What do you think?
Rate this book
At the Origins of Christian Worship: The Context and Character of Earliest Christian Devotion
This volume makes a valuable contribution to the debate about the origins and development of Christianity. Larry Hurtado argues that understanding the nature of Christianity in the first century requires taking full account of the first Christians' devotional practices because worship was the context in which christological titles and other expressions of faith were given their specific meaning--a fact that has largely been ignored.
Hurtado focuses on two distinguishing characteristics of earliest Christian its exclusivity (rejecting the worship of other deities) and its "binitarian" shape (the veneration of Christ alongside God the Father). Setting early Christianity within the religious environment of the Roman era, Hurtado describes the features of Christianity that attracted followers and led them to renounce other religions. He then turns his attention to a more detailed discussion of the place of Christ in the monotheistic worship of the earliest Christians, showing that Christ figured in their public and corporate devotional life at a surprisingly early stage. The book concludes with some reflections for Christian worship today based on the historical features of early Christian devotional practices.
Clear, illuminating, and relevant to the modern church, this volume will be of interest to scholars, pastors, students, and general readers seeking insight into the origins of Christian faith and practice.
Hurtado focuses on two distinguishing characteristics of earliest Christian its exclusivity (rejecting the worship of other deities) and its "binitarian" shape (the veneration of Christ alongside God the Father). Setting early Christianity within the religious environment of the Roman era, Hurtado describes the features of Christianity that attracted followers and led them to renounce other religions. He then turns his attention to a more detailed discussion of the place of Christ in the monotheistic worship of the earliest Christians, showing that Christ figured in their public and corporate devotional life at a surprisingly early stage. The book concludes with some reflections for Christian worship today based on the historical features of early Christian devotional practices.
Clear, illuminating, and relevant to the modern church, this volume will be of interest to scholars, pastors, students, and general readers seeking insight into the origins of Christian faith and practice.
150 pages, Paperback
First published November 30, 1999
25 people are currently reading
157 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
September 5, 2020
While this book considers the historical context and character of early Christian worship, it is more than that. It challenges the reader to consider his own worship in today’s context. For example, in a culture dominated by pagan religion, what did the church have to offer, and how were monotheistic Christians to interact with their pagan neighbors? The pagans held power, and their temples and shrines were ubiquitous. Everyday activities unavoidably featured some form of pagan worship. Quite often the very food on sale in the markets had been offered to pagan gods, and eating it could be construed as honoring whichever god to whom it had been offered.
The pagan temples offered impressive monumental architecture and pomp. Although the book doesn’t bring it up, after Christianity became dominant, monumental temples were replaced by monumental churches and cathedrals, and pagan pomp in worship was replaced by Christian pomp in worship. While I have no doubt that many of those Christians who over the centuries have given up their time and resources in the construction, maintenance and operation of these facilities have done so as an act of devotion to their God, I also have to wonder just how many of those Christians who are impressed with it would have chosen a monumental pagan temple and pagan pomp over a lowly house church had they lived in the pagan era. In other words, what is the object of their worship? The impressive pomp and architecture or the Lord God Almighty? I grew up in a denomination that frowned on the use of church resources for activities not related to worship. As a result, a defining feature of their church buildings would be the absence of a fellowship hall, kitchen or gym as they view them as supporting secular activities. While I disagree with their dogmatic stance on this, they do have a point. Are people drawn to the goodies on offer, or are they drawn to the Lord?
One thing that the early church had to offer was community in which everyone was on equal terms regardless of ethnicity, social status or gender. “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:28, NASB). As a strong introvert who is more comfortable with my nose in a book rather than around people, I find this matter particularly challenging. A book doesn’t necessarily pressure me to get on board with whatever ideas it is promulgating; I can take it or leave it, no pressure. Dealing with people is a different matter on account of egos and pride, both theirs and mine. Annoying people don’t come with mute buttons or off buttons, as desirable as that might be, and everybody is annoying at some point or another. Regardless of the challenges involved, I still have the same responsibility for Christian community as everyone else.
