaking proved to be significant in determining what type of reception the Harvesters received.”[25]
Both churches were founded in rural New Hampshire farming towns in the year of 1907. There was little difference that could be noted other than Jefferson seemed to have more established churches and secret societies than Canaan did. What can be established is that a different approach was utilized by the founders. In Canaan the first family to be converted, who would become the backbone of the church, was George Barney and his family. He and his family had been long-time residents in the area, active in all aspects of community life, and their name was well established in the countryside. The immediate and extended family of George Barney was active in the local economy and government.[26] In 1956 the beautiful brick uptown church, founded by Barney, joined the Assemblies of God and changed its name to the Canaan Assembly of God, as it remains to this day. [27] “Instead of criticizing the [Pentecostal Church], the paper [Canaan Reporter] praised it, noting, ‘The work… is progressing rapidly towards completion… for this little church which means so much for this society (emphasis added).’”[28]
Not far away in Jefferson another church was also founded by the Harvesters and was pastored by a man named Wright. “Throughout much of his ministry Wright [Jefferson’s founding (and only) pastor] exhibited a proclivity for confrontation.” The Jefferson Times and the Jefferson Democrat both noted the violent attacks Wright made on the establishment (denominational religion and other town societies).[29] Furthermore, and probably because of his violent attacks, Wright was unable to attract prominent community members into his fold. Less than one year after its humble beginning, around 1 AM on December 8, 1908, somebody(ies) threw several sticks of dynamite through the newly-built church window and blew the church level with the ground. That was the end of Pentecostalism in Jefferson, New Hampshire. [30]
One of the fundamental differences between Canaan and Jefferson was the Barney family. “Their social respectability and community involvement offered credibility to the fledging Pentecostal movement in Canaan.” While in fact many did disagree with the Pentecostalism of the Barney’s, they accepted Pentecostalism because the Barneys were “hard-working contributors to the welfare of the community (emphasis added).”[31] “Their [the Barneys] involvement in Second Commandment ministries, more than anything or anyone else, proved to be the decisive variable in the region’s open-armed welcome to the Harvesters and their message. Their role in the daily life of the community led to the region’s open-armed welcome to the Harvesters... (emphasis added).”[32] It is important to note that it was not speaking in tongues that caused the rejection of Pentecostalism in Jefferson, but rather the constant attacks led by Wright were both annoying and offensive to the people they wanted to win.[33]
Pentecost Finds Acceptance in North America
“Since the Pentecostals so completely rejected society, it is not surprising that society rejected the Pentecostals. This period of rejection lasted roughly from 1906 to 1923, when Aimee Semple McPherson with her Foursquare Gospel movement gave Pentecostalism its… first taste of acceptance by the public.”[34] Although much negative can be, and has been, said about McPherson, her vision of what the church should be set the pace for the next twenty years. With a price tag of 1.5 million dollars, McPherson built the Angelus Temple in Los Angeles in 1923 that sat 5,300 people,[35] and for twenty years the temple was filled to capacity every time service was held, with thousands being turned away at the door. “In the beginning, she personally conducted twenty-one services per week for the faithful… popular demand quickly overwhelmed her. People stood in line for hours for seats.” [36]
McPherson’s talent was the ability to present the Gospel in a package that both individuals and communities could palate. Her key was showing her followers how to love God by loving others. “Sister’s most notable public achievement in the 1930s was a social program… In 1926 the Angelus Temple Commissary was opened to feed the hungry and clothe the naked (80,000 meals were served in the first two months). When the great Depression hit the nation after 1929, the temple fed and clothed more than 1.5 million needy people in the LA area. Because of her love for the poor, Sister Aimee won the everlasting love and devotion of the down-and-outers…”[37] The Angelus Temple was known because “…ambitious programs to feed the hungry and respond to natural disasters gained goodwill.”[38] Miracle healers like McPherson found that the public would be more receptive to the message they desired to deliver if they used a sense of community involvement within which to present and live the Gospel. “The advent of Aimee Semple McPherson marked a turning point in the history of the Pentecostal movement in the United States… she did much to add interest and toleration to a religion that had been considered of interest only to the lowest levels of society.”[39]
When one considers the eulogies of Pentecost’s “successful” pioneers, this common theme of loving one’s neighbor is easily discernable, “… if there was a need, [Albert Abbey] helped… [Harry] Branding was always very thoughtful and respectful of the elderly… [William H. Ring] liked visiting the hospital and won many friends during his lifetime… [J. W. Wallace] always [was] a doer…”[40] “[Winfred Black] loved people and people sensed that love, for it was not just demonstrated from the pulpit, but was part of his everyday life… [Paul Box] a friend of the missionaries… had ninety dollars and wanted to designate it to some [mission] need… suddenly he passed away that evening… [Arnold H. Browning] had always been active in working and doing things with his hands… in home missions churches… [and] on Indian Mission projects… [Roy D. Gibson] is affectionately referred to as ‘Popsy’, and is loved by the young as well as the elderly… [W. M. Greer was] kind, considerate and gentle with those who needed help… [Frank Martin’s] joints were stiff and his hearing almost gone, but he could still outwork men half his age… through [M. J. Wolf’s] love, I realized what the love of God must be like.”[41] Over the last 100 years Pentecostalism has found success, not because it has rejected the basic tenets of orthodoxy, but rather because it has coupled truth with community, and the multitudes have been won.
Pentecost Finds Acceptance in South America
If the growth of Pentecostalism has been great and miraculous in North America, “The growth of Pentecostalism among Spanish and Portuguese-speaking people of North and South America has been phenomenal.”[42] “Assemblies of God efforts among Spanish-speaking Americans are as old as the denomination and have been the most successful ethnic-directed efforts the denomination has pursued.”[43]
There is little doubt that this success is attributed to the social aspect of Pentecostalism in South American cultures. “Jeffery Gros, a Roman Catholic ecumenist… commented that ‘Pentecostals don’t have social programs, they are a social program.’”[45] As was contrasted earlier, consider this up against what Wacker claims about early Pentecostal movements in the United States, “The [early Pentecostal] revival never had much of a social program…”[46] It should be no surprise, that while the outpouring of the Pentecostal message originated in North America, in seventy-five years it was surpassed by the Pentecostal movement in South America.
“Wacker notes that the social change brought about by Pentecostals in Latin America is significant.”[47] It has been argued that Pentecostalism is more adaptable to the Latin culture. “Much has been written about the Latin American character, whose traits include innate warmth and hospitality…”[48] However, this is no defense to those that lack this Second Commandment nature, the very nature of Christ. “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.”[49] Latin American pastors, although they may have been influenced by the Liberation Theology of the Catholic Church, were still following the example of Christ. Latin American pastors serve as more than just a spiritual advisor; they often act as public representatives of the unemployed and dispossessed.[50] “David Martin refers to [Pentecostalism] as a protective social capsule that renews the broken ties of family, community, and religion in an atmosphere of hope and anticipation.”[51]
Gamaliel L. Morales, an early modern Pentecostal missionary to Venezuela, offered the following example of Pentecostal success in South America. G. F. Bender arrived in Venezuela on the 25th of February, 1914, and founded an independent Pentecostal movement there. While he was only the first of many to preach the Pentecostal message, he is considered both the father and the most successful proponent of the Pentecostal message in Venezuela. Morales attributes this to, “…his concern for orphans and the needy… his desire to help with primary education for those who had no opportunity to go to secular schools.”[52]
In Latin America, Pentecostals are “…responding to the vital needs of marginalized populations…”[53] “Hunger, misery, marginalization, poverty, injustice, repression, loneliness, and exploitation typically describes the situation prevailing among the impoverished masses of Latin America.”[54] Instead of being overwhelmed, missionaries have looked on the field that is white unto harvest,[55] rolled up their sleeves, got down in the dirt beside the downtrodden, picked up their burdens, and took them to Jesus. “In the practice of Pentecostalism the neglected sectors and the poorest members of the population find a type of participation denied them by the dominant society… the Pentecostal movement in Latin America… has shown a concern for such people.”[56] Therefore, Pentecostals will continue to grow in numbers and influence in Latin America, because they have proven themselves capable of responding to the immediate concerns of their neighbors.[57]
Community and Church Growth
For a long time researchers of church growth were willing to denounce Pentecostalism; however, due to the phenomenal growth in Latin America (and other areas) they have begun serious consideration of the cause and social effect of this aberration.[58] “Had the Pentecostals been just another isolated sect emphasizing controversial doctrines… their existence could have probably been ignored. The inconvenient reality of Pentecostalism was its pervasive expansion and presence around the world.”[59] Five hundred million Pentecostals, 1/12 of the earth’s population, has turned the heads of the scoffers and doubters. While Pentecostals must never forget the truths poured out in the first decade of the last century, it is important to understand that growth has come, in a large part, to those that have learned, either biblically or culturally, the importance of the Second Commandment.
“The God of the Bible is a God who loves the poor. It is true that He loves all people, including the rich; but, if we take the Bible seriously, we know that He has a special bias for the poor… God raised up the Holiness/Pentecostal movement to minister to the poor once again… Check it out… This is one of the strongest characteristics of Pentecostal growth.”[60] Remember the words Jesus cried out in the synagogue that day, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised.”[61]
Lessons Learned From Early Pentecostal Movements
If one were to synthesize all the lessons that could be learned from this research into the causes of the massive Pentecostal advent of the 20th Century, they would be capsulated in the First and Second Commandments.[62] “Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”[63] God’s true church must equip itself with gifts and ministries that will fulfill the redemption of all people everywhere, focusing especially upon those who are enslaved by sin, victims of acts of violence, and those who live in degrading and unjust systems.[64] Churches that failed to provide Second Commandment ministry, they have stagnated and not grown, while other churches, started in parks twenty years ago, like Saddleback,[65] have exploded to 20,000 members while providing Second Commandment ministry to its community. While it cannot be said that Saddleback’s growth can be solely responsible to Second Commandment ministry, it is a major contributing factor.
“[Pentecostal Churches] are generally made up of women, peasants, blacks, indigenous people, young people, workers, students, taxi drivers, etc. We are calling on the vital forces in… Pentecostalism to take up with renewed urgency the historic role we must fulfill for the church…”[66] It is there among the poor, the downtrodden, and common people that the Pentecostal church, with its tremendous emphasis upon God’s Spirit acting right now in Society, is needed.[67] Pentecostalism’s spirituality should, by being involved in Second Commandment ministry, convey to everyone in the community, “…this is the way that we live” and should “…challenge all persons to be morally responsible for both the way they live in community and for the ways by which they influence the lives of others.”[68] The mission of the church must be to construct a reality in the daily lives of humanity that is according to God’s will in both the community of faith (the church) and the world (everything outside the church).[69] The world must not only hear of God’s love, but must see God’s love in the Second Commandment ministries of Pentecostals today.
The Pentecostal explosion will, by most expectations, march on through the 21st Century. If so, 1/6 to 1/3 of our earth’s population will be claiming a Pentecostal experience by the year 2100. The amount of growth will be determined by how closely we embrace the principles outlined in the First and Second Commandments. What South America has demonstrated culturally is possible and must be endorsed biblically throughout the world. North America has attempted to demonstrate her individuality, even within the ranks of the church. This individuality has cost her the revival that South America, Africa, and China have enjoyed. This individuality and absence of Second Commandment ministry keeps the world out of the church and away from the salvific preaching of Godly men and women. This trajectory must be corrected, unless one wants to miss the goal intended by Christ. The story of the Good Samaritan is calling to the North American Pentecostal movement across 2000 years of proven validity; the social-spiritual matrix of the church must be “…permeated by the ideals, values and ethics of the kingdom of God… [ie.] love, justice, and compassion.”[70]
Bibliography/Footnotes
[1] For a summary of the Second Commandment see Post entitled Second Commandment.
[2] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal (Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2001), 44.
[3] Downloaded from Adherents.com on April 28, 2005, which is a statistic gathering organization that focuses on church growth. ( http://adherents.com/Na/Na_508.html).
[4] Donald W Dayton, Theological Roots of Pentecostalism (Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1987), 15-28.
[5] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 293.
[6] For a summary of the Second Commandment Theology see Post entitled Second Commandment.
[7] Huibert Zegwarrt, “Christian Experience in Community,” Cyberjournal for Pentecostal Charismatic Research (May 2001): 22-23.
[8] Ibid, 22.
[9] Ibid, 1.
[10] Ibid, 19.
[11] Ibid.
[12] Grant Wacker, Heaven Below: Early Pentecostals and American Culture (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2003), 197.
[13] Frank J. Ewart, The Phenomenon of Pentecost (Hazelwood, Missouri: Word Aflame Press, 1947). 1-62, 77.
[14] Talmadge L. French, Our God is One; the Story of the Oneness Pentecostals (Indianapolis, Indian: Voice and Vision Publication, 1999), 47.
[15] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 135, 251.
[16] Grant Wacker, Heaven Below: Early Pentecostals and American Culture, 135.
