August 16, 2004 - Where's My Kiss?

weekly fodder for the flock...

Join our e-mail list!

Just type your e-mail address below and press submit.

Print
Where’s My Kiss?
By Josh Lewis
August 16, 2004

I just returned from our church’s Wednesday night Bible study with a burning question: Why didn’t I get a kiss?

Upon entering the building, I was greeted by a friendly male usher who warmly shook my hand. As I left, another usher bid me good evening. Both are committed Christians, trying to do all that God asks of them. Neither of them, however, offered me a kiss.

I’ve always wondered why we didn’t practice the holy kiss as commanded in the New Testament (NT). It is quite clearly and unambiguously commanded no fewer than five times in five different books of the NT (Romans 16:16, I Corinthians 16:20, II Corinthians 13:12, I Thessalonians 5:26, I Peter 5:14), yet I’ve never heard it so much as mentioned from an Apostolic pulpit.

I see three possible explanations of this:

1. We only obey/follow selected passages of Scripture.

2. We are in error, and should immediately begin following this command in Apostolic churches.

3. It is a biblical principle and should be applied as appropriate to the culture in which we live.

Option number one is clearly unacceptable. We have been critical of other organizations / movements that seemingly pick and choose the passages of Scripture they wish to follow, so we cannot do the same. I don’t support this option, nor would I expect other Apostolics to do so.

Option number two also has few supporters. We have taken a strong stand against homosexuality, and same-sex kisses are strongly associated with that lifestyle here in the United States (kissing is an acceptable, non-erotic greeting in most European nations). Pardon my lack of faith, but I don’t expect to see Bro. Kenneth Haney smack 90&9’s chief editor, Kent Curry, on the cheek as they pass in the hallways of World Evangelism Center.

Option number three has problems as well. If this is applied in a cultural setting, what other concepts in the Word should be applied as principles in a particular society versus literal commands? For example, I Timothy 2:9 cautions/commands against four specific items: broided hair, gold, pearls, and costly array. If we accept option number three, how should we apply this in 21^st century America? Let’s take a look at how we currently address them:

Broided hair—If this prohibition is taken literally, it would preclude any braiding of the hair. It is generally interpreted, through extra-biblical sources, to mean weaving other decorative items into the hair (e.g. gold). This interpretation allows a woman to wear plain braids, but frowns upon other decorative items (although “hair jewelry” seems quite common in Pentecost today).

Gold—The literal interpretation used by some preachers precludes the wearing of any gold or gold-colored items, such as buttons or watches. Others simply ban/preach against non-functional gold jewelry.

Pearls—Again, some ban all pearl items, to include buttons, but most just prohibit non-functional pearl jewelry.

Costly array—Don’t you wish Paul could have been more specific? How much does it cost before it becomes costly? I don’t see this subject touched too much, perhaps because of the popularity of high-dollar men’s suits?

There is obviously an inconsistent application of this single verse.

Human nature likes black-and-white, so we’ve created some guidelines (i.e. standards). That is certainly biblical, as exemplified by the church council in Acts 15. They set down four guidelines for the newly-formed Gentile church: abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals, and from blood (Acts 15:20, NIV).

Are these commands still in effect today? Should we preach them as sin? Three of these are quite obviously drawn from the Mosaic ceremonial law and had more to do with their interaction with the Jewish church than with their actual salvation and holiness. Only sexual immorality was ever denounced in a “hellfire and brimstone” manner (numerous passages). Paul later addresses the meat issue and describes it as a matter of conscience. In other words, I believe the edicts issued by the Jerusalem council were not “bound in heaven” for eternity, but were for a particular time and situation.

Obviously, this idea makes some leaders nervous. They feel it’s a slippery slope that will end with all caution thrown to the wind and a return to Sodom and Gomorrah. They have a valid concern, but many of these folks have control and trust issues. They like having control, and they don’t trust average Christians to “work out their own salvation with fear and trembling” (Philippians 2:12). Consider this—a brace can certainly help you and prevent some muscle tears or strains, but wearing it too much actually causes the muscle to atrophy. Could our well-meaning “braces” prevent what Hebrews refers to as mature Christians who “by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil” (Hebrews 5:14, NIV)?

Where does this leave us? Lists of do’s and don’ts are not the answer. Does this mean that we should have no restrictions or guidelines? Absolutely not! Acts 15 is the perfect example of the legitimacy of this practice. Spiritual leaders on any level (pastors and parents are the best examples) can come together, look at the current society and situation, examine the Word of God, and issue guidelines for the church or family. These should not, however, be confused with biblical commands on equal with the words of Christ. The Bible makes it clear that they are time and situation specific, not eternal and infallible.

If you disagree with my conclusions, may God bless you anyhow. I only ask that you warn me before I visit your church. I don’t want to be caught off guard when the usher plants a big, wet, holy kiss on me.

ninetyandnine.com

---------

Josh Lewis resides in the wet state of Louisiana. He is quite content to receive holy kisses from his wife, Nancy.