The discussion of communion in the early church was especially challenging to me. It is so packed with meaning: memorial of Jesus’ death on the cross, covenantal meal, a realized eschatological foretaste of the marriage feast of the Lamb. Dr. Hurtado brings up the point that it also serves as a cultic meal with Jesus Himself as the host. To treat it lightly is to insult the host, Jesus, and incur His wrath, which is why Paul had such strong words about it in 1 Cor. 11. It is difficult to see the future marriage feast of the Lamb in our current practice of small cups of grape juice or wine and small wafers of communion bread. How can I consistently show it due respect? The church I grew up in did communion every Sunday. Some churches, fearing that too frequent a celebration of communion might make it too familiar, do it less frequently. Other churches resort to a more formal liturgy to maintain its dignity. Each of these practices has its pitfalls because it is executed by fallible humans. I guess it ultimately comes down to personal responsibility for my own heart.
An interesting point made in the book is the direct influence of the Holy Spirit on the church. Consider the apostles speaking in tongues in Acts 2, the healing miracles performed by apostles and others, prophets at Antioch who sent out Paul and Barnabas (Acts 13), the daughters of Philip who prophesied, divine communication via dreams (Acts 16) and visions (Acts 9 and 10; 2 Cor. 12). The church has not necessarily dealt with this consistently over the years, and the modern church typically adopts one of three different positions:
1. Miracles were a feature of the early church but ceased with the death of the last apostle (cessationism).
2. Miraculous intervention remains a feature of the church. This is commonly held by charismatic groups such as the Pentecostals, for whom speaking in tongues is a normal feature of their worship services.
3. Miracles remain a possibility, but they serve very specific divine purposes and are rare, not to be expected.
I can’t necessarily say whether Dr. Hurtado was pushing a charismatic or hybrid position but agree with his basic points. Miracles and other supernatural events were a feature of the early church. Regarding miracles today, I grew up in a cessationist church but hold position 3 because I think it is more consistent with scripture than the other positions. The New Testament was written over the course of a few decades, but the Old Testament was written over more than a millennium and covers thousands of years of history. Yes, it attests miracles, but they were rare and episodic, serving very specific purposes, such as achieving a divine purpose (e.g. creation, the flood, the exodus), communicating something (e.g. Daniel) or validating a divine messenger (e.g. Moses, Elijah, Elisha). The ancients were no more gullible than we are and understood that the natural world works in very specific ways. Dead people stay dead. Illness and other physical mal-conditions don’t just go away. When that natural order was violated, it was an attention-getting moment, just as it would be today. The scriptures document episodic supernaturalism. If it were a common occurrence, it wouldn’t be out of the ordinary, would it?
I can’t help but think of an incident that took place when I was a young adult in the Navy. A friend, R, had been invited to a service at a charismatic church. While there, he was asked if he would be baptized. Willing to try just about anything, he consented. The water in the baptistry was freezing, and his teeth were chattering too much for him to say anything intelligible. This church used speaking in tongues as a litmus test for receiving the Holy Spirit, an unscriptural position, and those present interpreted his distorted words as speaking in tongues, saying, “Hallelujah! He’s speaking in tongues.” Needless to say, this didn’t impress R, but he held his tongue.
Afterwards, when he was getting changed back into his street clothes in the men’s room, the person who had invited him, X, was gushing about how glad he was that R had received the Spirit. At this point, R started to have his fun, replying that it felt as if something else were inside, too. Immediately, X grabbed R’s face and slammed his head against the mirror so hard it cracked and started commanding the demon to come out. R decided to roll with it. If X thought he had a demon, he would put on his best Exorcist act. Finally, he acted as if the demon had left, lying motionless on the floor. By this time the others had heard the commotion and come to see what was happening. X explained that R had had a demon and that he had managed to cast it out. At this point, R, still not done with his fun, sat up and said with his most demonic voice, “That’s what you think!” This was a mistake, as everyone present piled onto him, grabbing for his face and commanding the demon to come out. R continued his Exorcist impression for a while and finally acted as if the demon had been cast out, returning to normal and ending the charade.
Personally, I find this as tragic as it is comedic, and yes, it is funny. I laughed my head off when R told me about it. That said, Jesus commanded his followers to be as innocent as lambs and as wise as serpents. This was a massive display of gullibility that was completely unworthy of the church. We can and must do better than that.
Whether Dr. Hurtado was subtly advocating a more charismatic approach based on the early church or otherwise, I appreciate that he did refer back to how the early church actually functioned. Paul’s corrective instructions in 1 Corinthians suggests that the church did not always get it right regarding both community and spiritual gifts, but if we are to get it right, we must root our efforts in scripture, the legacy of the early church.