[17] Ibid, 135.
[18] Ibid, 136.
[19] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 294.
[20] Edith L. Blumhofer, Restoring the Faith; The Assemblies of God, Pentecostalism, and American Culture (Chicago Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1993), 43.
[21] Ibid, 53.
[22] Grant Wacker, Heaven Below: Early Pentecostals and American Culture, 134.
[23] Ibid.
[24] For a summary of the Second Commandment Theology see Post entitled Second Commandment.
[25] Kurt O. Berends, “Social Variables and Community Response,” Flowers Heritage Center (31261, 20-10), Date Unknown, Retrieved January 9, 2004: 72.
[26] Ibid, 72-77.
[27] Ibid.
[28] Ibid, 76.
[29] Ibid, 82.
[30] Ibid, 72-77.
[31] Ibid, 83.
[32] Ibid, 72-77.
[33] Ibid, 84.
[34] Vinson Synan, The Holiness-Pentecostal Movement in the United States (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1971), 190-191.
[35] Ibid, 198.
[36] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 135, 251.
[37] Ibid.
[38] Ibid, 250.
[39] Vinson Synan, The Holiness-Pentecostal Movement in the United States, 200.
[40] Mary H. Wallace, Profiles of Pentecostal Preachers, Volume I (Hazelwood, Missouri: Word Aflame Press, 1983), 18, 36, 194, 268.
[41] Mary H. Wallace, Profiles of Pentecostal Preachers, Volume II (Hazelwood, Missouri: Word Aflame Press, 1984), 41-42, 76, 91-92, 177, 265, 396.
[42] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 293.
[43] Edith L. Blumhofer, Restoring the Faith; The Assemblies of God, Pentecostalism, and American Culture, 244.
[44] This graph was extrapolated from data in Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 389.
[45] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 294.
[46] Grant Wacker, Heaven Below: Early Pentecostals and American Culture, 136.
[47] L. Grant McClung Jr., Azusa Street and Beyond; Pentecostal Missions and Church Growth in the Twentieth Century (South Plainfield, New Jersey: Bridge Publishing House, 1986), 153.
[48] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 315.
[49] John 15:13.
[50] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 316.
[51] Ibid, 293-294.
[52] Gamaliel Lugo Morales, “Moving Forward with the Latin American Pentecostal Movement” [Cited February 19, 2004]. Online: ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, ATLA0000983609, 2003, 505.
[53] Jean Pierre Bastian, “The New Religious Map of Latin America: Causes and Social Effects” [Cited February 19, 2004]. Online: ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, ATLA0000982752, 1998, 335.
[54] Gamaliel Lugo Morales, “Moving Forward with the Latin American Pentecostal Movement”, 510.
[55] John 4:35.
[56] Gamaliel Lugo Morales, “Moving Forward with the Latin American Pentecostal Movement”, 511.
[57] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 322.
[58] Jean Pierre Bastian, “The New Religious Map of Latin America: Causes and Social Effects”, 330.
[59] L. Grant McClung Jr., Azusa Street and Beyond; Pentecostal Missions and Church Growth in the Twentieth Century, 110.
[60] Ibid, 129.
[61] Luke 4:18.
[62] For a summary of the Second Commandment Theology see Post entitled Second Commandment.
[63] Matthew 22:37-40.
[64] Gamaliel Lugo Morales, “Moving Forward with the Latin American Pentecostal Movement.” 512.
[65] Randy Frazee, The Connecting Church, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), Introduction.
[66] Ibid, 511.
[67] L. Grant McClung Jr., Azusa Street and Beyond; Pentecostal Missions and Church Growth in the Twentieth Century, 112.
[68] R. Jerome Boone. “Community and Worship: The Key Components of Pentecostal Christian Formation,” Flowers Heritage Center 24379, 16-10, 199, 4-5.
[69] Ibid. Page 5.
[70] Ibid, 6.
“The growth of Pentecostalism… has been phenomenal.”[5] This growth has caught the attention of the church world, and they have begun to ask the much-needed question, “Why?” While it is not the intention of this paper to exhaustively answer this question, it is the intention to examine the role that the Second Commandment[6] has played in the Pentecostal explosion of the 20th Century with a brief look at the Pentecostal community perspective; to examine what role, if any, the Second Commandment played in the first decade of modern Pentecostal movements; to compare Pentecostal acceptance in the 20th Century between North and South America; and to learn some lessons from the information presented.
A Pentecostal Perspective of Community
In spite of their unity on issues like premillinialism and glossolalia, there often seems to be little else upon which Pentecostals agree. For example, the Pentecostal perspectives on the Church are many. Much ecclesiological reflection was carried out in connection to the question of authority in the Church, and Pentecostals were born to rebellion against any authority but the Spirit. Therefore, the Pentecostal experience did not yield a single ecclesiological teaching, and a wide variety of traditional forms of Church government can be found among Pentecostals.[7] This lack of a universal idea of the church prevented a common perspective on what constituted the church and whether church was only praying, singing, and preaching, or could church also include feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, and loving one’s neighbor? Early ecclesiology was “…an area of Christian Theology often minimized and taken for granted...”[8] and left, for the most part, to individual interpretation.
North American Pentecostals, specifically, normally think, first of all, in terms of individuals and the individual infilling of the Holy Ghost. It is only upon secondary reflection, did they acknowledge the possibility that whole communities can also be converted, and therefore outward behavior may affect acceptance.[9] North American Pentecostals of the early 20th Century were prone to consider first the spiritual well-being of the individual, while Catholics (universally at that time) were prone to consider first of all the spiritual well-being of the community [church].[10] This can attribute for much of the success of the universal Catholic Church throughout the late19th and early 20th Centuries.
The initial concern of a movement indicates where the emphasis really lies. If the movement insufficiently recognizes the prismatic significance of their point of departure, then this point of departure affects the entire theological construct, and they will inevitably de-emphasize other theological constructs.[11] In other words, the church must consider the individualistic nature of their early 20th Century North American Pentecostal roots, and, by recognizing the biblical path from which they (or their ancestors) deviated, they can find the path to Second Commandment ministry and renewal. If this analysis is correct, one would do well to engender serious theological reflection on the relationship between Ecclesiology and Soteriology, as well as a more authentic understanding of the relationship of pneumatology to Ecclesiology and Soteriology. In other words, it would behoove Pentecostals to take another look at how they do ‘church’ and what constitutes ‘church.’
Community in the First Decade of Modern Pentecostal Movements
Unfortunately, “The… extensive documentation for saints’ mundane social lives simply is not available.”[12] Herein lies a major obstacle to this vein of research, and therefore must be done with an abundance of circumstantial evidence. There is no shortage of legitimate records of the vast volume of “classical Pentecostal” church services. “Meetings followed daily and nightly… Prayer was held day and night… No one would be likely to complain about all night meetings… That meeting lasted for over three years, going on day and night without a break…”[13] “The services ran almost continuously. Seeking souls could be found under the power almost any hour, night, and day…”[14] “…she personally conducted twenty-one services per week for the faithful…”[15]
What little we can surmise from diaries, letters, and autobiographies is that Pentecostals attended church 6 or more times each week, and at least partly it was because it offered a time of rewarding fellowship.[16] So one can see, while the focus was upon individual salvation, the emphasis upon individual salvation did not preclude the services from having the added (unforeseeable to some) benefit of community, even though initially fellowship was discretely denied in regular worship meetings.[17]
It is worth noting that Wacker claimed, “The [Pentecostal] revival never had much of a social program…”[18] This will be especially important when we see the perception of Pentecostalism in South America below. “Jeffery Gros, a Roman Catholic ecumenist… commented that ‘Pentecostals [in Latin America] don’t have social programs, they are a social program.’”[19] This difference, as I will postulate below, gives rationale to the explosion and fizzle of revival throughout the first two decades of Pentecostalism in North America and the general rejection of its postulations. Wherever Parham went, he left behind people who believed that they had been transformed by a powerful encounter with the living Christ.[20] Unfortunately, he rarely left them with any sense of community or continuity in the form of a church or fellowship group. “Despite [Parham’s] heartening beginning, committed supporters were few, and within several months Parham’s ministry [once again] had disintegrated.”[21]
This is not to say there was no community at all. For wherever there are humans they will seek out community with other like-minded folk. Officially, however, fellowship and community were worldly and unnecessary. Part of this must have been secondary to the belief in the imminent return of Jesus Christ for the Church. Wacker argued that while there did not seem to be much fellowship outside of church services, it can be found if one looks behind the verbiage of the time. For example, while “baseball was out… faith homes were in.” [22] Wacker theorized that a week at a faith home replaced the recreation and fellowship once enjoyed during a week at the beach. A day spent at campmeetings in “…earnest devotion to God” was often spent enjoying and consuming “…baskets containing the fat of the land.”[23]
Few ever stopped to think about the effect this stifling of community, and consequently upon Second Commandment[24] ministry, could have on the Pentecostal movement around the country. Kurt Berend, with the benefit of 100 years of hindsight, offers the following example of the effect of community involvement and acceptance. He researched two churches and the towns in which they were built (Canaan, New Hampshire, and Jefferson, New Hampshire) from the Harvester (Pentecostal) movement, that was only found in the Northeastern part of the United States. Berend’s opening point in this dialogue is, “Several factors other than tongues speaking proved to be significant in determining what type of reception the Harvesters received.”[25]
Both churches were founded in rural New Hampshire farming towns in the year of 1907. There was little difference that could be noted other than Jefferson seemed to have more established churches and secret societies than Canaan did. What can be established is that a different approach was utilized by the founders. In Canaan the first family to be converted, who would become the backbone of the church, was George Barney and his family. He and his family had been long-time residents in the area, active in all aspects of community life, and their name was well established in the countryside. The immediate and extended family of George Barney was active in the local economy and government.[26] In 1956 the beautiful brick uptown church, founded by Barney, joined the Assemblies of God and changed its name to the Canaan Assembly of God, as it remains to this day. [27] “Instead of criticizing the [Pentecostal Church], the paper [Canaan Reporter] praised it, noting, ‘The work… is progressing rapidly towards completion… for this little church which means so much for this society (emphasis added).’”[28]
Not far away in Jefferson another church was also founded by the Harvesters and was pastored by a man named Wright. “Throughout much of his ministry Wright [Jefferson’s founding (and only) pastor] exhibited a proclivity for confrontation.” The Jefferson Times and the Jefferson Democrat both noted the violent attacks Wright made on the establishment (denominational religion and other town societies).[29] Furthermore, and probably because of his violent attacks, Wright was unable to attract prominent community members into his fold. Less than one year after its humble beginning, around 1 AM on December 8, 1908, somebody(ies) threw several sticks of dynamite through the newly-built church window and blew the church level with the ground. That was the end of Pentecostalism in Jefferson, New Hampshire. [30]
One of the fundamental differences between Canaan and Jefferson was the Barney family. “Their social respectability and community involvement offered credibility to the fledging Pentecostal movement in Canaan.” While in fact many did disagree with the Pentecostalism of the Barney’s, they accepted Pentecostalism because the Barneys were “hard-working contributors to the welfare of the community (emphasis added).”[31] “Their [the Barneys] involvement in Second Commandment ministries, more than anything or anyone else, proved to be the decisive variable in the region’s open-armed welcome to the Harvesters and their message. Their role in the daily life of the community led to the region’s open-armed welcome to the Harvesters... (emphasis added).”[32] It is important to note that it was not speaking in tongues that caused the rejection of Pentecostalism in Jefferson, but rather the constant attacks led by Wright were both annoying and offensive to the people they wanted to win.[33]
Pentecost Finds Acceptance in North America
“Since the Pentecostals so completely rejected society, it is not surprising that society rejected the Pentecostals. This period of rejection lasted roughly from 1906 to 1923, when Aimee Semple McPherson with her Foursquare Gospel movement gave Pentecostalism its… first taste of acceptance by the public.”[34] Although much negative can be, and has been, said about McPherson, her vision of what the church should be set the pace for the next twenty years. With a price tag of 1.5 million dollars, McPherson built the Angelus Temple in Los Angeles in 1923 that sat 5,300 people,[35] and for twenty years the temple was filled to capacity every time service was held, with thousands being turned away at the door. “In the beginning, she personally conducted twenty-one services per week for the faithful… popular demand quickly overwhelmed her. People stood in line for hours for seats.” [36]
McPherson’s talent was the ability to present the Gospel in a package that both individuals and communities could palate. Her key was showing her followers how to love God by loving others. “Sister’s most notable public achievement in the 1930s was a social program… In 1926 the Angelus Temple Commissary was opened to feed the hungry and clothe the naked (80,000 meals were served in the first two months). When the great Depression hit the nation after 1929, the temple fed and clothed more than 1.5 million needy people in the LA area. Because of her love for the poor, Sister Aimee won the everlasting love and devotion of the down-and-outers…”[37] The Angelus Temple was known because “…ambitious programs to feed the hungry and respond to natural disasters gained goodwill.”[38] Miracle healers like McPherson found that the public would be more receptive to the message they desired to deliver if they used a sense of community involvement within which to present and live the Gospel. “The advent of Aimee Semple McPherson marked a turning point in the history of the Pentecostal movement in the United States… she did much to add interest and toleration to a religion that had been considered of interest only to the lowest levels of society.”[39]
When one considers the eulogies of Pentecost’s “successful” pioneers, this common theme of loving one’s neighbor is easily discernable, “… if there was a need, [Albert Abbey] helped… [Harry] Branding was always very thoughtful and respectful of the elderly… [William H. Ring] liked visiting the hospital and won many friends during his lifetime… [J. W. Wallace] always [was] a doer…”[40] “[Winfred Black] loved people and people sensed that love, for it was not just demonstrated from the pulpit, but was part of his everyday life… [Paul Box] a friend of the missionaries… had ninety dollars and wanted to designate it to some [mission] need… suddenly he passed away that evening… [Arnold H. Browning] had always been active in working and doing things with his hands… in home missions churches… [and] on Indian Mission projects… [Roy D. Gibson] is affectionately referred to as ‘Popsy’, and is loved by the young as well as the elderly… [W. M. Greer was] kind, considerate and gentle with those who needed help… [Frank Martin’s] joints were stiff and his hearing almost gone, but he could still outwork men half his age… through [M. J. Wolf’s] love, I realized what the love of God must be like.”[41] Over the last 100 years Pentecostalism has found success, not because it has rejected the basic tenets of orthodoxy, but rather because it has coupled truth with community, and the multitudes have been won.
