Man has been complicating his relationship with God from the beginning. One way that doctrine has been muddied is with traditions that take away from the teachings of truth and grace. Don’t get me wrong, traditions have value: some apply to seasons of life and last for generations, but only the basics that God has given us are infallible for eternity.
In Genesis 2:17, God instructed man in the garden of Eden, “but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.” There was one basic law for man to live by to have a great life. When Eve responded to satan in Genesis 3:2, “but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’ ” Where did she get this idea that humans couldn’t touch the tree or its fruit? There is no evidence for this. This may have been the first tradition of God’s people. Even before the fall of man, we may have added complexity. This was not recorded anywhere as a law of God. In the garden, there was one law: do not eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. If humans would have followed this tradition of not touching the fruit of this tree, they surely would have remained in their close relationship with God because one cannot eat fruit without touching it. If this tradition was touted as the law of God, a door would have been opened for Satan to add to man’s complicating ideas. Possibly Adam added to God’s law to protect himself from eating, keeping a greater distance from temptation. Maybe he inferred that God said, “do not touch the tree or its fruit”.
Possibly as far back as Eden, man’s traditions have fleshed themselves out in a multitude of ways creating complexities which hide the basic elements by which God’s creations were supposed to abide. Helpful traditions or practices of a person, family, church, or even a denomination, add complexity to the Church’s life. These complexities become hideous when they hide God’s laws and principles so deep, causing us to lose sight of truth and grace and the application of it in our lives. Traditions can become an unnecessary burden or stumbling block to living for Christ, confusing the masses that once bonded together. When humans retain the proper perspective of the fallible, expendable, short-lived purpose of their traditions, they can highlight God’s infallible and eternal principles for His people. We are by nature traditional people, which can be evidenced not only by traveling to other countries, but by going to the next city or state. In fact, those who vehemently oppose tradition even become traditionally individual. On most city-owned vehicles in Portland, Oregon, you will find the catch phrase “The city that works.” Displayed on many private vehicles, you may notice the popular “Keep Portland Weird” motto that has become the tradition of the city’s culture. If you live there, you will find yourself challenged to comply because at its roots, it demands allegiance to be non-conforming. To the sightseer in Portland, you can observe this idea after a few days of bicycling. For someone born in this city, witnessing weird is perfectly normal. The city of Portland does not work because it is weird, its unique character has complicated its function at times. Even Portland’s unique tradition roots itself in the principle that God made us all individuals. Traditions that root themselves in God’s laws and principles can coexist with the weird. They are given their purpose and strength because of their connection to laws. Understanding traditions before we attempt to change, replace, or even dispose of them is wise. The church, although ripe with complex traditions and even some man-made rules, is not alive because of these. We tend to withhold value from something we don’t understand, especially if it impedes how we function.
The Church in all her weirdness will not survive because of a complex shell of traditions, but in spite of them. New traditions will continue to spring up and old ones disappear.
Talk about complexity, the evolution of this vehicle (the church) which predates Carl Benz1 and all his ingenuity by almost two thousand years has succumbed to adverse change that few understand.
Not every new idea has survived the test of time on cars, and the vehicle of the church is no exception. Some have been more concerned with her as a storage place, and instead value the old cargo rather than make room for more people. When parts break down, and we are afraid to let them be recycled because of nostalgic or other reasons, the load becomes overbearing. An elderly friend of ours bought a new vehicle. The suggestion was never made to have the nobs and switches from the old car placed in the new one just so they wouldn’t have to learn new options. These parts were not even saved in the trunk, just in case the novelty of the current model was overwhelming. Towing the old vehicle behind the new one could have been a possibility should buyer’s remorse set in, but this was not on the discussion table with the dealership. All of the fore-mentioned ideas would have been possible, but what complications would that have added to the function of the new car? The choice was to keep the old car or buy a new one. Keeping both could have been considered as well. They both function on the same basic principles.
If the vehicle of the church is complicated from her original condition, we cannot blame God any more than we can blame Carl Benz for the malfunction of our power windows due to poor engineering. God is complex beyond our understanding, but He did not make the functioning of the Church beyond anyone’s grasp.