The pagan temples offered impressive monumental architecture and pomp. Although the book doesn’t bring it up, after Christianity became dominant, monumental temples were replaced by monumental churches and cathedrals, and pagan pomp in worship was replaced by Christian pomp in worship. While I have no doubt that many of those Christians who over the centuries have given up their time and resources in the construction, maintenance and operation of these facilities have done so as an act of devotion to their God, I also have to wonder just how many of those Christians who are impressed with it would have chosen a monumental pagan temple and pagan pomp over a lowly house church had they lived in the pagan era. In other words, what is the object of their worship? The impressive pomp and architecture or the Lord God Almighty? I grew up in a denomination that frowned on the use of church resources for activities not related to worship. As a result, a defining feature of their church buildings would be the absence of a fellowship hall, kitchen or gym as they view them as supporting secular activities. While I disagree with their dogmatic stance on this, they do have a point. Are people drawn to the goodies on offer, or are they drawn to the Lord?
One thing that the early church had to offer was community in which everyone was on equal terms regardless of ethnicity, social status or gender. “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:28, NASB). As a strong introvert who is more comfortable with my nose in a book rather than around people, I find this matter particularly challenging. A book doesn’t necessarily pressure me to get on board with whatever ideas it is promulgating; I can take it or leave it, no pressure. Dealing with people is a different matter on account of egos and pride, both theirs and mine. Annoying people don’t come with mute buttons or off buttons, as desirable as that might be, and everybody is annoying at some point or another. Regardless of the challenges involved, I still have the same responsibility for Christian community as everyone else.
The discussion of communion in the early church was especially challenging to me. It is so packed with meaning: memorial of Jesus’ death on the cross, covenantal meal, a realized eschatological foretaste of the marriage feast of the Lamb. Dr. Hurtado brings up the point that it also serves as a cultic meal with Jesus Himself as the host. To treat it lightly is to insult the host, Jesus, and incur His wrath, which is why Paul had such strong words about it in 1 Cor. 11. It is difficult to see the future marriage feast of the Lamb in our current practice of small cups of grape juice or wine and small wafers of communion bread. How can I consistently show it due respect? The church I grew up in did communion every Sunday. Some churches, fearing that too frequent a celebration of communion might make it too familiar, do it less frequently. Other churches resort to a more formal liturgy to maintain its dignity. Each of these practices has its pitfalls because it is executed by fallible humans. I guess it ultimately comes down to personal responsibility for my own heart.
An interesting point made in the book is the direct influence of the Holy Spirit on the church. Consider the apostles speaking in tongues in Acts 2, the healing miracles performed by apostles and others, prophets at Antioch who sent out Paul and Barnabas (Acts 13), the daughters of Philip who prophesied, divine communication via dreams (Acts 16) and visions (Acts 9 and 10; 2 Cor. 12). The church has not necessarily dealt with this consistently over the years, and the modern church typically adopts one of three different positions:
1. Miracles were a feature of the early church but ceased with the death of the last apostle (cessationism).
2. Miraculous intervention remains a feature of the church. This is commonly held by charismatic groups such as the Pentecostals, for whom speaking in tongues is a normal feature of their worship services.
3. Miracles remain a possibility, but they serve very specific divine purposes and are rare, not to be expected.
I can’t necessarily say whether Dr. Hurtado was pushing a charismatic or hybrid position but agree with his basic points. Miracles and other supernatural events were a feature of the early church. Regarding miracles today, I grew up in a cessationist church but hold position 3 because I think it is more consistent with scripture than the other positions. The New Testament was written over the course of a few decades, but the Old Testament was written over more than a millennium and covers thousands of years of history. Yes, it attests miracles, but they were rare and episodic, serving very specific purposes, such as achieving a divine purpose (e.g. creation, the flood, the exodus), communicating something (e.g. Daniel) or validating a divine messenger (e.g. Moses, Elijah, Elisha). The ancients were no more gullible than we are and understood that the natural world works in very specific ways. Dead people stay dead. Illness and other physical mal-conditions don’t just go away. When that natural order was violated, it was an attention-getting moment, just as it would be today. The scriptures document episodic supernaturalism. If it were a common occurrence, it wouldn’t be out of the ordinary, would it?
