A lesson on worship from a child's perspective

I was reminded of a story I need to set down.  Last week, in one of my second grade classes, I had a problem with one student telling another "You're supposed to sing AND dance, not just dance" while we were doing a worship song.  Unfortunately his tone was very demanding and also he was interrupting class for everyone, so I called him out.  Today, the same student made a similar comment (but I guess thought he would get away with it if he just made it a general comment rather than getting in someone's face in particular) and said "I HATE it when people don't sing AND dance!!"

And so I pulled him aside.

I sat him down at a table near the wall.  After I set another song on for the students, and came over to him and asked him a few questions.  "Are you the teacher?"  No.  "Are you supposed to decide how other people act?"  No.  "Why are you interrupting class with mean comments then?"  Tears, and anger.  They're not doing what they're supposed to do.  "Oh, they aren't?  Did I say anything to them?  Did I tell them they were wrong?"  No.  "Why do you think that is?"  Silence.  "When we worship together, the only wrong thing is to not participate.  Were they participating?"  But some of them weren't singing, they were just dancing!  "Ok. . . but who gets to decide if that's right or not?"  Silence.  "Ok. . . so here's paper- I want you to come up with two reasons why it is OK for people to dance to a song but not sing along with it."

I left him alone for a couple minutes, did another activity, and then swept by to see what he had written.

It is NOT ok for them to dance and not sing.

As soon as I walked by, he scribbled it out.  He was still fuming.

I got the kids started on another activity, and then I pulled out my iPad and brought up two Scriptures:  first from 2 Samuel and second from 1 Corinthians (what's cool is that I was all about the LOOK KING DAVID DANCED STOP COMPLAINING but I knew I needed something else, so thanks Holy Spirit).  "Read this."  As the ark of the Lord came into the city of David, Michal the daughter of Saul looked out of the window and saw King David leaping and dancing before the Lord.  "OK. . . so how was King David responding to God?"  Dancing.  "Does it say he was singing?"  No.  "Look up here. . .we see there was some singing and music playing, but it doesn't mention dancing.  Do we always have to sing and dance together?"  Silence.  "Ok, read this."  I will pray with my spirit, but I will pray with my mind also; I will sing praise with my spirit, but I will sing with my mind also.   "Do we always have to pray aloud for God to hear us?"  No.  "Ok.  And does this verse say that we should just sing aloud, or that what we are thinking is important too?"  We sing inside and outside.  "I like what you said.  So do you think that some people might just sing inside, and that God can hear them still?"  Silence.  "See, I didn't make these rules up on my own.  I run my classroom by what the Bible says, not just what Mr. Beck decides.  If students are messing around, or if they aren't participating at all, then they get in trouble, don't they?" Nods. "I tell them they are distracting and keeping other people from participating, and that's not fair.  But if they are moving and not singing, or if they are singing and not moving, or if they are doing both, I let them alone, and do you know why?"  Silence.  "Because it is not my job to decide how they worship God best."

I honestly can't say that he got it, but I know he was thinking hard, because he changed from angry and hurt to receptive and, well, after scribbling out the first comment, this is what he wrote:

I know now it is OK if they only want to sing or to dance.  But I'm singing and dancing.

You just can't make that stuff up.  I think there is a grand lesson for all of us in this.

I can't bring myself to title this the way I want to. . .

. . . because a) I think it should be a dead issue and b) maybe it is?  A Google search of the phrase brought up articles written in the past few years (and Bing brought up some ancient articles from the late 90's but also auto-filled to add the word "Baptist" as I typed which made me cringe and laugh at the same time), maybe it's not relevant anymore, but if it has meaning to you, then maybe the Ghost-verbalized statement of the preacher talking this evening will help shed some light.

Because what I wanted to put in the title was "Worship Wars."  *cue lightning, thunder, The Price Is Right sound effect*

I've heard the term thrown around, it's a very church-ese thing, but I think it was a bigger deal while I was a kid and wasn't really going on in my particular view of the world.  Anyway, the statement made tonight, whether intentional or not, was fantastically simple and potentially perspective-changing.

He said that worship wars are a personal internal problem.

I doubt he meant Worship Wars (I almost said WORSHIP worship wars, because in English, when we repeat a word it gets a different meaning, right?  "Their baby is so cute!"  "Yeah, it's still a BABY baby." . . . anyway).  Regardless, the real war of worship is something fought within each of us individually; will we worship God, or will we worship something else?

Like. . . I am all about wanting things to be black and white but having to explore to really get a full idea.  But what more attitude do you need to see in this?  What is our priority?  Also, most importantly, it's not about music- it's about our hearts.

I'm sure I have more to say but I am tired.  If you want more from my crazy brain go look at this or this or this or even this.

"God's got someone in mind already"

I finally put my finger on what bugs me about that statement.  "Well, God's already got someone who is perfect for that position that needs to be filled," or its companion statement, "Well, God needed that person to be here for just that time."

I don't disagree with the truth of those statements (if we are to accept God is all powerful and all knowing, here is a little bit of that side, and yet over and over the Bible says that Godly men led by God still have the freedom to choose, which is confusing, but that's not my focus this morning).  It's the sentiment behind it.  It's the shrug-your-shoulders, kick-the-dirt-around-your-feet, I-can't-control-it-so-I'm-just-gonna-endure-it attitude.  If something is moving and shaking, if there are major changes, if someone is brought into a position of leadership or power or suddenly removed, if life is going one way and then takes a huge U-turn, then God is doing something and our obligation is to respond and change something about ourselves.

I mean, isn't that the story of the entire Old Testament?  God does something, Israelites turn to God, Israelites get distracted, God does something to regain their focus, Israelites turn to God again, they get distracted again. . .  it seems inevitable.  But at some point the Israelites stopped turning to God, so He started to do bigger things. He eventually split their nation, sent them into exile, and nearly wiped them out; they were saved only because God in His perfect mercy had promised it.

So when people say things like what I wrote above, and then walk away without a fire under them, I am confused.  But it's not what they are saying that is wrong; it's how they are responding.  And by they I definitely mean ME as well.

A big change is an opportunity for us to refocus our hearts on God, to check our priorities and our habits and see what things have slipped away, what idols we've brought back into our homes and what unclean influences we've stitched back into the fabric of our lives.  It's a time to seek God more than ever, to search diligently and be sure that we are in line with God's will and not our own.  We forget that the Israelites asked God for a king, and God didn't want them to have a king.  And look how that turned out. . . . . AND, if God knew that David would be a better king (and he certainly wasn't perfect either!) then why bother with Saul?  Is it possible that the "someone who is perfect for the position" is perfectly in a position to fail the people of God?

Because that's the other premise that lacks validity in the title statement.  We assume success!!  "If God is for us, who can be against us?" is a statement about persecution against the church, not within it!  Paul's letters to the various churches growing in his time encouraged them to continue to grow closer and closer with Christ, to get rid of the sin problems, to challenge false teachers. . . essentially, to build God's people.  Even when he talks about logistical things, like collecting money to help those in need, his focus was not on the process of giving but on the hearts of the givers!
Anyway, the real tragedy is we assume success without analyzing why the change is happening.  Some changes are within our control, some aren't, but regardless, how boastful are we to say that the person God brings us is to take us to the next level!  Or. . . perhaps we just don't realize that when we say "the next level" that does not mean human success. . . maybe it's a way to get rid of spiritual decay. . . but no matter the end result, if at the end of the day we are not seeking Christ in our life circumstance and in the changing circumstance(s) around us, then, regardless of what God does or who God chooses, we have missed the boat.

I don't know.  I'm babbling.  The point I'm trying to make is statements of "faith" in God's plan that don't result in individual action are not worth much.

Ebb and flow

I was sitting along the Halifax River near the Daytona Playhouse before our brush-up Thursday for our final weekend of performances, pretty well emotionally shot from the week and just missing Cam and wanting to have her back so that I could enjoy our companionship.  She always said that she could feel God in the wind- for me I can hear him in the water.  And so there I was, pretty well depressed out of my mind (yeah I know, Christians aren't supposed to be depressed, right?) just watching the water, and I noticed something.  The water as a whole was traveling in waves towards the shore where I was seated, but there were reflective ripples that were traveling in the opposite direction.  In looking at it, it seems as though those ripples were moving on top of the natural tide, not under it or through it.  And ultimately the water just kept moving towards the shore, and the ripples were eventually borne back to the course of the water underneath.
I thought it made a good analogy of how God works maybe.  It's like our lives are the ripples, we move in different directions and sometimes we are influenced by other ripples (which some of those ripples complement and make the effect stronger, sometimes they counteract and decrease the effect), sometimes we crash into rocks and end up going in a different direction.  But you know what?  The tide goes "through" the rocks.  I took a video, it's very poor quality since I have an ancient phone, but maybe you can see it too:

So the point I'm trying to make is this- God is constantly moving in the undercurrent of our lives.  Regardless of the rocks, the fish, the bugs, the walls, we are to continue to reflect His work in our lives.  And even when it doesn't feel like He's there, he definitely is, flowing underneath everything and continuing to make His purpose, sometimes with us and sometimes in spite of us.