Family Worship
Andy Beard
Luke 5:1-11 Family Worship Ideas

Home Group Notes Eph.1:3-14

Anyone who reads St. Paul’s epistles knows he had a rare gift for crowding a huge number of thoughts into a remarkably few number of words.  Perhaps this is nowhere more evident than in this opening chapter of the Book of Ephesians.  Paul grapples with limits of human language as he seeks to convey the immensity of God’s work in, and purposes for us, and indeed in all creation.  It’s important that we recognize that Paul’s teaching is rooted in and leads to worship (Eph.1:3 & 6).  Things go awry quickly when we don’t see the connection between doctrine and devotion.

It's such an important passage in the midst of a series such as the one we are doing in the run up to Easter.  We have been reflecting on different dynamics in God’s work at the cross, this creation-defining moment when the Son offers Himself unblemished, by the Spirit, to the Father (Heb.9:14).  We have a fatal propensity to reduce everything – even something as vast as the death of Christ – to the confines and limits of our own experience of life.  What does this mean for me?  … or perhaps what does it mean for my Church?  Paul won’t let us be so minimalistic.  It isn’t that the Cross has nothing to say to our personal experience.  Rather, the problem is that if we confine our thinking, worship and vision to that we end up with a truncated and disfigured idea of what is going on.  And that will hinder our whole discipleship project.  We end up seeing things like ‘adoption’ (Eph.1:5), ‘forgiveness’ (Eph.1:7), and ‘redemption’ (Eph.1:7) as ends in themselves.  We even end up thinking that ‘grace’ itself finds its terminus in me.

Paul refuses to let us be so parochial.  He puts the Cross, the shedding of Christ’s blood, in the context of God’s purposes for the whole of creation.  Purposes that stretch back before its beginning and that will continue into the everlasting ages of its renewal.  Purposes that cannot be derailed or disrupted.  When we become Christians, we don’t invite the Living God in our lives and plans, as if we fit Him into what we already have going on.  We are invited and included in His life and His plans and purposes for all of creation.  And grasping that give us a very different perspective on what is happening when we are ‘included in Christ’ (Eph.1:13), and what inevitably follows. 

 

Questions:

How does words like ‘chosen’ (1:4 & 11) and ‘predestined’ (1:5 & 11) make you feel as a Christian?  Do they connect with worship (1:3 & 6), and your sense of God’s love (1:5) in the way we see in Paul, or does it cause you anxiety and concern? 

What is the Father’s purpose in choosing us from before the creation of the world (1:4)?  What do you think Paul envisages in that?  How is it reflected in your own life as a Christian, and in your involvement in MIE?

How many ‘spiritual blessings in Christ’ (1:3) can you identify in this passage?  How would you explain them to someone who wasn’t a Christian?

What is God’s will and purpose for creation?  How should that shape the way we engage with Church life? 

How are people included in God’s purposes for creation?  How does that affect our idea about what it means to be a Christian… or to be part of a Church?

How does the Cross fit into those purposes?

Why is the Holy Spirit described as ‘a seal’ (1:13), and a deposit (1:14)?  How does that shape our expectations of our experiencing His presence?  What would someone be like if they really understood these elements of the Spirit’s ministry amongst His people?

What is ‘our inheritance’ (1:14) that the Spirit guarantees?  Why does Paul talk about those who will inherit as ‘those who are God’s possession’ (1:14)?  How do you feel about that?

 

Home Group Notes I Cor.10:14-17

What happens when we take Communion together?  It’s a moment that remains one of the most profound moments in Christian worship.  Precisely because it is so profound, it is at the same time fraught with danger and potent with blessing.  The 39 Articles of the Church of England pick up this exact passage (I Cor.10:16) when they teach us: ‘The Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the mutual love that Christians ought to have among themselves.  Rather it is a sacrament of our redemption through Christ’s death.  To those who rightly, worthily and with faith receive it, the bread that we break is a partaking of the body of Christ, and similarly the cup of blessing is a partaking of the blood of Christ’ (Art.28).  Article 29 by contrast warns that ‘those who lack a living faith … are in no way partakers of Christ.  Rather, by eating and drinking the sign or sacrament of so great a thing, they bring condemnation on themselves’. 