I can’t help but think of an incident that took place when I was a young adult in the Navy. A friend, R, had been invited to a service at a charismatic church. While there, he was asked if he would be baptized. Willing to try just about anything, he consented. The water in the baptistry was freezing, and his teeth were chattering too much for him to say anything intelligible. This church used speaking in tongues as a litmus test for receiving the Holy Spirit, an unscriptural position, and those present interpreted his distorted words as speaking in tongues, saying, “Hallelujah! He’s speaking in tongues.” Needless to say, this didn’t impress R, but he held his tongue.
Afterwards, when he was getting changed back into his street clothes in the men’s room, the person who had invited him, X, was gushing about how glad he was that R had received the Spirit. At this point, R started to have his fun, replying that it felt as if something else were inside, too. Immediately, X grabbed R’s face and slammed his head against the mirror so hard it cracked and started commanding the demon to come out. R decided to roll with it. If X thought he had a demon, he would put on his best Exorcist act. Finally, he acted as if the demon had left, lying motionless on the floor. By this time the others had heard the commotion and come to see what was happening. X explained that R had had a demon and that he had managed to cast it out. At this point, R, still not done with his fun, sat up and said with his most demonic voice, “That’s what you think!” This was a mistake, as everyone present piled onto him, grabbing for his face and commanding the demon to come out. R continued his Exorcist impression for a while and finally acted as if the demon had been cast out, returning to normal and ending the charade.
Personally, I find this as tragic as it is comedic, and yes, it is funny. I laughed my head off when R told me about it. That said, Jesus commanded his followers to be as innocent as lambs and as wise as serpents. This was a massive display of gullibility that was completely unworthy of the church. We can and must do better than that.
Whether Dr. Hurtado was subtly advocating a more charismatic approach based on the early church or otherwise, I appreciate that he did refer back to how the early church actually functioned. Paul’s corrective instructions in 1 Corinthians suggests that the church did not always get it right regarding both community and spiritual gifts, but if we are to get it right, we must root our efforts in scripture, the legacy of the early church.
November 22, 2018
Based on a series of lectures, the short book is a very readable summary of many of the themes that extend throughout Hurtado's work. The main goal of the book is to explore what worship was like near the beginning of the Christian faith.
Hurtado starts his book by looking at paganism as it would have existed in the day and how that would have impacted Christian worship. The gist of it is that a Christian of Gentile extraction would have had a difficult time in society, because its social structure was largely based around pagan cults. Want to share a meal? You'll do that at the temple--or in rarer cases, at rich person's house (though in a crowd of ten at most)--generally in honor of a god. Being Christian involved breaking away from much of this social structure.
Next, Hurtado looks at how Christians actually worshipped, insofar as what they received in exchange for their conversion. Many churches met in homes and featured only a small number of congregants, so the experience was intimate--and it often featured food. Social distinctions were largely removed. There was also the promise of a coming utopian age of which Christians had a foretaste.
Hurtado turns next to the worship pattern insofar as the nature of God is concerned. He denotes that worship was largely binitarian--focused on Jesus and the Father as objects of veneration. The Spirit was certainly something of importance, but it was not an object of worship. Christians still believed themselves monotheists, as the Son was seen as the expression of the Father.
In the final chapter, Hurtado turns to contemporary worship and discusses how the early history/pattern of worship might instruct Christians today in their own practice.
Hurtado starts his book by looking at paganism as it would have existed in the day and how that would have impacted Christian worship. The gist of it is that a Christian of Gentile extraction would have had a difficult time in society, because its social structure was largely based around pagan cults. Want to share a meal? You'll do that at the temple--or in rarer cases, at rich person's house (though in a crowd of ten at most)--generally in honor of a god. Being Christian involved breaking away from much of this social structure.
Next, Hurtado looks at how Christians actually worshipped, insofar as what they received in exchange for their conversion. Many churches met in homes and featured only a small number of congregants, so the experience was intimate--and it often featured food. Social distinctions were largely removed. There was also the promise of a coming utopian age of which Christians had a foretaste.
Hurtado turns next to the worship pattern insofar as the nature of God is concerned. He denotes that worship was largely binitarian--focused on Jesus and the Father as objects of veneration. The Spirit was certainly something of importance, but it was not an object of worship. Christians still believed themselves monotheists, as the Son was seen as the expression of the Father.