Pentecost Finds Acceptance in South America
If the growth of Pentecostalism has been great and miraculous in North America, “The growth of Pentecostalism among Spanish and Portuguese-speaking people of North and South America has been phenomenal.”[42] “Assemblies of God efforts among Spanish-speaking Americans are as old as the denomination and have been the most successful ethnic-directed efforts the denomination has pursued.”[43]
There is little doubt that this success is attributed to the social aspect of Pentecostalism in South American cultures. “Jeffery Gros, a Roman Catholic ecumenist… commented that ‘Pentecostals don’t have social programs, they are a social program.’”[45] As was contrasted earlier, consider this up against what Wacker claims about early Pentecostal movements in the United States, “The [early Pentecostal] revival never had much of a social program…”[46] It should be no surprise, that while the outpouring of the Pentecostal message originated in North America, in seventy-five years it was surpassed by the Pentecostal movement in South America.
“Wacker notes that the social change brought about by Pentecostals in Latin America is significant.”[47] It has been argued that Pentecostalism is more adaptable to the Latin culture. “Much has been written about the Latin American character, whose traits include innate warmth and hospitality…”[48] However, this is no defense to those that lack this Second Commandment nature, the very nature of Christ. “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.”[49] Latin American pastors, although they may have been influenced by the Liberation Theology of the Catholic Church, were still following the example of Christ. Latin American pastors serve as more than just a spiritual advisor; they often act as public representatives of the unemployed and dispossessed.[50] “David Martin refers to [Pentecostalism] as a protective social capsule that renews the broken ties of family, community, and religion in an atmosphere of hope and anticipation.”[51]
Gamaliel L. Morales, an early modern Pentecostal missionary to Venezuela, offered the following example of Pentecostal success in South America. G. F. Bender arrived in Venezuela on the 25th of February, 1914, and founded an independent Pentecostal movement there. While he was only the first of many to preach the Pentecostal message, he is considered both the father and the most successful proponent of the Pentecostal message in Venezuela. Morales attributes this to, “…his concern for orphans and the needy… his desire to help with primary education for those who had no opportunity to go to secular schools.”[52]
In Latin America, Pentecostals are “…responding to the vital needs of marginalized populations…”[53] “Hunger, misery, marginalization, poverty, injustice, repression, loneliness, and exploitation typically describes the situation prevailing among the impoverished masses of Latin America.”[54] Instead of being overwhelmed, missionaries have looked on the field that is white unto harvest,[55] rolled up their sleeves, got down in the dirt beside the downtrodden, picked up their burdens, and took them to Jesus. “In the practice of Pentecostalism the neglected sectors and the poorest members of the population find a type of participation denied them by the dominant society… the Pentecostal movement in Latin America… has shown a concern for such people.”[56] Therefore, Pentecostals will continue to grow in numbers and influence in Latin America, because they have proven themselves capable of responding to the immediate concerns of their neighbors.[57]
Community and Church Growth
For a long time researchers of church growth were willing to denounce Pentecostalism; however, due to the phenomenal growth in Latin America (and other areas) they have begun serious consideration of the cause and social effect of this aberration.[58] “Had the Pentecostals been just another isolated sect emphasizing controversial doctrines… their existence could have probably been ignored. The inconvenient reality of Pentecostalism was its pervasive expansion and presence around the world.”[59] Five hundred million Pentecostals, 1/12 of the earth’s population, has turned the heads of the scoffers and doubters. While Pentecostals must never forget the truths poured out in the first decade of the last century, it is important to understand that growth has come, in a large part, to those that have learned, either biblically or culturally, the importance of the Second Commandment.
“The God of the Bible is a God who loves the poor. It is true that He loves all people, including the rich; but, if we take the Bible seriously, we know that He has a special bias for the poor… God raised up the Holiness/Pentecostal movement to minister to the poor once again… Check it out… This is one of the strongest characteristics of Pentecostal growth.”[60] Remember the words Jesus cried out in the synagogue that day, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised.”[61]
Lessons Learned From Early Pentecostal Movements
If one were to synthesize all the lessons that could be learned from this research into the causes of the massive Pentecostal advent of the 20th Century, they would be capsulated in the First and Second Commandments.[62] “Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”[63] God’s true church must equip itself with gifts and ministries that will fulfill the redemption of all people everywhere, focusing especially upon those who are enslaved by sin, victims of acts of violence, and those who live in degrading and unjust systems.[64] Churches that failed to provide Second Commandment ministry, they have stagnated and not grown, while other churches, started in parks twenty years ago, like Saddleback,[65] have exploded to 20,000 members while providing Second Commandment ministry to its community. While it cannot be said that Saddleback’s growth can be solely responsible to Second Commandment ministry, it is a major contributing factor.
“[Pentecostal Churches] are generally made up of women, peasants, blacks, indigenous people, young people, workers, students, taxi drivers, etc. We are calling on the vital forces in… Pentecostalism to take up with renewed urgency the historic role we must fulfill for the church…”[66] It is there among the poor, the downtrodden, and common people that the Pentecostal church, with its tremendous emphasis upon God’s Spirit acting right now in Society, is needed.[67] Pentecostalism’s spirituality should, by being involved in Second Commandment ministry, convey to everyone in the community, “…this is the way that we live” and should “…challenge all persons to be morally responsible for both the way they live in community and for the ways by which they influence the lives of others.”[68] The mission of the church must be to construct a reality in the daily lives of humanity that is according to God’s will in both the community of faith (the church) and the world (everything outside the church).[69] The world must not only hear of God’s love, but must see God’s love in the Second Commandment ministries of Pentecostals today.
The Pentecostal explosion will, by most expectations, march on through the 21st Century. If so, 1/6 to 1/3 of our earth’s population will be claiming a Pentecostal experience by the year 2100. The amount of growth will be determined by how closely we embrace the principles outlined in the First and Second Commandments. What South America has demonstrated culturally is possible and must be endorsed biblically throughout the world. North America has attempted to demonstrate her individuality, even within the ranks of the church. This individuality has cost her the revival that South America, Africa, and China have enjoyed. This individuality and absence of Second Commandment ministry keeps the world out of the church and away from the salvific preaching of Godly men and women. This trajectory must be corrected, unless one wants to miss the goal intended by Christ. The story of the Good Samaritan is calling to the North American Pentecostal movement across 2000 years of proven validity; the social-spiritual matrix of the church must be “…permeated by the ideals, values and ethics of the kingdom of God… [ie.] love, justice, and compassion.”[70]
Bibliography/Footnotes
[1] For a summary of the Second Commandment see Post entitled Second Commandment.
[2] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal (Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2001), 44.
[3] Downloaded from Adherents.com on April 28, 2005, which is a statistic gathering organization that focuses on church growth. ( http://adherents.com/Na/Na_508.html).
[4] Donald W Dayton, Theological Roots of Pentecostalism (Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1987), 15-28.
[5] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 293.
[6] For a summary of the Second Commandment Theology see Post entitled Second Commandment.
[7] Huibert Zegwarrt, “Christian Experience in Community,” Cyberjournal for Pentecostal Charismatic Research (May 2001): 22-23.
[8] Ibid, 22.
[9] Ibid, 1.
[10] Ibid, 19.
[11] Ibid.
[12] Grant Wacker, Heaven Below: Early Pentecostals and American Culture (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2003), 197.
[13] Frank J. Ewart, The Phenomenon of Pentecost (Hazelwood, Missouri: Word Aflame Press, 1947). 1-62, 77.
[14] Talmadge L. French, Our God is One; the Story of the Oneness Pentecostals (Indianapolis, Indian: Voice and Vision Publication, 1999), 47.
[15] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 135, 251.
[16] Grant Wacker, Heaven Below: Early Pentecostals and American Culture, 135.
[17] Ibid, 135.
[18] Ibid, 136.
[19] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 294.
[20] Edith L. Blumhofer, Restoring the Faith; The Assemblies of God, Pentecostalism, and American Culture (Chicago Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1993), 43.
[21] Ibid, 53.
[22] Grant Wacker, Heaven Below: Early Pentecostals and American Culture, 134.
[23] Ibid.
[24] For a summary of the Second Commandment Theology see Post entitled Second Commandment.
[25] Kurt O. Berends, “Social Variables and Community Response,” Flowers Heritage Center (31261, 20-10), Date Unknown, Retrieved January 9, 2004: 72.
[26] Ibid, 72-77.
[27] Ibid.
[28] Ibid, 76.
[29] Ibid, 82.
[30] Ibid, 72-77.
[31] Ibid, 83.
[32] Ibid, 72-77.
[33] Ibid, 84.
[34] Vinson Synan, The Holiness-Pentecostal Movement in the United States (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1971), 190-191.
[35] Ibid, 198.
[36] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 135, 251.
[37] Ibid.
[38] Ibid, 250.
[39] Vinson Synan, The Holiness-Pentecostal Movement in the United States, 200.
[40] Mary H. Wallace, Profiles of Pentecostal Preachers, Volume I (Hazelwood, Missouri: Word Aflame Press, 1983), 18, 36, 194, 268.
[41] Mary H. Wallace, Profiles of Pentecostal Preachers, Volume II (Hazelwood, Missouri: Word Aflame Press, 1984), 41-42, 76, 91-92, 177, 265, 396.
[42] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 293.
[43] Edith L. Blumhofer, Restoring the Faith; The Assemblies of God, Pentecostalism, and American Culture, 244.
[44] This graph was extrapolated from data in Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 389.
[45] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 294.
[46] Grant Wacker, Heaven Below: Early Pentecostals and American Culture, 136.
[47] L. Grant McClung Jr., Azusa Street and Beyond; Pentecostal Missions and Church Growth in the Twentieth Century (South Plainfield, New Jersey: Bridge Publishing House, 1986), 153.
[48] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 315.
[49] John 15:13.
[50] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 316.
[51] Ibid, 293-294.
[52] Gamaliel Lugo Morales, “Moving Forward with the Latin American Pentecostal Movement” [Cited February 19, 2004]. Online: ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, ATLA0000983609, 2003, 505.
[53] Jean Pierre Bastian, “The New Religious Map of Latin America: Causes and Social Effects” [Cited February 19, 2004]. Online: ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, ATLA0000982752, 1998, 335.
[54] Gamaliel Lugo Morales, “Moving Forward with the Latin American Pentecostal Movement”, 510.
[55] John 4:35.
[56] Gamaliel Lugo Morales, “Moving Forward with the Latin American Pentecostal Movement”, 511.
[57] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 322.
[58] Jean Pierre Bastian, “The New Religious Map of Latin America: Causes and Social Effects”, 330.
[59] L. Grant McClung Jr., Azusa Street and Beyond; Pentecostal Missions and Church Growth in the Twentieth Century, 110.
[60] Ibid, 129.
[61] Luke 4:18.
[62] For a summary of the Second Commandment Theology see Post entitled Second Commandment.
[63] Matthew 22:37-40.
[64] Gamaliel Lugo Morales, “Moving Forward with the Latin American Pentecostal Movement.” 512.
[65] Randy Frazee, The Connecting Church, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), Introduction.
[66] Ibid, 511.
[67] L. Grant McClung Jr., Azusa Street and Beyond; Pentecostal Missions and Church Growth in the Twentieth Century, 112.
[68] R. Jerome Boone. “Community and Worship: The Key Components of Pentecostal Christian Formation,” Flowers Heritage Center 24379, 16-10, 199, 4-5.