The significance of taking Communion is so dramatic because in this act of worship, the Spirit is deeply present joining us in the death of Christ, such that we ‘participate’ in His body and blood.  Put another way, the bread and wine – by the working of the Holy Spirit – convey to us the reality of what they symbolize.

But it isn’t just that through Communion the Spirit binds us to Christ.  He binds us to each other.   Communion is never an individual thing.  As we’ll see in the ‘Hour before the Cross’ on Good Friday, our relationship to each other is in focus every bit as much as our relationship with Christ.  ‘We who are many are one body, for we all share the one loaf’ (I Cor.10:17).  We do not come to the Cross alone. 

The fact that this is Spiritual doesn’t make it any less real.  Paul shifts seamlessly into warnings about demonic involvement (10:18-22), and later to weakness, illness and even death resulting from abusing the Lord’s Supper (11:30-31).  Christian spirituality is physical, and it refuses to be confined to one isolated arena of our experience.

 

 

Questions:

Do you think Christ by His Spirit is present at Communion in a way that He isn’t at any other time?  …or perhaps: that you are present by the Spirit with Christ at Communion in a way that you aren’t at any other time?

When have you experienced Christ’s presence in Communion in a unique way?

What does Art.28 mean when it warns us to receive the Bread and Wine ‘rightly, worthily and with faith’?  How can we be sure we are receiving Communion in such a manner?

Do you think people would still be in danger – spiritually or physically – if they took Communion inappropriately? 

 

Paul’s language throughout I Corinthians reveals a multi-facetted understanding of Communion and the relationship of the Bread and Wine to Cross and to the Church.   

In what sense are we proclaiming (I Cor.11:26) the Lord’s death when we repeat this meal?  In what sense are we ‘remembering (I Cor.11:24-25) His death?  Why is it important that we do these?

Does Paul suggest something more than proclaiming and remembrance is going on in I Cor.10:16?  What does he mean by ‘participating’?

 

What is the connection between taking Communion and the unity of the Church as the Body of Christ?   

Is there a time when you should refrain from taking communion?  …or when someone shouldn’t be allowed to take communion?

Given Paul’s connecting Communion with unity, are there any conditions under which we should refuse to take communion with someone?  

How would it affect you / the Church if you took Communion whilst not in communion with others in the Church?

Home Group Notes I Cor.1:18-31

Sometimes a passage is difficult because it contains a lot of ideas in a small space, or because of the intensity of the logic.  Sometimes they are difficult because they prove so incisive and challenging that we kind of sub-consciously protect ourselves against what they are saying: we won’t let ourselves understand what is being said because the consequences are more than we can deal with.

If my own experience is anything to go by, we’re dealing with the latter scenario as we turn to I Cor.1:18-30.  We are so susceptible to the same temptation, to making the same mistakes, as Corinth.  We have a (well-intentioned) desire for the Church to be influential in the world.  We often want the Church to have a kind of cultural credibility, financial clout, or political influence.  Or if we are a bit more subtle, we long to see a more overtly ‘spiritual’ power.  We want people to think the Church is relevant and accessible (in a bygone generation we might even have said ‘cool’).  We want people to be impressed.  We want to be seen as rational and educated and sophisticated.  For the good of the Gospel, of course.

We are, in other words, very Corinthian. 

And Paul has little patience with such spiritual posturing.  We cannot preach the Gospel using methods that critically undermine that Gospel.  And a community brought into being by the cross must not reject being shaped by that cross.   The end does not ever justify the means when it comes to the economy of God. 

Paul is challenging that whole way of thinking…  and is calling us back to a humble dependence on the Holy Spirit and the Gospel of Christ…  that affects how we present ourselves and how we are perceived.  Paul categorically rejected everything that his culture would have considered essential to getting a message across effectively.  He consciously rejected the wise and persuasive, and relied instead on a ‘demonstration of the Spirit’s power’ (2:4).  It is when we have lost the Spirit’s power that we rely on production values, marketing techniques and cultural credibility.   Which is ironic, because often Churches that shape themselves in these ways are most vocal about their experience of the Spirit’s power!