When we watch what our complex God has created, it simply works. Even if we research it to its complex end, much to our amazement, He has had it all figured out. The sun goes up, the sun goes down. The moon appears, and then it hides again. The seasons come, we plant, or something springs up naturally. It grows. We store. We eat. One day we are born; many days later, we die. At birth, our small hearts beat and supply blood for our entire little body. While years later, that same heart grows to do the same for our adult stature. The rules are in place for nature, which seems to work. The large oak grows every year as does the sapling. Moreover, God has retained control, things work and they seem simple and naturally functional. The earth’s functions need no compost heap, garbage collectors, climate control boards, moderators, regulators, or other external checks and balances. The earth not only can sustain the life it was designed to support, but in its natural beauty can be a joy. When we travel, we see nature is more diverse and complex in its variety, yet still functions. When we dissect it, we discover the complexity and minute details collaboratively mesh.
Bertha Benz2 must have had some understanding of how the first automobile functioned in order to repair it on that first marketing trip. We have to know and understand how something works before we can add our own garter belts to a vehicle. Every addition to the vehicle must sync with the existing elements. If not, they risk being recalled when they adversely affect the performance or add possible harm to its passengers. Every new convenience we add to the Church has both the potential to distort the view of the basic elements or add difficulty diagnosing the point of any malfunction. Could Bertha fix an AC unit in a car today? I believe she could if she understood why it was needed in the first place, or she would want to discard the extra weight. The engine in her vehicle could not have handled either the complexity or weight of this option. Would Bertha put AC in her original motorwagen? No, I think she was wise enough to know windows would have been a more prudent first addition.
There are two other examples of simplicity versus complexity to notice. In 1957, Ford tried to start a new car line called the Edsel.3 There was mass marketing, much hype, and great anticipation. It is not worth trying to debate its failure: sales were 64,000 cars the first year,4 but that was not sustainable. It was new, innovative in many ways, and still used the basic elements of the first “motorwagen,” but when it was unveiled as the new personality in the automobile field, it didn’t meet expectations. And yet, another inventor in the automobile industry attempted to give cars personality with a new rotary-style engine, yet issues ensued.5
Anomalies like the Edsel or the rotary engine will come along, but these ideas should not cause us to question the simplicity of the Church, and then incorporate every complex design change as if it is an improvement or the greatest new innovation. Despite the novelty, these two unique designers still used spark, fuel, and a transmission to propel their vehicles. Those were not what made their products less marketable. They had new ideas but not better ones. These cars had a personality of their own but had to apply the same basic functions. Any new idea needs to meet the road test. If you can sell someone a new idea, but it fails on the road to produce the same or better results than the last model they purchased, you will lose the best marketing tool invented, a satisfied customer. Options or novelties can add complexity, yet not improve the function of the church despite the conveniences. Instead, these can make the church’s life more complicated, and then harder to diagnose a problem should it arise.
Since the inception of the church, many valuable ministries have been spawned so that the church could continue to be the hands and feet of Christ. As in the early church when the apostles appointed others to serve tables, we need to be diligent to keep evangelism, discipleship, and shepherding actively present in our Church life. Be careful to ensure these three basic elements of the church are not buried under attractive ministries, so their effectiveness remains the heartbeat of the body of Christ.
Reflections on It Must Be The Complexity!
What creative license have we been given by God with respect to the Church?
What liberties have we taken and over-complicated Church life?
Have we tried to market the Church for something she is not?
When is it okay to keep the Church life simple and okay to make it more complex?
Author: Wilf Scheuermann, excerpt from the transcript God’s Grade ©2015; Photo by Tim Clark: https://www.pexels.com/photo/classic-car-in-grayscale-photography-141500/
1 Group, M.-B. (n.d.). Benz Patent Motor Car: The first automobile (1885–1886): Mercedes-Benz Group. Mercedes. https://group.mercedes-benz.com/company/tradition/company-history/1885-1886.html
2 Wikimedia Foundation. (2025, May 9). Benz patent-motorwagen. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benz_Patent-Motorwagen
3 Deaton, J. P. (2015, July 8). The Ford Edsel failed, but why?. HowStuffWorks. https://auto.howstuffworks.com/why-the-ford-edsel-failed.htm
4 Wikimedia Foundation. (2025, May 9). Benz patent-motorwagen. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benz_Patent-Motorwagen
5 Felix Wankel: EBSCO. EBSCO Information Services, Inc. | www.ebsco.com. (n.d.). https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/biography/felix-wankel