[69] Ibid. Page 5.
[70] Ibid, 6.
Thursday, January 12, 2006
THE SECOND COMMANDMENT
Loneliness! Stark, relentless, loneliness! Empty, pointless, purposeless lives filled with loneliness! Wandering the crowded halls of society, Americans are the loneliest people in the world![1] From the mega-malls to the high-rise apartment buildings with 10,000 residents, there has never been a time in American history that America has been more crowded, yet at the same time Americans are lonelier than ever before. Crowds of 100,000, that used to be a novelty, are now so common they rarely make the news. Pushing through the crowds are millions of lonely people. Lonely people are spending millions to talk to people they never seen on the phone, the radio, and in internet chat-rooms. In the mental health field, which did not exist prior to the Second World War, psychiatric medicine and psychotropic medication has become a multibillion-dollar industry serving millions of lonely Americans. Always searching for…
America has embraced the doctrine of individuality, and our individuality has spawned loneliness and isolationism. The doctrine of individuality has not been isolated to the heathen world and denominationalism, but has permeated throughout all of Christianity from the pulpit to the pews and from Catholics to Pentecostals. Not only do Americans not know their neighbors on either side of one’s home, but many do not know the person sitting on the pew nearby on Sunday morning. The Christian slogan for the end of the 20th Century was, “Me and Jesus got our own thing going.” We are not just going to the grocery store and the post office alone, but we are going to church alone and going home even more lonely, wondering at that empty, unfulfilled feeling that goes with us throughout our lonely lives. We have drive-through fast food, drive-through cleaners, drive-through pharmacies, and now we even have drive-through churches. We claim to know God and to love Him, yet something is still wrong…
We are part of a Christian world that has become very comfortable with the First Commandment (at least as far as we understand it) that commands us to love God with all of our heart, all of our soul, and all of our mind (Matthew 22:37). We worship God with exuberance: running, leaping, and shouting for joy at the knowledge of our God. We are blessed beyond measure with the revelation of truth. We have utilized the understanding of one God to justify worshiping until we literally drop in exhaustion on the floor. However, many still go home to a long, lonely week waiting for another weekend service to give it all they’ve got for another couple hours. Wondering about the emptiness of the week and the loneliness of the nights…
This myopic view of the First Commandment, to the complete exclusion of the Second Commandment, does not fulfill the First Commandment, and the end result of isolating the First Commandment from the Second Commandment is loneliness. Rather, the First Commandment can only be fulfilled in the Second Commandment, and the Second Commandment is only possible because of the First Commandment.
It is high time for the body of Christ to examine the world around us that is void of the Second Commandment and the effect, both corporately and individually, this has had upon the church. For assuredly, this problem is not isolated in the world; but within the ranks of Christianity, as well, we find a church bifurcated and lonely. Secondly, one must look at what the Second Commandment means, both from a theoretical and practical perspective. Thirdly, the relationship between revival and the Second Commandment must be examined if the church is ever to understand the path to revival and fulfilling the Kingdom of God. One will discover that the lack of revival and/or the blessings of God’s Kingdom here on earth are directly related to the fulfillment or the absence of the Second Commandment. Fourthly, the Word of God teaches that the First Commandment is fulfilled in obedience to the Second Commandment. This will further show that the fulfillment of the Law is accomplished by obedience to the Second Commandment and that the harsh, completely unachievable requirements and/or judgments of the Law fall upon each who reject, for whatever reason, obedience to the Second Commandment. Finally, the blessing and the eternal outcome of life are dependent on obedience to both the First and the Second Commandment. Obedience to the Second Commandment will greatly impact the 21st century church / community. The need for obedience to the Second Commandment is urgently felt in our day and will be greatly needed throughout the millennium ahead.[2]
A Christian World Without the Second Commandment
One of the biggest mistakes of modern Christianity is to equate ‘church’ with a building or a location. Long before the first building, the church existed in an upper room and the first outpouring of the Holy Ghost spilled out into the street (Acts 2). One of the first words to describe the church was the Greek word ekklesia, which refers to an assembly of people.[3] It is important to note that the word ekklesia was never used in the New Testament to refer to a building or place.[4] The term, ekklesia, was used three ways in the New Testament.[5] First, ekklesia is used in a secular sense meaning an assembly of people (Acts 19:32). Secondly, ekklesia is used to refer to the Israelites in the Wilderness (Acts 7:38). Thirdly, and by far the largest with over 100 references, it describes a group of believers without regards to a building or a geographic location. Stephen, instructed and ordained by the Apostle Peter, taught, “…the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands… (Acts 7:48).” The Apostle Paul followed up with a similar discourse when he asked the question, “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you (1 Corinthians 3:16)?” The people are God’s tabernacle in this world – a place where thirsty souls can find succor and sustenance.
The point, the church is not a building but rather an assembly of people (believers), is well proven; unfortunately though, most of ‘Christian’ America would describe the church (or a church) as a building. This leads to a major obstacle to the Second Commandment and, at the very least, creates a limit to where the church ‘is’. This explains why Americans are satisfied with doing church on Sunday morning and a few, more fanatical, Christians might attend ‘church’ three times a week. Many consider this paying their religious and/or social dues, and the rest of the time is theirs to do with as they see fit. When only two to six hours out of a one hundred and sixty-eight hour week is applied to ‘church’, this leaves a huge vacuum in which people do a lot of things but, almost never, the Second Commandment. This extremely small contribution to the First Commandment is the appeasement that allows the church to ignore the Second Commandment.
Even though Christians spend two to six hours together each week, the majority of this time is spent in organized worship and teaching or preaching, thus attempting to fulfill the First Commandment. This allows ‘maybe’ ten minutes per each two-hour segment in which we are to establish relationships and fulfill the Second Commandment. It is no wonder that Christians struggle to remember the names of the people with which they attend ‘church’. Divide this ten to thirty minutes a week among a church of one hundred regular attendees, and they have about 10 to 30 seconds to practice the Second Commandment on each person with whom they attend ‘church’. With only seconds to be friendly and obey the Second Commandment, very few bother. Solomon exhorted, “A man that hath friends must show himself friendly… (Proverbs 18:24).” However, with no time to be friendly with fellow Christians, few Christians have Christian friends. Many, because of their Christian beliefs, have few friends outside the ranks of Christianity. The bottom line is that Christians are lonely, and they may even be lonelier than their secular counter-parts; consequently, America’s pews are filled with strangers.
A convincing statement can be made that some may not be able to serve God faithfully for any length of time without a sense of community within the body of believers that the Second Commandment provides. Human beings are social beings and will look to satisfy this void in their lives. Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, clubs, billiard halls, gangs, schools, colleges, the military, and even prisons are all forms of community.[6] People join, or become part of, to be able to belong to something. Some even intentionally commit a crime for the express purpose of returning to the community of the prison. This misappropriation of community springs from the totality of one’s personal and social life being infected with self-centeredness.[7] Not being a part of something creates an emptiness that constantly desires to be filled. Many times young people leave the church because they do not feel like they belong to that ‘sour-faced bunch of boring old folk who sit around and do nothing.’ They want to belong, they want to have ownership, they want to have a part, and they want it to be relevant and meaningful.
Looking at the church from another perspective, we find that there are two kinds of churches in our world today. The first kind of church is a First Commandment church and their motivation is strictly in worshiping and loving God. The second kind of Church is a Second Commandment church and their main focus is social welfare without reform of the inward man. The important thing to note is that both church types are well founded in the Bible. What is needed in the Christian world today is a church that incorporates both the First Commandment and the Second Commandment into their church, their lives, and into their community.[8]
Foundations of the Second Commandment
(The Relationship of the Two Commandments)
One cannot fully comprehend the width and depth of the Second Commandment unless they understand the relationship between the first and the second. The First Commandment, which is the more palatable of the two, requires that we, “…love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind (Matthew 22:37).” However, at first glance it would seem that this passage does not give specific instructions on how to fulfill the First Commandment and is shrouded as an abstract proposition.[9] This seems to allow individual interpretation of the First Commandment and, consequently, one hears a wide variety of answers that range from total obedience to God to a total absorption into the things of God. When looking across ‘Christianity’ one will find that people walk on coals of fire, crawl on streets strewn with broken glass, dance for hours to the point of exhaustion, hang from crosses, and many other attempts in an effort to ‘love the Lord with all their might.’
The method with which we can fulfill the First Commandment is not as subjective or as hard to decipher as some may think. Quite the contrary, the only way to fulfill the First Commandment, which at first glance does seem to be shrouded in subjective terminology, is to obey the Second Commandment, which is to “…love thy neighbor as thyself (Matthew 22:40).” Jesus said it this way, when explaining why the faithful would go to heaven when they stood before the judgment throne of God, “Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me (Matthew 25:34-36).” The righteous were astonished and replied with the question; When did we do any of these things (Matthew 25:37-39)? Jesus’ reply here mirrors the Second Commandment when He tells the righteous, “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me (Matthew 25:40).” If one desires to love God with all of his heart, soul, and mind, the way to do this is by reading the First Commandment in context with the Second Commandment. Jesus knew how subject the First Commandment was for people limited by their humanity and provided a Second Commandment that is like unto the first (Matthew 22:39).
This Second Commandment did not dwell in subjectivity, but rather was specific with two very important standards. The first standard of the Second Commandment, which specified what must be done to love the Lord with all your heart, was to love one’s neighbor; the second standard, which specified how one was to love his neighbor, was to love the neighbor in the same manner in which one loves himself. For only when you have loved your neighbor (who could be the least of these) as yourself have you loved the Lord with all your heart, soul, and mind. Conversely, it is true, “Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me (Matthew 25:45). The punishment for not fulfilling the Second Commandment and the reward for loving your neighbor is equally as plain, “…these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal (Matthew 25:46). Craig Van Gelder said it this way, “The church is [the First Commandment]. The church does what it is [the Second Commandment]. The church organizes what it does [the combination of both].”[10]
It is equally important that one understands that the Second Commandment is not possible unless you truly do love the Lord with all your heart, soul, and mind. Empty and hollow neighborliness only propagates hard feelings and a sense of obligation among neighbors. However, when we are motivated to love our neighbors because of our consuming love of the Savior, community and fellowship are created. Neighbor-love is driven by the injunction of the First and the Second Commandments.[11] It is in such an atmosphere of unity between both commandments that God can work and change lives forever. It is a passionate love for God that motivates missionaries to forsake home, language, and culture to reach the ‘heathens’ in distant lands. Home missionaries forsake jobs, security, and personal safety to start churches in unchurched cities. It is the same love for God that should motivate Christians to shovel their neighbor’s walk, help him slaughter his hog, share a meal, or fellowship with him. Fairchild, of the 19th Century, is quoted as saying; “It is obvious that the second half of the Law is a delusion and a cheat if you erase the first half.”[12] The best thing a Christian can do for his neighbor is to be consumed by love for his Savior.
“Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you (Matthew 5:44).” Only when Christians are consumed with the First Commandment can they fulfill this extension of the Second Commandment. The Scriptures further warn that if Christians only love those who love back they are no different than non-Christians (Matthew 5:46-47). The core of Christian lifestyles should be Christian service to both fellow believers and unbelievers, even when they are hostile and mistreat us.[13] The children of the Father, who is perfect as He is perfect, love those that are least in this world (Matthew 5:45, 48). David built the mightiest army of his time on a foundation of 400 men who were the ‘least’ of his world (1 Samuel 22:2). They developed such a bond of community with David that they forsook what little they had and followed him. Jesus was thronged and followed by the least of His world until many criticized even those He ate with (Matthew 9:10-11). One radical difference between Jesus and other Judaism movements was His concern for the poor and marginalized.[14] It does not sound like much to start a church with, yet from this ragtag bunch of sinners (counted the least of their day) Christ built the biggest and most powerful church in the world. Two thousand years later Christ is still asking us to gather the least, through the Second Commandment, to Him, on whom He promised to pour out His Spirit (Acts 2:17). The Apostle Paul, who built the majority of the early Christian communities, did not conceive them as isolated and autonomous points of light, but rather as communities committed to partnership and collaboration.[15]
The concept of the First and Second Commandments is specifically presented in three of the gospels.[16] In the book of Mark it is presented as a double commandment with the accent of importance upon the First Commandment (Mark 12:28-34). However, contextually, the emphasis here is to prove that there is One God (verse 29) and not the fulfillment of the two commandments. Matthew presents the First and Second Commandments as two commandments of equal importance (Matthew 22:39-40). The contextual emphasis here is given in consideration of the two commandments as an interpretation of the Law, and Jesus demonstrates that if you have done these two commandments you have fulfilled the Law. In Luke we find the two commandments fused into one great commandment by a lawyer who is discussing with Jesus how one might inherit the Kingdom of God (Luke 10:25-28). The contextual emphasis here is summed up in the question of the lawyer, “Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life (verse 25)?” Each of these different contextual emphases could be discussed, but the important point here is to demonstrate the inseparable nature of the two commandments, regardless of the contextual setting. However, it is important to point out that in the context of this paper (how the Kingdom of God is acquired on earth) the example in Luke is the example of relevance. The two commandments must become one great commandment! “Too often Christians have failed to combine servanthood with truth.”[17] Any effort to separate these two commandments is, in essence, “doing violence to what God meant to be joined.”[18]
(The Neighbor Defined)
Throughout the New Testament the word ‘neighbor’ is translated from the Greek word pleôsion. Pleôsion, when used as an adverb, is translated ‘near’, (John 4:5) and when used as a noun, is translated ‘neighbor’, meaning one who is close by.[19] The Latin translation of this word further indicates a broadened understanding of the early church that would include everyone for whom the Christian is concerned, virtually all men.[20] Considering the commandment to love those who are close by as yourself, and also the commandment to love even your enemies, changes entirely the common thoughts on such relationships. “Your neighbor is, not your blood-relation only, not the circle of your acquaintance only, not your countryman or co-religionist only; but he or she whom you can help in any way whatsoever – the wretched tatterdemalion from the slightest contact with whom you shrink; the besotted and degraded; even your enemy, who hates you and despitefully uses you; him, her, mankind, you are to love.”[21]
The question, attempting to define one’s neighbor, is not a new question but was the same question asked of Jesus that precipitated the popular story of the Good Samaritan. “Who is my neighbor (Luke 10:29)?” In answering this question today, it is important that we notice the positional references illustrated in the parable. When the priest went “…that way and saw him he passed by on the other side (verse 31).” Next “…a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side (verse 32).” Finally, “…a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was… (verse 33).” The Good Samaritan found in the beaten man a man much like himself: alone, ignored, and rejected by those around him.[22] Although true neighborliness may go well beyond proximity[23] this is certainly the point that Jesus was making in the parable of the Good Samaritan. Even if not limited to proximity, proximity is an excellent place to start obeying the Second Commandment. Sometimes distance (i.e. foreign missions) is a distracter from the neighbor that is within a few feet, and this distracter can become a pacifier that prevents any involvement with those that are closer. It is easier to give fifty dollars to missions in the offering pan each month than it is to get ‘down and dirty’ in our own back yard. Jesus’ only references in this parable are to people that were close by (the neighbor).
In reference to evangelism, Rick Warren, pastor of one of America’s largest churches, teaches about five progressive circles of commitment, building from the community around us as the outer level and moving into the center core of ministerial leadership. The goal in evangelism is to progressively move people closer and closer to the center of the circle.[24] However, the idea of the inner circle of safety going cold turkey to the outer circle of insecurity with a Second Commandment mission is frightening and prohibitive to most. The main reason this is so frightening and foreign to most is because we are utilizing the ‘cold turkey’ approach. Most people are not comfortable outside their ‘comfort zone’. Therefore, it is necessary that we enlarge our comfort zones in incremental steps. Concerning obedience to the Second Commandment, it would be easier to begin by being a neighbor to those ‘familiar strangers’ that are sitting on the pew next to us on Sunday morning. After practicing and familiarizing yourself with the Second Commandment among friends, it will become less difficult to take it to the least of our community.
Jesus said it this way, “A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another (John 13:34-35).” Christians will be identified by non-Christians as Christians because of their love for others. “We must plead with our broken neighbors like weeping prophets, not denounce them like angry moralists. We must gently throw our arms around all those trapped in sin. Love them into the kingdom, and travel with them no matter what the cost in their journey toward wholeness in Christ.”[25] One homosexual said that only when Christians serve our needs and we feel their love would we know that they are Christians because servanthood should be the hallmark of Christianity.[26]
Jesus, after finishing the parable of the Good Samaritan, spoke to the lawyer and said, “Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbor unto him that fell among the thieves (Luke 10:36)?” Notice that no one that had not been there weighed into the discussion on who was the neighbor, only the three who had been in proximity (close by) with the wounded man. However, it is important to note that being close by was not enough to fulfill the Second Commandment. Rather, the lawyer answered and said that it was he that showed mercy on the Samaritan (Luke 10:36). So two identifiable ingredients are noted in fulfilling the Second Commandment: first you have to be there (proximity), and secondly, one must show mercy.
(The Depth of the Neighbor Relationship)
Jesus is the true neighbor; neighborliness is part of the incarnate nature of God.[27] It would be just as impossible to understand Jesus without being a good neighbor as it would to separate the Father from the Son. “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends (John 15:13).” Surely laying down one’s life is the total sum of being a neighbor and, “If any man will come after [the true neighbor], let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow [Jesus] (Matthew 16:24).” The original sin was not eating the fruit, but it was the determination that Adam and Eve were going to do their own will. From that time until now, sin can be defined as selfishness (nobody, even God, is going to tell me what to do). This self-centeredness is what blinds the church today and keeps it from fulfilling the Second Commandment. If the church is ever going to deny herself and take up her responsibility (cross) to the world, she must start with the second commandment. The church’s responsibility is to do God’s will, and it is God’s will that the church becomes a better neighbor.
Let there be no mistake, the Second Commandment was not, and is not today, a suggestion. Repeatedly, throughout both the New and the Old Testament, loving your neighbor is referred to as a commandment. The very nature of a commandment is that the injunction is to be obeyed almost without question. Jesus spoke to the lawyer who stated that both the First and the Second Commandment was the requirement to obtain the Kingdom of God and said, “Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live (Luke 10:28).” There is an urgent call to obedience that runs throughout the New Testament for the church to love its neighbors like Christ did – “daily, persistently, practically. Jesus modeled servanthood, self-sacrifice, and special concern for the poor and neglected.”[28] His command to us was, “Go, and do thou likewise (Luke 10:40).”
The Relationship Between the Second Commandment and Revival / the Kingdom of God
Revival is the reviving of that which is almost or completely dead. The indication one gets from the word revival is that at one time there was a born-again child of God who has either grown cold or turned their back on God and needs reviving. Revival is not what happens when there are brand new babies in Christ Jesus. This I will refer to as the Kingdom of God in action. In this Kingdom we have a Father (God) who loves the Mother (the Church) and we all know what happens when a healthy father loves a healthy mother: they have healthy children. It does not take much planning or a certain program: it just happens. It is safe to assume that there is nothing wrong with the Father in this illustration; He has always been healthy. So, if there is nothing wrong with the Father, there must be something wrong with the Mother. Maybe the Mother has stood up the Father on too many dates lately? You see, the Mother thought the date was at the church on Sunday night, and the Father thought the date was at the neighbors (who just happen to be the least) on Monday night. So, while the Mother was dancing on Sunday night, the Father was weeping for the unborn baby in the house on the other side of the tracks. The end result was this: one healthy Father plus one (maybe even healthy but misguided and misplaced) mother equals no babies. The law of procreation requires the date to at least be in the same location.
A similar analogy can be made with revival; only the issue in revival is not that babies are not being born, but rather that the Mother is about to die. The Father has the answer, the Father has the medicine, and the Father wants to fellowship, yet where is the Mother? The way to love the Father (the First Commandment) is to love the neighbor (the Second Commandment), therefore, “…let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching (Hebrews 10:24-25).” If the church needs reviving and desires to have children, the church needs to start obeying the First Commandment by doing the Second Commandment.
How can anyone “…taste and see that the LORD is good (Psalm 34:8)” if they never see the church in action? Jesus said, “Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing… Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid. …Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven (Matthew 5:12-16).” If the world is ever to see the ‘Light of the Gospel’ they must see the light when the church is being a neighbor. For too long the church has hidden her candle inside of buildings and within the confines of her own homes. We were not created for isolation and individuality but rather we were, “…created in Christ Jesus unto good works (Ephesians 2:10).” The world will respond to the ‘Light of the Gospel’ in the same manner one responds to salt. The response is almost automatic; salt is either enjoyed and cherished or spit out and hated.
If the church is to see either, or both, revival and the Kingdom of God in action today, it will be when the church understands that the eye of the world is upon the church (and it should be). The spiritual growth of converts and the inquisitive is all but impossible unless we spur one another towards Christian love and being a good neighbor.[29] The Church has a responsibility to the evildoers because, by the help of God, the evildoers may be the good works of the church, and the evildoers will glorify God when they see the results of the Second Commandment in their lives (1 Peter 2:12). Furthermore, we must maintain good works because good works (the Second Commandment) are profitable unto all men (Titus 3:8).
The Relationship Between the Second Commandment and the Law
Among most mainstream Christian movements, including the United Pentecostal Church,[30] it has been well established that we are not under the Law, but under Grace.[31] The Apostle Paul repeatedly expostulated, “…ye are not under the law, but under grace… (Romans 6:14, Romans 10:4, Galatians 3:5, Acts 15:5).” It is often heard that the Law is finished and fulfilled, but rarely do we hear or see a study on how it was and is fulfilled. If you were to ask most (myself included two years ago) when and/or how this took place, they would simply say it happened at Calvary. While this is true, it is not a complete enough answer. On Calvary hung the greatest Neighbor that had ever lived, and Calvary was the greatest act of neighborliness that the world has ever seen. “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends (John 15:13).” Jesus was the perfect model of the Second Commandment, both before and while on the cross, and our attitude should be the same as Christ Jesus’.[32] “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant… (Philippians 2:5-7).”
Paul reaffirmed the fulfillment of the Law, both from Jesus’ demonstration of love on the cross and within Christianity today, by the Christian’s love for his neighbor when he wrote, “For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself (Galatians 5:14).” James, the brother of Jesus and the first bishop of Jerusalem, wrote, “If ye fulfill the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, ye do well (James 2:8).” The Law of Moses, although finished at Calvary, written on “…tables of stone,” was replaced with a new commandment when the Spirit of God wrote, “…in fleshy tables of the heart (2 Corinthians 3:3).” The Spirit of a Holy God enables Christians to love their neighbors in the same manner in which they love themselves, thus fulfilling the goal of the Law of Moses.
The goal of the Law of Moses could be split into two major parts. The first part of Moses’ Law is exemplified in the First Commandment Jesus mentions in the New Testament, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment (Matthew 22:37).” This first part deals with our relationship with God. Jesus also mentions the second part of Moses’ Law in the same passage, “…the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets (Matthew 22:40).” The second part of Moses’ Law deals with our relationship with others, and Moses used over six hundred laws (rules) to show the children of Israel how they should be a good neighbor. However, Paul stated, “…all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself [the Second Commandment] (Galatians 5:14).” This further shows the truth in what was discussed earlier: only when you have loved your neighbor (who could be the least of the Kingdom) as yourself, have you loved the Lord with all your heart, soul, and mind.
Paul wrote to the Romans who were finding it difficult to love their neighbor across the line between Jews and Gentiles. The Jews wanted the Gentiles to follow the Law of Moses, even though no man had ever been justified by the Law (Romans 3:20). Paul reminded the Jews and the Gentiles of Rome, in the closing of his book to the Romans, that they did not owe (neither should they require of each other) anything except love (Romans 13:8). Paul then quoted several of the original Laws of Moses and summed it up by saying, “…if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. Love worketh no ill to his neighbor: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law (Romans 13:9-10).”
A certain ruler came to Jesus one day and “…asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life (Luke 18:18)?” Jesus then quizzed him about his adherence to the Law of Moses. The young ruler was proud to be able to claim that he had kept all the Law from his youth up. However, the man turned away sorrowfully when Jesus said, “Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me (Luke 18:22).” The man’s problem was not that he had money, but rather that he would not love his neighbor as he loved himself. The rich men of Jesus’ time stepped over and around beggars on a daily basis. The rich young ruler could follow the letter of the Law, but not the spirit or intent of the Law. Many will stand in judgment someday with all of the boxes checked off and hear Jesus say, ‘Yet lackest thou one thing…’ or as Jesus warned in the Gospel of Matthew, “Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment… (Matthew 25:45-46).”
The Value of the Second Commandment
One of the main motivational factors behind Christians ‘serving’ the Lord is to make Heaven their eternal home. Christians are longing for the day when they will hear their Savior say, “Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful… (Matthew 25:21).” When one stops and realizes that the Second Commandment is a tangible requirement for Heaven and for loving God with all your heart, loving our neighbor suddenly leaps in value and is brought from the back burner to a rightful place of prominence in the Christian’s life. There should be little doubt, by this point, as to the basic requirement of the Second Commandment and one’s eventual residence in Heaven.
However, not all of the rewards of the Second Commandment are eternal rewards; there are many immediate rewards. The most valuable reward connected to the Second Commandment, which also has eternal implications, is the reward of the reviving of dying Christians and the birth of new Christians into the body of Christ. This has been well established in the section above entitled, “The Relationship Between the Second Commandment and Revival / the Kingdom of God.” Therefore, I will not recapitulate what has already been written other than to remind the reader of the immense value of the Second Commandment to the future of the church. David Bernard, a church growth expert, states that 85% of all converts come from personal relationships.[33] “The very existence of the church [should] demonstrates to the world the truthfulness of the gospel of grace, forgiveness, and reconciliation.”[34] It is time for the church to break out of her isolationism into the Second Commandment.
The law of the harvest is, “…whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap (Galatians 6:7)” and the law of judgment is, “with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again (Matthew 7:2).” These laws bring further value to the Second Commandment and are illustrated in the life of Dorcas. When Dorcas died, the widows that she had loved and been a good neighbor to stood by, “…weeping, and showing the coats and garments which Dorcas made, while she was with them (Acts 9:39).” God heard their weeping, and Peter came from Joppa to pray for Dorcas. After Peter had prayed, he presented her back to her neighbors alive; consequently, many more belived on the Lord Jesus because of her testimony (Acts 9:41-42). In a time when you are in need of prayer, succor, food, or comfort, those that flock to you will be your neighbors, and their response will be in direct proportion to your obedience to the Second Commandment.
Not only will obedience to the Second Commandment reap dividends for the Christian, but it will reap rewards within his circle of influence. Entire churches will reap the benefits of a few consumed with a love for God demonstrated to their neighbors. Families and family members will be saved and blessed because of the example one will demonstrate in obedience to the Second Commandment. “Joshua saved Rahab the harlot alive, and her father’s household, and all that she had; and she dwelleth in Israel even unto this day; because she hid the messengers, which Joshua sent to spy out Jericho (Joshua 6:25).” Her willingness to be a neighbor to strangers earned her a spot in the linage of Jesus Christ. One young boy shared his small lunch with five thousand men and their wives and children. Because of this boy’s willingness to be a neighbor, a miracle happened and over ten thousand people benefited from a single act of the Second Commandment (John 6:1-14). For far too long the church experience has been isolated to preaching, singing, and going to church services. It is high time that the ‘other half’ of the church becomes part of the important functions of the church as well, such as fellowshipping, discipling, serving, sharing, and being an example to our communities.[35]
Go, and Do Thou Likewise
Even though the Christian world has mirrored the world of individualism and isolation, there is a movement within the body of Christ that is heading back to the Second Commandment. Stephen Macchia listed community (the Second Commandment) as the fourth characteristic of ten if the church is to become a healthy church.[36] No longer will the church focus only on the First Commandment, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind (Matthew 22:37).” The Church is coming to understand that the only way to respond to the First Commandment is through obedience to the Second Commandment, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself (Matthew 22:39).” The church must look around herself at her positional relationships and reach out with the love of Christ emanating to those around her. When the Law of Moses is fulfilled in the church’s love for her neighbor, the Kingdom of God shall be in action and the church will experience revival and growth like has never been seen since the beginning of the church age. When the church loves her neighbor as herself, there will no longer be a need, within the church, for governmental social welfare programs. The Second Commandment will even lessen the need for governmental social welfare outside the church because the Second Commandment is not isolated to neighbors within the church but is extended to the very least of our enemies. After Jesus had identified for the lawyer who his neighbor was, he commanded the lawyer, “Go, and do thou likewise (Luke 10:37).” This writing would be a failure if the readers did not feel compelled to do the same. My prayer is this: that all would hear, myself included, the echoing of the words of our Lord. Go and love your neighbor as yourself; then I will feel your fervent love for Me. Go…
Footnotes
[1] Randy Frazee, The Connecting Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2001), 24.
[2] Jean-Marie Cardinal Lustiger, “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity,” First Things (1997): 38-45.
[3] J. D. Douglas, The New International Dictionary of the Christian Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Corporation, 1978), 226.
[4] Chester Wright, The Missing Half of the Church, (Gaithersburg, Maryland: Antioch Publishes the Word, 1989), 25.
[5] J. L. Hall, Doctrines of the Bible, (Hazelwood, Missouri: World Aflame Press, 2000), 211-212.
[6] Randy Frazee, The Connecting Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2001), 196.
[7] Elmer G Homrighausen, “Who is My Neighbor,” Interpretations (2002): 403.
[8] Craig Ban Gelder, The Essence of the Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 2000), 27-37.
[9] H.D. M. Spence, ed., The Pulpit Commentary, Vol. 15, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: WM. B. Eerdman’s Publishing Company, 1950), 366.
[10] Craig Ban Gelder, The Essence of the Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 2000), 37.
[11] Stephen Post, “The Purpose of Neighbor-Love,” Journal of Religious Ethics 18 (2001): 182.
[12] Ibid, 184.
[13] Craig Ban Gelder, The Essence of the Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 2000), 153.
[14] Ronald J. Sider, Living Like Jesus, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 1996), 35.
[15] James F. Engel and William A. Dyrness, Changing the Mind of Missions: Where Have We Gone Wrong, (Grand Dover Gove, Illinois: Inter Varsity Press, 2000), 96.
[16] Victor Paul Funish,, Love of Neighbor in the New Testament, (Journal of Religious Ethics: October 2002), 330-331.
[17] Ronald J. Sider, Living Like Jesus, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 1996), 169.
[18] Elmer G Homrighausen, “Who is My Neighbor” Interpretations (2001): 401.
[19] James Strong, The Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, (Cedar Rapids, Iowa: Parsons Technology Inc., 1998), G4139.
[20] H.D. M. Spence, ed, The Pulpit Commentary, Vol. 15, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: WM. B. Eerdman’s Publishing Company, 1950), 366.
[21] H.D. M. Spence, ed, The Pulpit Commentary, Vol. 16, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: WM. B. Eerdman’s Publishing Company, 1950), 283.
[22] Arlene Swidler, “The Forgotten Neighbor,” Journal of Ecumenical Studies 4 (2002): 722.
[23] Elmer G Homrighausen, “Who is My Neighbor,” Interpretations (2001): 407.
[24] Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1995), 129.
[25] Ronald J. Sider, Living Like Jesus, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 1996), 177.
[26] Ibid.
[27] Elmer G Homrighausen, “Who is My Neighbor,” Interpretations (2001): 407.
[28] Ronald J. Sider, Living Like Jesus, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 1996), 32-34.
[29] James F. Engel and William A. Dyrness, Changing the Mind of Missions: Where Have We Gone Wrong, (Grand Dover Gove, Illinois: Inter Varsity Press, 2000), 103.
[30] David K. Bernard, Understanding the Articles of Faith, (Hazelwood, Missouri: World Aflame Press, 1998), 22-23, 34-35.
[31] Daniel L. Seagraves, Themes From a Letter to Rome, (Hazelwood, Missouri: World Aflame Press, 1995), 80-81.
[32] Ronald J. Sider, Living Like Jesus, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 1996), 172.
[33] David K. Bernard, Growing a Church, (Hazelwood, Missouri: World Aflame Press, 2001), 227.
[34] Craig Ban Gelder, The Essence of the Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 2000), 112.
[35] Craig Ban Gelder, The Essence of the Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 2000), 57.
[36] Stephen A. Macchia, Becoming a Healthy Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 1999), 77-93.
America has embraced the doctrine of individuality, and our individuality has spawned loneliness and isolationism. The doctrine of individuality has not been isolated to the heathen world and denominationalism, but has permeated throughout all of Christianity from the pulpit to the pews and from Catholics to Pentecostals. Not only do Americans not know their neighbors on either side of one’s home, but many do not know the person sitting on the pew nearby on Sunday morning. The Christian slogan for the end of the 20th Century was, “Me and Jesus got our own thing going.” We are not just going to the grocery store and the post office alone, but we are going to church alone and going home even more lonely, wondering at that empty, unfulfilled feeling that goes with us throughout our lonely lives. We have drive-through fast food, drive-through cleaners, drive-through pharmacies, and now we even have drive-through churches. We claim to know God and to love Him, yet something is still wrong…
We are part of a Christian world that has become very comfortable with the First Commandment (at least as far as we understand it) that commands us to love God with all of our heart, all of our soul, and all of our mind (Matthew 22:37). We worship God with exuberance: running, leaping, and shouting for joy at the knowledge of our God. We are blessed beyond measure with the revelation of truth. We have utilized the understanding of one God to justify worshiping until we literally drop in exhaustion on the floor. However, many still go home to a long, lonely week waiting for another weekend service to give it all they’ve got for another couple hours. Wondering about the emptiness of the week and the loneliness of the nights…
This myopic view of the First Commandment, to the complete exclusion of the Second Commandment, does not fulfill the First Commandment, and the end result of isolating the First Commandment from the Second Commandment is loneliness. Rather, the First Commandment can only be fulfilled in the Second Commandment, and the Second Commandment is only possible because of the First Commandment.
It is high time for the body of Christ to examine the world around us that is void of the Second Commandment and the effect, both corporately and individually, this has had upon the church. For assuredly, this problem is not isolated in the world; but within the ranks of Christianity, as well, we find a church bifurcated and lonely. Secondly, one must look at what the Second Commandment means, both from a theoretical and practical perspective. Thirdly, the relationship between revival and the Second Commandment must be examined if the church is ever to understand the path to revival and fulfilling the Kingdom of God. One will discover that the lack of revival and/or the blessings of God’s Kingdom here on earth are directly related to the fulfillment or the absence of the Second Commandment. Fourthly, the Word of God teaches that the First Commandment is fulfilled in obedience to the Second Commandment. This will further show that the fulfillment of the Law is accomplished by obedience to the Second Commandment and that the harsh, completely unachievable requirements and/or judgments of the Law fall upon each who reject, for whatever reason, obedience to the Second Commandment. Finally, the blessing and the eternal outcome of life are dependent on obedience to both the First and the Second Commandment. Obedience to the Second Commandment will greatly impact the 21st century church / community. The need for obedience to the Second Commandment is urgently felt in our day and will be greatly needed throughout the millennium ahead.[2]
A Christian World Without the Second Commandment
One of the biggest mistakes of modern Christianity is to equate ‘church’ with a building or a location. Long before the first building, the church existed in an upper room and the first outpouring of the Holy Ghost spilled out into the street (Acts 2). One of the first words to describe the church was the Greek word ekklesia, which refers to an assembly of people.[3] It is important to note that the word ekklesia was never used in the New Testament to refer to a building or place.[4] The term, ekklesia, was used three ways in the New Testament.[5] First, ekklesia is used in a secular sense meaning an assembly of people (Acts 19:32). Secondly, ekklesia is used to refer to the Israelites in the Wilderness (Acts 7:38). Thirdly, and by far the largest with over 100 references, it describes a group of believers without regards to a building or a geographic location. Stephen, instructed and ordained by the Apostle Peter, taught, “…the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands… (Acts 7:48).” The Apostle Paul followed up with a similar discourse when he asked the question, “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you (1 Corinthians 3:16)?” The people are God’s tabernacle in this world – a place where thirsty souls can find succor and sustenance.
The point, the church is not a building but rather an assembly of people (believers), is well proven; unfortunately though, most of ‘Christian’ America would describe the church (or a church) as a building. This leads to a major obstacle to the Second Commandment and, at the very least, creates a limit to where the church ‘is’. This explains why Americans are satisfied with doing church on Sunday morning and a few, more fanatical, Christians might attend ‘church’ three times a week. Many consider this paying their religious and/or social dues, and the rest of the time is theirs to do with as they see fit. When only two to six hours out of a one hundred and sixty-eight hour week is applied to ‘church’, this leaves a huge vacuum in which people do a lot of things but, almost never, the Second Commandment. This extremely small contribution to the First Commandment is the appeasement that allows the church to ignore the Second Commandment.
Even though Christians spend two to six hours together each week, the majority of this time is spent in organized worship and teaching or preaching, thus attempting to fulfill the First Commandment. This allows ‘maybe’ ten minutes per each two-hour segment in which we are to establish relationships and fulfill the Second Commandment. It is no wonder that Christians struggle to remember the names of the people with which they attend ‘church’. Divide this ten to thirty minutes a week among a church of one hundred regular attendees, and they have about 10 to 30 seconds to practice the Second Commandment on each person with whom they attend ‘church’. With only seconds to be friendly and obey the Second Commandment, very few bother. Solomon exhorted, “A man that hath friends must show himself friendly… (Proverbs 18:24).” However, with no time to be friendly with fellow Christians, few Christians have Christian friends. Many, because of their Christian beliefs, have few friends outside the ranks of Christianity. The bottom line is that Christians are lonely, and they may even be lonelier than their secular counter-parts; consequently, America’s pews are filled with strangers.
A convincing statement can be made that some may not be able to serve God faithfully for any length of time without a sense of community within the body of believers that the Second Commandment provides. Human beings are social beings and will look to satisfy this void in their lives. Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, clubs, billiard halls, gangs, schools, colleges, the military, and even prisons are all forms of community.[6] People join, or become part of, to be able to belong to something. Some even intentionally commit a crime for the express purpose of returning to the community of the prison. This misappropriation of community springs from the totality of one’s personal and social life being infected with self-centeredness.[7] Not being a part of something creates an emptiness that constantly desires to be filled. Many times young people leave the church because they do not feel like they belong to that ‘sour-faced bunch of boring old folk who sit around and do nothing.’ They want to belong, they want to have ownership, they want to have a part, and they want it to be relevant and meaningful.
Looking at the church from another perspective, we find that there are two kinds of churches in our world today. The first kind of church is a First Commandment church and their motivation is strictly in worshiping and loving God. The second kind of Church is a Second Commandment church and their main focus is social welfare without reform of the inward man. The important thing to note is that both church types are well founded in the Bible. What is needed in the Christian world today is a church that incorporates both the First Commandment and the Second Commandment into their church, their lives, and into their community.[8]
Foundations of the Second Commandment
(The Relationship of the Two Commandments)
One cannot fully comprehend the width and depth of the Second Commandment unless they understand the relationship between the first and the second. The First Commandment, which is the more palatable of the two, requires that we, “…love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind (Matthew 22:37).” However, at first glance it would seem that this passage does not give specific instructions on how to fulfill the First Commandment and is shrouded as an abstract proposition.[9] This seems to allow individual interpretation of the First Commandment and, consequently, one hears a wide variety of answers that range from total obedience to God to a total absorption into the things of God. When looking across ‘Christianity’ one will find that people walk on coals of fire, crawl on streets strewn with broken glass, dance for hours to the point of exhaustion, hang from crosses, and many other attempts in an effort to ‘love the Lord with all their might.’
The method with which we can fulfill the First Commandment is not as subjective or as hard to decipher as some may think. Quite the contrary, the only way to fulfill the First Commandment, which at first glance does seem to be shrouded in subjective terminology, is to obey the Second Commandment, which is to “…love thy neighbor as thyself (Matthew 22:40).” Jesus said it this way, when explaining why the faithful would go to heaven when they stood before the judgment throne of God, “Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me (Matthew 25:34-36).” The righteous were astonished and replied with the question; When did we do any of these things (Matthew 25:37-39)? Jesus’ reply here mirrors the Second Commandment when He tells the righteous, “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me (Matthew 25:40).” If one desires to love God with all of his heart, soul, and mind, the way to do this is by reading the First Commandment in context with the Second Commandment. Jesus knew how subject the First Commandment was for people limited by their humanity and provided a Second Commandment that is like unto the first (Matthew 22:39).
This Second Commandment did not dwell in subjectivity, but rather was specific with two very important standards. The first standard of the Second Commandment, which specified what must be done to love the Lord with all your heart, was to love one’s neighbor; the second standard, which specified how one was to love his neighbor, was to love the neighbor in the same manner in which one loves himself. For only when you have loved your neighbor (who could be the least of these) as yourself have you loved the Lord with all your heart, soul, and mind. Conversely, it is true, “Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me (Matthew 25:45). The punishment for not fulfilling the Second Commandment and the reward for loving your neighbor is equally as plain, “…these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal (Matthew 25:46). Craig Van Gelder said it this way, “The church is [the First Commandment]. The church does what it is [the Second Commandment]. The church organizes what it does [the combination of both].”[10]
It is equally important that one understands that the Second Commandment is not possible unless you truly do love the Lord with all your heart, soul, and mind. Empty and hollow neighborliness only propagates hard feelings and a sense of obligation among neighbors. However, when we are motivated to love our neighbors because of our consuming love of the Savior, community and fellowship are created. Neighbor-love is driven by the injunction of the First and the Second Commandments.[11] It is in such an atmosphere of unity between both commandments that God can work and change lives forever. It is a passionate love for God that motivates missionaries to forsake home, language, and culture to reach the ‘heathens’ in distant lands. Home missionaries forsake jobs, security, and personal safety to start churches in unchurched cities. It is the same love for God that should motivate Christians to shovel their neighbor’s walk, help him slaughter his hog, share a meal, or fellowship with him. Fairchild, of the 19th Century, is quoted as saying; “It is obvious that the second half of the Law is a delusion and a cheat if you erase the first half.”[12] The best thing a Christian can do for his neighbor is to be consumed by love for his Savior.
“Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you (Matthew 5:44).” Only when Christians are consumed with the First Commandment can they fulfill this extension of the Second Commandment. The Scriptures further warn that if Christians only love those who love back they are no different than non-Christians (Matthew 5:46-47). The core of Christian lifestyles should be Christian service to both fellow believers and unbelievers, even when they are hostile and mistreat us.[13] The children of the Father, who is perfect as He is perfect, love those that are least in this world (Matthew 5:45, 48). David built the mightiest army of his time on a foundation of 400 men who were the ‘least’ of his world (1 Samuel 22:2). They developed such a bond of community with David that they forsook what little they had and followed him. Jesus was thronged and followed by the least of His world until many criticized even those He ate with (Matthew 9:10-11). One radical difference between Jesus and other Judaism movements was His concern for the poor and marginalized.[14] It does not sound like much to start a church with, yet from this ragtag bunch of sinners (counted the least of their day) Christ built the biggest and most powerful church in the world. Two thousand years later Christ is still asking us to gather the least, through the Second Commandment, to Him, on whom He promised to pour out His Spirit (Acts 2:17). The Apostle Paul, who built the majority of the early Christian communities, did not conceive them as isolated and autonomous points of light, but rather as communities committed to partnership and collaboration.[15]
The concept of the First and Second Commandments is specifically presented in three of the gospels.[16] In the book of Mark it is presented as a double commandment with the accent of importance upon the First Commandment (Mark 12:28-34). However, contextually, the emphasis here is to prove that there is One God (verse 29) and not the fulfillment of the two commandments. Matthew presents the First and Second Commandments as two commandments of equal importance (Matthew 22:39-40). The contextual emphasis here is given in consideration of the two commandments as an interpretation of the Law, and Jesus demonstrates that if you have done these two commandments you have fulfilled the Law. In Luke we find the two commandments fused into one great commandment by a lawyer who is discussing with Jesus how one might inherit the Kingdom of God (Luke 10:25-28). The contextual emphasis here is summed up in the question of the lawyer, “Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life (verse 25)?” Each of these different contextual emphases could be discussed, but the important point here is to demonstrate the inseparable nature of the two commandments, regardless of the contextual setting. However, it is important to point out that in the context of this paper (how the Kingdom of God is acquired on earth) the example in Luke is the example of relevance. The two commandments must become one great commandment! “Too often Christians have failed to combine servanthood with truth.”[17] Any effort to separate these two commandments is, in essence, “doing violence to what God meant to be joined.”[18]
(The Neighbor Defined)
Throughout the New Testament the word ‘neighbor’ is translated from the Greek word pleôsion. Pleôsion, when used as an adverb, is translated ‘near’, (John 4:5) and when used as a noun, is translated ‘neighbor’, meaning one who is close by.[19] The Latin translation of this word further indicates a broadened understanding of the early church that would include everyone for whom the Christian is concerned, virtually all men.[20] Considering the commandment to love those who are close by as yourself, and also the commandment to love even your enemies, changes entirely the common thoughts on such relationships. “Your neighbor is, not your blood-relation only, not the circle of your acquaintance only, not your countryman or co-religionist only; but he or she whom you can help in any way whatsoever – the wretched tatterdemalion from the slightest contact with whom you shrink; the besotted and degraded; even your enemy, who hates you and despitefully uses you; him, her, mankind, you are to love.”[21]
The question, attempting to define one’s neighbor, is not a new question but was the same question asked of Jesus that precipitated the popular story of the Good Samaritan. “Who is my neighbor (Luke 10:29)?” In answering this question today, it is important that we notice the positional references illustrated in the parable. When the priest went “…that way and saw him he passed by on the other side (verse 31).” Next “…a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side (verse 32).” Finally, “…a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was… (verse 33).” The Good Samaritan found in the beaten man a man much like himself: alone, ignored, and rejected by those around him.[22] Although true neighborliness may go well beyond proximity[23] this is certainly the point that Jesus was making in the parable of the Good Samaritan. Even if not limited to proximity, proximity is an excellent place to start obeying the Second Commandment. Sometimes distance (i.e. foreign missions) is a distracter from the neighbor that is within a few feet, and this distracter can become a pacifier that prevents any involvement with those that are closer. It is easier to give fifty dollars to missions in the offering pan each month than it is to get ‘down and dirty’ in our own back yard. Jesus’ only references in this parable are to people that were close by (the neighbor).
In reference to evangelism, Rick Warren, pastor of one of America’s largest churches, teaches about five progressive circles of commitment, building from the community around us as the outer level and moving into the center core of ministerial leadership. The goal in evangelism is to progressively move people closer and closer to the center of the circle.[24] However, the idea of the inner circle of safety going cold turkey to the outer circle of insecurity with a Second Commandment mission is frightening and prohibitive to most. The main reason this is so frightening and foreign to most is because we are utilizing the ‘cold turkey’ approach. Most people are not comfortable outside their ‘comfort zone’. Therefore, it is necessary that we enlarge our comfort zones in incremental steps. Concerning obedience to the Second Commandment, it would be easier to begin by being a neighbor to those ‘familiar strangers’ that are sitting on the pew next to us on Sunday morning. After practicing and familiarizing yourself with the Second Commandment among friends, it will become less difficult to take it to the least of our community.
Jesus said it this way, “A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another (John 13:34-35).” Christians will be identified by non-Christians as Christians because of their love for others. “We must plead with our broken neighbors like weeping prophets, not denounce them like angry moralists. We must gently throw our arms around all those trapped in sin. Love them into the kingdom, and travel with them no matter what the cost in their journey toward wholeness in Christ.”[25] One homosexual said that only when Christians serve our needs and we feel their love would we know that they are Christians because servanthood should be the hallmark of Christianity.[26]
Jesus, after finishing the parable of the Good Samaritan, spoke to the lawyer and said, “Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbor unto him that fell among the thieves (Luke 10:36)?” Notice that no one that had not been there weighed into the discussion on who was the neighbor, only the three who had been in proximity (close by) with the wounded man. However, it is important to note that being close by was not enough to fulfill the Second Commandment. Rather, the lawyer answered and said that it was he that showed mercy on the Samaritan (Luke 10:36). So two identifiable ingredients are noted in fulfilling the Second Commandment: first you have to be there (proximity), and secondly, one must show mercy.
(The Depth of the Neighbor Relationship)
Jesus is the true neighbor; neighborliness is part of the incarnate nature of God.[27] It would be just as impossible to understand Jesus without being a good neighbor as it would to separate the Father from the Son. “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends (John 15:13).” Surely laying down one’s life is the total sum of being a neighbor and, “If any man will come after [the true neighbor], let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow [Jesus] (Matthew 16:24).” The original sin was not eating the fruit, but it was the determination that Adam and Eve were going to do their own will. From that time until now, sin can be defined as selfishness (nobody, even God, is going to tell me what to do). This self-centeredness is what blinds the church today and keeps it from fulfilling the Second Commandment. If the church is ever going to deny herself and take up her responsibility (cross) to the world, she must start with the second commandment. The church’s responsibility is to do God’s will, and it is God’s will that the church becomes a better neighbor.
Let there be no mistake, the Second Commandment was not, and is not today, a suggestion. Repeatedly, throughout both the New and the Old Testament, loving your neighbor is referred to as a commandment. The very nature of a commandment is that the injunction is to be obeyed almost without question. Jesus spoke to the lawyer who stated that both the First and the Second Commandment was the requirement to obtain the Kingdom of God and said, “Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live (Luke 10:28).” There is an urgent call to obedience that runs throughout the New Testament for the church to love its neighbors like Christ did – “daily, persistently, practically. Jesus modeled servanthood, self-sacrifice, and special concern for the poor and neglected.”[28] His command to us was, “Go, and do thou likewise (Luke 10:40).”
The Relationship Between the Second Commandment and Revival / the Kingdom of God
Revival is the reviving of that which is almost or completely dead. The indication one gets from the word revival is that at one time there was a born-again child of God who has either grown cold or turned their back on God and needs reviving. Revival is not what happens when there are brand new babies in Christ Jesus. This I will refer to as the Kingdom of God in action. In this Kingdom we have a Father (God) who loves the Mother (the Church) and we all know what happens when a healthy father loves a healthy mother: they have healthy children. It does not take much planning or a certain program: it just happens. It is safe to assume that there is nothing wrong with the Father in this illustration; He has always been healthy. So, if there is nothing wrong with the Father, there must be something wrong with the Mother. Maybe the Mother has stood up the Father on too many dates lately? You see, the Mother thought the date was at the church on Sunday night, and the Father thought the date was at the neighbors (who just happen to be the least) on Monday night. So, while the Mother was dancing on Sunday night, the Father was weeping for the unborn baby in the house on the other side of the tracks. The end result was this: one healthy Father plus one (maybe even healthy but misguided and misplaced) mother equals no babies. The law of procreation requires the date to at least be in the same location.
A similar analogy can be made with revival; only the issue in revival is not that babies are not being born, but rather that the Mother is about to die. The Father has the answer, the Father has the medicine, and the Father wants to fellowship, yet where is the Mother? The way to love the Father (the First Commandment) is to love the neighbor (the Second Commandment), therefore, “…let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching (Hebrews 10:24-25).” If the church needs reviving and desires to have children, the church needs to start obeying the First Commandment by doing the Second Commandment.
How can anyone “…taste and see that the LORD is good (Psalm 34:8)” if they never see the church in action? Jesus said, “Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing… Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid. …Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven (Matthew 5:12-16).” If the world is ever to see the ‘Light of the Gospel’ they must see the light when the church is being a neighbor. For too long the church has hidden her candle inside of buildings and within the confines of her own homes. We were not created for isolation and individuality but rather we were, “…created in Christ Jesus unto good works (Ephesians 2:10).” The world will respond to the ‘Light of the Gospel’ in the same manner one responds to salt. The response is almost automatic; salt is either enjoyed and cherished or spit out and hated.
If the church is to see either, or both, revival and the Kingdom of God in action today, it will be when the church understands that the eye of the world is upon the church (and it should be). The spiritual growth of converts and the inquisitive is all but impossible unless we spur one another towards Christian love and being a good neighbor.[29] The Church has a responsibility to the evildoers because, by the help of God, the evildoers may be the good works of the church, and the evildoers will glorify God when they see the results of the Second Commandment in their lives (1 Peter 2:12). Furthermore, we must maintain good works because good works (the Second Commandment) are profitable unto all men (Titus 3:8).
The Relationship Between the Second Commandment and the Law
Among most mainstream Christian movements, including the United Pentecostal Church,[30] it has been well established that we are not under the Law, but under Grace.[31] The Apostle Paul repeatedly expostulated, “…ye are not under the law, but under grace… (Romans 6:14, Romans 10:4, Galatians 3:5, Acts 15:5).” It is often heard that the Law is finished and fulfilled, but rarely do we hear or see a study on how it was and is fulfilled. If you were to ask most (myself included two years ago) when and/or how this took place, they would simply say it happened at Calvary. While this is true, it is not a complete enough answer. On Calvary hung the greatest Neighbor that had ever lived, and Calvary was the greatest act of neighborliness that the world has ever seen. “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends (John 15:13).” Jesus was the perfect model of the Second Commandment, both before and while on the cross, and our attitude should be the same as Christ Jesus’.[32] “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant… (Philippians 2:5-7).”
Paul reaffirmed the fulfillment of the Law, both from Jesus’ demonstration of love on the cross and within Christianity today, by the Christian’s love for his neighbor when he wrote, “For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself (Galatians 5:14).” James, the brother of Jesus and the first bishop of Jerusalem, wrote, “If ye fulfill the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, ye do well (James 2:8).” The Law of Moses, although finished at Calvary, written on “…tables of stone,” was replaced with a new commandment when the Spirit of God wrote, “…in fleshy tables of the heart (2 Corinthians 3:3).” The Spirit of a Holy God enables Christians to love their neighbors in the same manner in which they love themselves, thus fulfilling the goal of the Law of Moses.
The goal of the Law of Moses could be split into two major parts. The first part of Moses’ Law is exemplified in the First Commandment Jesus mentions in the New Testament, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment (Matthew 22:37).” This first part deals with our relationship with God. Jesus also mentions the second part of Moses’ Law in the same passage, “…the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets (Matthew 22:40).” The second part of Moses’ Law deals with our relationship with others, and Moses used over six hundred laws (rules) to show the children of Israel how they should be a good neighbor. However, Paul stated, “…all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself [the Second Commandment] (Galatians 5:14).” This further shows the truth in what was discussed earlier: only when you have loved your neighbor (who could be the least of the Kingdom) as yourself, have you loved the Lord with all your heart, soul, and mind.
Paul wrote to the Romans who were finding it difficult to love their neighbor across the line between Jews and Gentiles. The Jews wanted the Gentiles to follow the Law of Moses, even though no man had ever been justified by the Law (Romans 3:20). Paul reminded the Jews and the Gentiles of Rome, in the closing of his book to the Romans, that they did not owe (neither should they require of each other) anything except love (Romans 13:8). Paul then quoted several of the original Laws of Moses and summed it up by saying, “…if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. Love worketh no ill to his neighbor: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law (Romans 13:9-10).”
A certain ruler came to Jesus one day and “…asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life (Luke 18:18)?” Jesus then quizzed him about his adherence to the Law of Moses. The young ruler was proud to be able to claim that he had kept all the Law from his youth up. However, the man turned away sorrowfully when Jesus said, “Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me (Luke 18:22).” The man’s problem was not that he had money, but rather that he would not love his neighbor as he loved himself. The rich men of Jesus’ time stepped over and around beggars on a daily basis. The rich young ruler could follow the letter of the Law, but not the spirit or intent of the Law. Many will stand in judgment someday with all of the boxes checked off and hear Jesus say, ‘Yet lackest thou one thing…’ or as Jesus warned in the Gospel of Matthew, “Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment… (Matthew 25:45-46).”
The Value of the Second Commandment
One of the main motivational factors behind Christians ‘serving’ the Lord is to make Heaven their eternal home. Christians are longing for the day when they will hear their Savior say, “Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful… (Matthew 25:21).” When one stops and realizes that the Second Commandment is a tangible requirement for Heaven and for loving God with all your heart, loving our neighbor suddenly leaps in value and is brought from the back burner to a rightful place of prominence in the Christian’s life. There should be little doubt, by this point, as to the basic requirement of the Second Commandment and one’s eventual residence in Heaven.
However, not all of the rewards of the Second Commandment are eternal rewards; there are many immediate rewards. The most valuable reward connected to the Second Commandment, which also has eternal implications, is the reward of the reviving of dying Christians and the birth of new Christians into the body of Christ. This has been well established in the section above entitled, “The Relationship Between the Second Commandment and Revival / the Kingdom of God.” Therefore, I will not recapitulate what has already been written other than to remind the reader of the immense value of the Second Commandment to the future of the church. David Bernard, a church growth expert, states that 85% of all converts come from personal relationships.[33] “The very existence of the church [should] demonstrates to the world the truthfulness of the gospel of grace, forgiveness, and reconciliation.”[34] It is time for the church to break out of her isolationism into the Second Commandment.
The law of the harvest is, “…whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap (Galatians 6:7)” and the law of judgment is, “with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again (Matthew 7:2).” These laws bring further value to the Second Commandment and are illustrated in the life of Dorcas. When Dorcas died, the widows that she had loved and been a good neighbor to stood by, “…weeping, and showing the coats and garments which Dorcas made, while she was with them (Acts 9:39).” God heard their weeping, and Peter came from Joppa to pray for Dorcas. After Peter had prayed, he presented her back to her neighbors alive; consequently, many more belived on the Lord Jesus because of her testimony (Acts 9:41-42). In a time when you are in need of prayer, succor, food, or comfort, those that flock to you will be your neighbors, and their response will be in direct proportion to your obedience to the Second Commandment.
Not only will obedience to the Second Commandment reap dividends for the Christian, but it will reap rewards within his circle of influence. Entire churches will reap the benefits of a few consumed with a love for God demonstrated to their neighbors. Families and family members will be saved and blessed because of the example one will demonstrate in obedience to the Second Commandment. “Joshua saved Rahab the harlot alive, and her father’s household, and all that she had; and she dwelleth in Israel even unto this day; because she hid the messengers, which Joshua sent to spy out Jericho (Joshua 6:25).” Her willingness to be a neighbor to strangers earned her a spot in the linage of Jesus Christ. One young boy shared his small lunch with five thousand men and their wives and children. Because of this boy’s willingness to be a neighbor, a miracle happened and over ten thousand people benefited from a single act of the Second Commandment (John 6:1-14). For far too long the church experience has been isolated to preaching, singing, and going to church services. It is high time that the ‘other half’ of the church becomes part of the important functions of the church as well, such as fellowshipping, discipling, serving, sharing, and being an example to our communities.[35]
Go, and Do Thou Likewise
Even though the Christian world has mirrored the world of individualism and isolation, there is a movement within the body of Christ that is heading back to the Second Commandment. Stephen Macchia listed community (the Second Commandment) as the fourth characteristic of ten if the church is to become a healthy church.[36] No longer will the church focus only on the First Commandment, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind (Matthew 22:37).” The Church is coming to understand that the only way to respond to the First Commandment is through obedience to the Second Commandment, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself (Matthew 22:39).” The church must look around herself at her positional relationships and reach out with the love of Christ emanating to those around her. When the Law of Moses is fulfilled in the church’s love for her neighbor, the Kingdom of God shall be in action and the church will experience revival and growth like has never been seen since the beginning of the church age. When the church loves her neighbor as herself, there will no longer be a need, within the church, for governmental social welfare programs. The Second Commandment will even lessen the need for governmental social welfare outside the church because the Second Commandment is not isolated to neighbors within the church but is extended to the very least of our enemies. After Jesus had identified for the lawyer who his neighbor was, he commanded the lawyer, “Go, and do thou likewise (Luke 10:37).” This writing would be a failure if the readers did not feel compelled to do the same. My prayer is this: that all would hear, myself included, the echoing of the words of our Lord. Go and love your neighbor as yourself; then I will feel your fervent love for Me. Go…
Footnotes
[1] Randy Frazee, The Connecting Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2001), 24.
[2] Jean-Marie Cardinal Lustiger, “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity,” First Things (1997): 38-45.
[3] J. D. Douglas, The New International Dictionary of the Christian Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Corporation, 1978), 226.
[4] Chester Wright, The Missing Half of the Church, (Gaithersburg, Maryland: Antioch Publishes the Word, 1989), 25.
[5] J. L. Hall, Doctrines of the Bible, (Hazelwood, Missouri: World Aflame Press, 2000), 211-212.
[6] Randy Frazee, The Connecting Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2001), 196.
[7] Elmer G Homrighausen, “Who is My Neighbor,” Interpretations (2002): 403.
[8] Craig Ban Gelder, The Essence of the Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 2000), 27-37.
[9] H.D. M. Spence, ed., The Pulpit Commentary, Vol. 15, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: WM. B. Eerdman’s Publishing Company, 1950), 366.
[10] Craig Ban Gelder, The Essence of the Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 2000), 37.
[11] Stephen Post, “The Purpose of Neighbor-Love,” Journal of Religious Ethics 18 (2001): 182.
[12] Ibid, 184.
[13] Craig Ban Gelder, The Essence of the Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 2000), 153.
[14] Ronald J. Sider, Living Like Jesus, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 1996), 35.
[15] James F. Engel and William A. Dyrness, Changing the Mind of Missions: Where Have We Gone Wrong, (Grand Dover Gove, Illinois: Inter Varsity Press, 2000), 96.
[16] Victor Paul Funish,, Love of Neighbor in the New Testament, (Journal of Religious Ethics: October 2002), 330-331.
[17] Ronald J. Sider, Living Like Jesus, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 1996), 169.
[18] Elmer G Homrighausen, “Who is My Neighbor” Interpretations (2001): 401.
[19] James Strong, The Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, (Cedar Rapids, Iowa: Parsons Technology Inc., 1998), G4139.
[20] H.D. M. Spence, ed, The Pulpit Commentary, Vol. 15, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: WM. B. Eerdman’s Publishing Company, 1950), 366.
[21] H.D. M. Spence, ed, The Pulpit Commentary, Vol. 16, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: WM. B. Eerdman’s Publishing Company, 1950), 283.
[22] Arlene Swidler, “The Forgotten Neighbor,” Journal of Ecumenical Studies 4 (2002): 722.
[23] Elmer G Homrighausen, “Who is My Neighbor,” Interpretations (2001): 407.
[24] Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1995), 129.
[25] Ronald J. Sider, Living Like Jesus, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 1996), 177.
[26] Ibid.
[27] Elmer G Homrighausen, “Who is My Neighbor,” Interpretations (2001): 407.
[28] Ronald J. Sider, Living Like Jesus, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 1996), 32-34.
[29] James F. Engel and William A. Dyrness, Changing the Mind of Missions: Where Have We Gone Wrong, (Grand Dover Gove, Illinois: Inter Varsity Press, 2000), 103.
[30] David K. Bernard, Understanding the Articles of Faith, (Hazelwood, Missouri: World Aflame Press, 1998), 22-23, 34-35.
[31] Daniel L. Seagraves, Themes From a Letter to Rome, (Hazelwood, Missouri: World Aflame Press, 1995), 80-81.
[32] Ronald J. Sider, Living Like Jesus, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 1996), 172.
[33] David K. Bernard, Growing a Church, (Hazelwood, Missouri: World Aflame Press, 2001), 227.
[34] Craig Ban Gelder, The Essence of the Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 2000), 112.
[35] Craig Ban Gelder, The Essence of the Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 2000), 57.
[36] Stephen A. Macchia, Becoming a Healthy Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 1999), 77-93.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)