Sermon Tone Analysis

Excessive Individualism

In her article on the blog, Psychology Today, Dr. Jean Kim candidly reveals man’s drive for excessive individualism in her critique of current American culture.

She says,

“America was founded in part on the cult of the individual, the self-made myth, the will to power.

And indeed we cannot ignore the core egotism of human nature, the need to channel that drive to succeed and establish one’s sense of self and identity, against all odds.”

Jean Kim

Kim further laments current trends in American culture that come from a form of excessive self-centered autonomy.

She notes how Americans seem to lack empathy toward one another, struggle to show kindness, and lack compassion, which is the outward fruit of an inward self-centered reality.

Kim contrasts the current culture with that of Americans during World War II.

She says,

“On this Memorial Day, we remember how numerous Americans easily made the ultimate sacrifice for the good of their fellow citizens, to uphold a land of peacetime and liberty for others.

Yet, it feels as though lately the simple act of kindness, of caring for one’s fellow man for the good of the many has become anathema to our American values of late.”

Jean Kim

Expressive Individualism

Another trend in western culture concerning self-centered autonomy is the creation of extreme autonomous worldviews such as expressive individualism.

Theologian Carl Trueman clarifies expressive individualism when he says,

“Expressive Individualism holds that human beings are defined by their individual psychological core, and that the purpose of life is allowing that core to find social expression in relationships.

Anything that challenges it is deemed oppressive.”Carl

Trueman

Expressive Individualism is convinced that one’s core identity is simply what they make of it.

By contrast the Bible teachers you are made in the image of God.

Expressive individualism says I make my image what I want it to be.

What you are is fluid and can change.

Expressive Individualism is the worldview framework supporting much of the social movements we are seeing today, particularly in the LGBTQ movement.

The Unhealthy Marriage of the Church & Individualism

Somewhere down the road of our growth as a “Christian Nation,” America’s “self-made do it alone attitude” that formed the backbone of our democracy, our “one nation under God,” left it’s Christian formation and morphed into something of the future in George Orwell’s novel “The Time Machine.”

And of course found in that process, the church unequally yoked itself to the ideology of individualism.

The Western Church stopped caring as much about the needs and mission of God’s community and our commitment and contribution to the community as a whole.

Instead, we have become more concerned about celebrating ourselves, focusing most of our attention personal immediate needs with a loyalty to myself first and foremost.

Do you not see this attitude when people at church talk more about what they need to get from the church-the right music, the right preaching, the right feelings- than what they bring to the church community?

Do you not see this attitude when people hang out on the fringe of the church, never fully investing into the community with their time, talents, and tithes?

Do you not see this individualistic attitude that arises when there is conflict or disagreement in the church?

Someone does not get their way.

So, instead of seeing it as an opportunity to grow, this person person picks up their ball and leaves.

In the early 1800’s there was a frenchman name Alexis de Tocqueville.

He is best known for his book, “Democracy in America.”

This book was the fruit of him spending ten months in America researching our prison system.

He said that individualism was one of America’s five values that contributed to the success of our republic.

He described the American people as,

“Such folk owe no man anything and hardly expect anything from anybody.

They form the habit of thinking of themselves in isolation and imagine that their whole destiny is in their own hands.”

Alexis de Tocqueville

Tocqueville’s description of the American people, unfortunately, describes too much of the attitude in church in the church today.

Too much of the church believes you can be part of the church without being part of the community.

As if you can live in isolation believing your destiny is in your hands, not God’s hands.

Or you can live your Christian faith owing nothing to anyone and expecting nothing from anybody.

If you think I am over exaggerating my point, look at the evidence seen in the attitude observed by a Life Way research survey of the Western church that revealed that

“65% of churchgoers said they can walk with God without other churchgoers.”

(Scott McConnell.

Why Discipleship Can’t Happen in Your Church Without Relationships.

LifeWay Research.

April 19, 2021)

Interestingly enough, some of you may feel some tension in your heart right now about the problem of individualism I am spelling out.

You feel a tension, on the one hand, because as an American, it feels very natural to celebrate the self-made grit of American individualism-its the culture you grew up.

It is something we pride ourselves in as a nation.

On the other-hand, you must know that God calls you to fix your loyalty to His kingdom and his community.

Your citizenship is in heaven.

He expects you to forsake your individualism and commit to this community.

For some of you, it might feel countercultural for you to see church membership the way the Bible describes it.

Brothers and sisters, if we are going to joyfully advance the kingdom of God by making much of Jesus until the church, community, and home joyfully abide in Jesus, then we must be countercultural in our commitment to the church.

A robust church membership that is clear about expectations and commitments to God’s community, doing life in the Vineyard, must be in the DNA of our fellowship at FBCL.

To see this more clearly, we need to look once again at the early church, in Acts 2:41-47.

Michael already read the text, so we will jump right into verse 41.

You will notice how Luke distinguishes who the first members of the early church were.

In verse 41,

Those who received the word are those who believed upon the Lord Jesus Christ.

They made a profession of faith.

Then those who made a profession of faith were immediately baptized by full immersion.

Membership into the early church was marked by faith in Christ and baptism.

These two components are entry points to church fellowship.

You must be a born again believer who has been baptized by full immersion.

To enter the church my must come by faith in Christ and testify a commitment to Christ by baptism.

With a profession of faith and the witness of baptism, you will also noticed that there were five practices of the early church.

These practices were commitments the church made to each other (the leadership & the congregation) that distinguished this group of people from the Jews and the rest of pagan culture.

The early church was committed to teaching God’s word.

The Apostles were committed to preaching the gospel.

Preaching is, according to Jeremy Kimble,

“the public unfolding and proclamation of the truth of God’s word; it is interpreting, explaining, applying, and exulting over that word in the power of the Holy Spirit.”

Jeremy Kimble

Kimble wonderfully summarizes the point and purpose of preaching.

Preaching unfolds, that is reveals, by the power of the Holy Spirit, God’s plan of redemption by lifting the veil of ignorance and unbelief through proclaiming God’s word, His truth, about Himself and his image bearers.

Preaching takes time to study the bible in order to rightly interpret the truth and explain the bible in a way that encourages immediate application and exultation, all the while depending on the Holy Spirit to work in the hearts of those who hear the good news.

The church was committed to gather to hear right preaching.

The early church was committed to fellowship.

We are familiar with the world koinonia.

It is the used for the word “fellowship.”

In this context, it denotes the idea of a close mutual relationship; the sharing of material blessings.

The early church was committed to gathering together to make sure everyone’s needs were properly met.

Luke describes the fellowship of the church a few chapters later,

Acts 4:32 (ESV)

...and no one said that any of the things that belonged to him was his own, but they had everything in common.

The early churches fellowship meant that the congregation and leadership were intimately involved in each other’s lives.

They knew each other’s needs and burdens.

The partnered together to ensure everybody was cared for.

It would be absurd for someone to be unknown or unfamiliar in their fellowship.

The early church was committed to breaking bread.

Breaking Bread in this context likely refers to the Lord’s Supper.

It’s possible that it refers to the Love Meal that was eaten before the Lord’s supper.

It could encompass both.

The point is the church was committed to eating together, either formally informally.