 

Read I Cor.1:18-31

 

Where do we see the Church today aspiring to use the ‘power’ and ‘wisdom’ of the world in its evangelism and worship?   Why is this so compelling to Christians?

 

Is it legitimate for a Church to do this, or is it sinful? 

 

What would you say to someone who decided they were going to start going to a Church that was embracing such techniques?

 

Do you think Paul is unduly pessimistic about humanity’s pursuit for knowledge of God?  What about those who are sincerely seeking God?

 

Why has God made truth so obscure and elusive?  Why is our ‘boasting in the Lord’ so important?

 

Do you think God is deliberately frustrating humanity in their search for truth?  Can you show why you think what you do from this passage?  If you think the answer is ‘Yes’, why would God do that? 

 

If ‘demanding signs’ is a bad thing, what do you make of the idea that people would become Christians if they saw more miraculous signs?

 

If ‘wisdom’ is a bad thing, do you think we should work hard at explaining what we believe and why we believe it?  What does Paul have in mind when he talks about wisdom?  What might be a contemporary equivalent?

 

Why do you think Paul is so derogatory about the Church (v.26-27)?

 

How does this passage affect our approach to evangelism? 

(When you have answered this question, read I Cor.2:1-5.  Does that change your answer in any way?)

 

What would a Church be like that followed Paul’s teaching and example?  Where do you think we have this right at MIE?  …and where do we have it wrong?

Home Group Notes Rom.5:12-21

Individualism is rampant in our culture, but thinking of ourselves as individuals makes it particularly difficult for us to grasp the Bible’s teaching on our relationship with Adam, or what has become known over the years as ‘original sin’.  Nevertheless, as we focus on the different ways that Christ’s death deals with different aspects of our sin and fallenness, we must negotiate this key area of the Bible’s teaching. 

It has been said that all of Christian belief is governed by the fall of Adam and the raising of Christ.  Certainly all of humanity is governed by its relationship with these two men.  In the Bible, we are not just ‘involved in mankind’, or somehow vaguely connected to each other (Acts 17:26).  Rather, we deeply integrated into one or other humanity that is in turn indelibly connected to one of these two Representative Humans.  We are in Adam or in Christ, and everything about us is determined by who we are united with, and the ‘one act’ of sin or righteousness supremely associated with them.

Adam’s original sin is not like any other sin - even any of Adam’s own other sins.  In the case of Adam a sinful state followed a sinful deed; in our case, the sinful state gives rise to sinful deeds.  Secondly, in the wisdom of God, this first sin introduces sin to creation, welcomes death; it changes the rules of the game, and the structure of creation.  Nothing is the same after this cataclysmic moment of dislocation from God.  It is the originating sin, which plunges the entire subsequent experience of creation into guilt, pollution, shame, and curse. 

But likewise, Christ’s one righteous act (Rom.5:18) has cosmic ramifications for those who are identified with Him.  This gift of grace and righteousness results in ‘many being made righteousness’.   It also is not like any other act of righteousness.  Our righteousness doesn’t result in the justification of ourselves, let alone anyone else.  No other act of righteousness by anyone else will many be made righteous.  Christ’s supreme act of obedience to His Father (the definition of righteousness) is utterly unique.  It is a righteousness that infects and affects all who look to Him as ‘Head’

 

Questions

Do you think it is just / fair for God to relate to us on the basis of someone else’s decisions and behaviour?  Does the idea Original sin confuse the Gospel for you, or make it clearer?  Does it help in our evangelism, or make it harder?

Do you think it is still possible for people with a corrupted humanity - and who have not become Christians - to do what is good and right before God? Why / why not?

Are we responsible for the sins of our parents?  Should we apologise or repent for sins committed by our nation, or our family, or the Church in the past?

How does the doctrine of Original Sin affect the way we think Christians should raise their children?  

Read Romans 5:12-21

Why do you think the contrast isn’t set up as between Eve and Christ?  Why isn’t it called Eve’s trespass?   What is Eve’s responsibility in the situation, if any?

Does the fact that everything hinges on Adam or Christ take away human responsibility? 

What is the essence of Paul’s argument in 5:12-14?  How does he prove his contention that Adam’s sin is credited to everyone’s account?

How are the dynamics of Adam’s relationship with humanity and Christ’s relationship with humanity similar?  …and in which ways dissimilar?  Does this highlight the grace we enjoy in Christ in the way that Paul seems to want it to?

How does the cross of Christ deal with the consequences of Adam’s sin?

In 5:18, Paul writes that the one ‘righteous act [of Christ] resulted in justification and life for all people’.  Is Paul teaching that everyone is saved through Christ’s death?  Why / why not?

In 5:20 Paul tells us that the Law was brought in ‘so that the trespass might increase’.  Does that surprise you?  Why would God want the trespass to increase?

p.s.

The Anglican Church took pains to outline and defend this doctrine in its foundational documents.  Article 9 is entitled ‘of Original, or Birth Sin’ and locates original sin in ‘…the fault and corruption of the nature of every man (sic) that is naturally engendered of the offspring of Adam, whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and is of his own nature inclined to evil … and therefore in every person born into this world, it deserveth God’s wrath and damnation’.    And this infection of nature doth remain in them that are regenerated … although there is no condemnation for them that believe’.

It did so because at the time, very few Christians took seriously this aspect of the Bible’s teaching, preferring to think that humanity still had a free will and that, with the right education, a good role model and favourable circumstances, could still live righteously (do good).   Most Christians didn’t believe that we had inherited consequences from Adam’s transgression so that we were all born sinful, and under God’s judgement.  In such a context, Cranmer et al felt the need to remind people of the Bible’s teaching that we do what we do because we are what we are.  They understood this was at the very foundation of the Christian faith, and that without it, Christianity would be fatally compromised.

Home Group notes Rom.3:21-31

When we become Christians, our relationship with everything and everyone is fundamentally transformed, in many cases utterly inverted. It affects us psychologically, volitionally, emotionally, spiritually, physically, relationally … and legally. The legal change in our standing before God is what the Bible is talking about when it uses the word justified / justification. ‘Justification’ is the opposite of ‘condemnation’ in the Divine Court of Law. It speaks not merely of acquittal, but of a right legal standing, a vindication, of being judged to possess a perfect human righteous. The implications are breathtakingly. The mighty Dutch Reformed theologian, Bavinck wrote: ‘Of all the benefits [of our union with Christ] first place is due to justification, for by it we understand the gracious, judicial act of God, by which He acquits humans of all the guilt and punishment of sin, and confers on them the right to eternal life’.

It is a powerful spiritual reality that takes us to the heart of one of the deepest mysteries in the Bible: How can God justify (i.e. declare righteous) the wicked (Rom.4:5)? How can God look on a life that is riddled with intrinsic sinfulness and declare it to be righteous, without violating His own righteousness? If he is going to do what is right, then He ought to look at a life that is sinful and wicked and declare it to be sinful and wicked, and deal with it accordingly (Dt.25:1; Prov.17:15; Ps.11:4-7 etc.). This is a question of God’s righteousness as much as it is ours. How can God ‘not treat us as our sins deserve, or repay us according to our iniquities’ (Ps.103:10)? It is the deepest problem of a fallen creation. How does God in His wisdom, resolve that problem without causing dissonance within His own being? How can He be gracious and righteous, forgiving and just?

The answer is found at the cross. God’s putting forth Christ as a sacrifice is first and foremost a demonstration of His own justice … so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus (Rom.3:26). It is what Martin Luther describes as ‘the great exchange’ that comes about through faith. In one direction, my sinfulness is credited, attributed, imputed to Jesus and as He takes to Himself a sinfulness that is not His own, so He takes to Himself God righteous condemnation of that sin. In the other direction, His righteousness as a Man who has lived in total obedience to the Law (Gal.2:16; 3:11) is credited to my account, and on that basis God declares me to be righteous (Rom.5:17-19). Remember that this is a legal transaction. None of this changes my nature, or affects my spiritual condition. I remain a sinner who is at the same time declared righteous. You may have heard this referred to in disparaging terms as a ‘legal fiction’. But as there is nothing fictitious about Jesus becoming sin on the cross and dying a God-forsaken death, so there is nothing fictitious about my becoming the righteousness of God and as such being vindicated (II Cor.5:21). It can feel counter-intuitive to begin with, but it is liberating, both for God and for us. The demands of obedience to the Law have been satisfied and fulfilled on my behalf by Jesus.

This has always been the understanding of the Church, and as such, it finds its place in the CofE’s basis of faith: We are accounted righteous before God solely on the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, through faith, and not on account of our own good works, or of what we deserve. The teaching that we are justified by faith alone is a most wholesome and comforting doctrine…’ (Art.11, see also the Homily on Salvation).

Questions

Have you ever wondered if God is continuing to punish you for sins you committed in the past? How does this study help you to think this through?

The Canons of the Council of Trent (1545-63) still stands as the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. Canon 9: “If anyone says that by faith alone the impious is justified … let him be anathema.” Why do you think RC-ism takes such a strident view of this? How do you feel about it?

Read Rom.3:21-31

How has the righteousness of God now been made known (v.21)? Why is it important to realise that this stands in line with the Old Testament?

How serious is that ‘all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God’ (v.23)? How would you describe the impact of sin on us as humans? …on the world?

What would you say to someone who said they knew people who weren’t Christians who were better people than the Christians they knew?

Why is Paul underlining the issue of ‘sin’ so emphatically in this whole opening section of Romans (see esp. 1:18-32; 2:1-16; 3:9-20)?

What is a ‘sacrifice of atonement’ (v.25, NIV)? What is Paul teaching us about the nature of Jesus’ death on the cross?

Other translations render it: propitiation (ESV - some of you may recognise this word from BCP); sacrifice for sin (NLT); or ‘God sacrificed Jesus on the altar of the world to clear that world of sin’ (The Message).

In what sense has sin prior to the cross been left unpunished (v.25)? How does that call God’s righteousness into question? How is this resolved in the cross?

What does Paul mean when he describes God as ‘the One who justifies those who have faith in Jesus (v.26)? What does it mean to be justified (also vv.28 & 30)?

How does Paul’s teaching lead to humility (v.27)?

What is a Christian’s relationship to the Law of God as laid out in the OT? Should we keep the Law or not (v.27-31)?

Isaiah 40:1-11 Bible Study

What do you think Isaiah / the Lord has in mind when h/He speaks of ‘Comfort’? How you answer this question might prove more revealing than you would think! We need to be careful to let the passage tell us what it means, rather than impose on the word what we might hope it means. God has a very specific idea of the kind of pain and suffering into which he wants to pour His comfort. To understand Is.40, it helps to see how this passage is picked up in Lk.3:4-6.

We have almost certainly recognised these words as referring to John the Baptist, who in an unprecedented way was sent to prepare a people ready to meet with God. What does that look like? … to be a people ready / prepare to meet with God. The word we most naturally associate with John’s ministry is the call to ‘Repent’ (Matt.3:2; Lk.3:3 etc.). Essentially, that is what it means to be a prepared people – it is to be a repenting people.

Such repentance is born out of a grief and sorrow at the ongoing reality of our sin. It is born out of a godly and appropriate frustration at our lack of Christlikeness. It is born out of a desperation to turn away from a way of life shaped by this word, and its passing desires and priorities. It is a grief born of the psychological and emotional impact of our sin. I’m broken-hearted because I’m not like Jesus (II Cor.7:10).

And it is in response to that experience of sorrow, grief and trauma that the Lord speaks these words of ‘comfort’. It is those who are undergoing the struggle and pain of repentance and of fleeing sin that Jesus tends and gathers and carries and gently leads (40:11). Blessed are those who mourn, for the shall be comforted (Matt.5:4).

This dynamic is part of authentic Christian spirituality. It is something that is consistently part of or drawing near to God, and of His drawing near to us. Historically the Church has spoken variously of ‘a perfect agony of conviction’, ‘penitential pain’ and ‘distress of soul’. The traumatic sound of such language often raises concerns in our own generation about how ‘healthy’ repentance might be. But our desire is for a total re-envisioning of life as God desires it, and for my heart to desire that rather than ‘the fleeting pleasures of sin’.

Questions:

Are there other passages you can think of that do suggest God’s comfort for us in other situations and circumstances of life?

What is your experience of the conviction of sin?

How would you explain repentance to someone who wasn’t familiar with the idea?

Why, in Is.40:2, is Isaiah told to proclaim that ‘she has received from the Lord’s had double for all her sins? Wouldn’t that be unjust?

How does Is.40:3-5 correspond to the ministry of John the Baptist?

Would you say MIE was a Church characterised by ‘repentance’? What does a repentant Church look like? How would it prepare us to meet with the Lord?

What does it look like when the ‘glory of the Lord’ is revealed (Is.40:5)? What did it look like after the ministry of John? What would it look like today?

Why is repentance particularly necessary in the light of Is.40:6-8? Why does Isaiah contrast ‘all people’ and ‘the word of our God’ in the way he does in these verses?

Why is it good news that the ‘sovereign LORD comes with power’ (Is.40:10)? What is His reward and His recompense?

What event does Isaiah 40:11 refer to?

Family Worship ideas: Is.35:1-10

It’s such a visual, image laden passage that we might easily miss the profound spiritual truth that is being conveyed.  Isaiah is striving to capture the incredible transformation that will overtake the whole of creation when Jesus returns in glory and splendour (35:2).  Some of this week’s family worship can simply be about allowing the power of the imagery to take hold; and to connect it with the idea that this is what Jesus comes to do. 

Print out the passage (see below) and have some coloured pens ready.  Pick any different colour for each of the following activities relating to Is.35:1-10:

Highlight every image that describes this passing fallen age.

Highlight every image that captures something about the New Creation.

What are these collections of images trying to help us to see and understand.

Highlight what causes such an amazing change throughout all of creation.

Highlight the bits of the passage where Isaiah tells us how we should respond to our New Creation hope.

Highlight any parts of this passage that you think you’ve heard before.  Can you remember where?

Can you draw the picture that you think Isaiah is seeing as he writes this chapter? Mark will be giving out a small prize on Christmas Day to anyone who brings their picture with them (if your kids are planning to bring a picture, let me know – to avoid disappointment!).

You could plant up a pot of crocuses … and write Is.35:1-2 on the pot!!

10 days before Christmas (when we celebrate Jesus’ first coming) is a ‘gift’ of an opportunity to talk about the excitement we can feel when we are looking forward to something special. 

What is there about this age that makes us sad? … angry? …disappointed?

What are we looking forward to about the New Creation?

How does this passage encourage us as we think about:

…things that go wrong with people’s bodies?

…things that go wrong with the environment?

…things that go wrong with our own discipleship?

Why do you think Jesus doesn’t come back right now to make the world this amazing?

When Isaac Watts wrote his song: Joy to the world, it wasn’t originally designed for Christmas, but for the second coming of Jesus when creation would be renewed. 

You can hear a contemporary version of Joy to the World here

…a ‘kids version’ here

…and a more traditional version here

Heavenly Father

thank you that you have a great plan to fix everything that is wrong with the world.

thank you that Jesus is that plan

help me to look forward to the new creation

help to live as if I was already there!

Amen.

a bit of a trickier puzzle for older kids:

About 700 years after Isaiah wrote these words, John the Baptist was in prison (you can read about it in Matt.11:1-15).  He was asking some hard questions about his relationship with Jesus, and about whether Jesus was who He said He was.  This gives us a chance to talk and pray with our child(ren) about times when we’re not sure about being a Christian, or about what we believe about Jesus. 

How do we deal with those kinds of questions?  John sent two of his disciples to Jesus to ask the question straight out.  Jesus sent John back to think about Is.35.  Can you work out why?