In the final chapter, Hurtado turns to contemporary worship and discusses how the early history/pattern of worship might instruct Christians today in their own practice.
October 14, 2022
For a relatively short book, the author manages to cover quite a bit. This is both an excellent introduction to the Early Church as well as to the History of Christian Worship. Whilst the book is scholarly, it is easy to read and engaging.
Given the topic of Worship in the Early Church, it should come as no surprise that the person and nature of Jesus Christ is also covered - and done well.
Plus it has quite an impressive bibliography - a thing often missing in shorter books. Thus giving many options for further study!
Well worthwhile for any Christian who would like to understand more of their history.
Given the topic of Worship in the Early Church, it should come as no surprise that the person and nature of Jesus Christ is also covered - and done well.
Plus it has quite an impressive bibliography - a thing often missing in shorter books. Thus giving many options for further study!
Well worthwhile for any Christian who would like to understand more of their history.
August 3, 2018
Good, clear arguments. Interestingly, he seems somewhat bemused at what Athanasius did by developing a metaphysical explanation for why Christians worship Christ as God (101-102). And he also oddly use the language of binary worship of God despite the fact that he sees the Holy Spirit playing an important role in the New Testament. Why not call it a triadic shape that has the Father and Son as the primary recipients of honour?
August 12, 2018
This book was footnoted in another book I am currently reading (The Pastor's Book by R. Kent Hughes) and I thought it might be a helpful supplement to furthering an understanding of early church worship practices (as the footnote suggested). I was sadly disappointed. There is little of substance to this short work. I would not recommend.
January 10, 2022
A helpful, short little book concerning the context and unique characteristics of early Christian worship. Good for a short dive into the topic.
October 23, 2021
Having grown up as an atheist, I used to treat all religious practices with contempt. Even after my conversion to theism, rituals and liturgy have remained alien to me, partly by choice, partly due to circumstances. My experience and understanding of Christianity have been mostly on the intellectual level.
In this regard, Prof. Hurtado made a significant impact on me, as he piqued my interest in the lives of the earliest Christians, what they did in their private and public devotion, and more importantly, why. I also think this type of studies would help to inform and reform the lives and practices of Christians today, even my own.
Synopsis
Unlike many other scholars who have focused on theological and Christological beliefs expressed in the New Testament, Prof. Hurtado has focused his research efforts on the practices of earliest Christians, noting that religion in the ancient world is eminently practical, ubiquitous and diverse, quite distinct from the philosophy and theology of the “sophisticates”.
There is a “constellation” of Christian devotional practices that in Hurtado’s view constitutes worship, namely, prayer, invocation and confession, baptism, hymns, sacred meal (Lord’s Supper) and prophesy. This distinguishes Christianity both from Judaism and paganism. From Judaism, because no other figure in Jewish history was accorded devotion like this; From Paganism, because the devotion was offered exclusively to God and Christ. Ironically, Christians were charged with atheism because of their refusal to worship pagan deities.
Unanswered Questions
Question: Did the earliest Christian devotion to Jesus constitute worship as Jews worshipped God?
Prof. James Dunn, another prominent New Testament scholar, argued that the earliest Christians did not worship Jesus as Jews worshiped God. Prof. Hurtado seemed to concede this point, but argued that, nevertheless, earliest Christians did worship Jesus with reference to and alongside God, because their corporate devotion practices constitute worship which involves Jesus as the center.
The earliest Christians, i.e., Jewish believers, offered sacrifice to God in the Temple (as related in Acts). If they didn’t offer the same sacrifice to Jesus, this would seem to not only contradict Hurtado’s claim that Jesus was central in their devotional life, but also suggest a significant difference between Jesus and God as the object of worship. Moreover, if the Jewish believers continued to worship in the Temple, whereas the Gentile believers didn’t and couldn’t, one would expect dissension and division between the two groups. Interestingly, no such division can be detected in the writings in the NT. There are disagreements about circumcision, but not Temple worship.
Question: Why did the earliest Christians choose these specific forms of worship?
Unfortunately, we know precious little about Jewish devotional practices in the Second Temple period, and the little we know about Christian practices were mainly gleaned from the New Testament. There is no standard prayer book, not liturgy. So we cannot draw a detailed comparison between contemporary Jewish and Christian practices.
If they are quite different, as Hurtado seems to conclude, it begs the question: Why would any Jew, who was prescribed by the Law to worship God in certain ways, choose to worship another figure in different ways? Hurtado proposes that the earliest Christians believed that they were required to worship Jesus, and that, in worshipping Jesus, they glorify God. If so, why are there no written records of any divine instructions on the worship of Jesus, comparable to those on the worship of the God of Israel? It seems unlikely that the Almighty, who is very particular about worship, would make it a free-for-all, when requiring worship of His beloved Son.
(Read full review at Nemo's Library)
In this regard, Prof. Hurtado made a significant impact on me, as he piqued my interest in the lives of the earliest Christians, what they did in their private and public devotion, and more importantly, why. I also think this type of studies would help to inform and reform the lives and practices of Christians today, even my own.
Synopsis
Unlike many other scholars who have focused on theological and Christological beliefs expressed in the New Testament, Prof. Hurtado has focused his research efforts on the practices of earliest Christians, noting that religion in the ancient world is eminently practical, ubiquitous and diverse, quite distinct from the philosophy and theology of the “sophisticates”.
There is a “constellation” of Christian devotional practices that in Hurtado’s view constitutes worship, namely, prayer, invocation and confession, baptism, hymns, sacred meal (Lord’s Supper) and prophesy. This distinguishes Christianity both from Judaism and paganism. From Judaism, because no other figure in Jewish history was accorded devotion like this; From Paganism, because the devotion was offered exclusively to God and Christ. Ironically, Christians were charged with atheism because of their refusal to worship pagan deities.
Unanswered Questions
Question: Did the earliest Christian devotion to Jesus constitute worship as Jews worshipped God?
Prof. James Dunn, another prominent New Testament scholar, argued that the earliest Christians did not worship Jesus as Jews worshiped God. Prof. Hurtado seemed to concede this point, but argued that, nevertheless, earliest Christians did worship Jesus with reference to and alongside God, because their corporate devotion practices constitute worship which involves Jesus as the center.
The earliest Christians, i.e., Jewish believers, offered sacrifice to God in the Temple (as related in Acts). If they didn’t offer the same sacrifice to Jesus, this would seem to not only contradict Hurtado’s claim that Jesus was central in their devotional life, but also suggest a significant difference between Jesus and God as the object of worship. Moreover, if the Jewish believers continued to worship in the Temple, whereas the Gentile believers didn’t and couldn’t, one would expect dissension and division between the two groups. Interestingly, no such division can be detected in the writings in the NT. There are disagreements about circumcision, but not Temple worship.
Question: Why did the earliest Christians choose these specific forms of worship?
Unfortunately, we know precious little about Jewish devotional practices in the Second Temple period, and the little we know about Christian practices were mainly gleaned from the New Testament. There is no standard prayer book, not liturgy. So we cannot draw a detailed comparison between contemporary Jewish and Christian practices.
If they are quite different, as Hurtado seems to conclude, it begs the question: Why would any Jew, who was prescribed by the Law to worship God in certain ways, choose to worship another figure in different ways? Hurtado proposes that the earliest Christians believed that they were required to worship Jesus, and that, in worshipping Jesus, they glorify God. If so, why are there no written records of any divine instructions on the worship of Jesus, comparable to those on the worship of the God of Israel? It seems unlikely that the Almighty, who is very particular about worship, would make it a free-for-all, when requiring worship of His beloved Son.
(Read full review at Nemo's Library)
February 9, 2011
Hurtado offers some interesting perspectives into the history of Christian worship, particularly regarding the inclusion of Jesus into the worship life of first-centry Jewish disciples of Jesus who were earnestly striving to keep careful fidelity to the monotheistic dogma of Old Testament Hebrew religion. He gives a panoramic glimpse into what characterized early Christian worship in the Church and, in the final chapter, brings everything home to the worship life of the Church today, giving suggestions as to how we might worship more mindfully and, hence, more effectually... After all, earthly worship, he says, is participation in the activity of heaven, directed unto Him who sits upon the throne and unto the Lamb: if we would but open our spiritual eyes, we could see that we are accompanied by angels, our voices joining in with theirs.
* For me, this was a re-read.
* For me, this was a re-read.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews