I’ve been thinking a lot lately about a conversation I overheard about a year ago. I was at a major Sunday School convention here in Kentucky in line for lunch, and overheard two youth pastors behind me discussing their youth groups and meeting with them at school for lunch or other activities. About half-way through the conversation one pastor said to the other something along the lines of “well, the school won’t let me on campus to meet with my own students, but that is okay with me, because if I can’t come on campus, then neither can the Satanist or any other crazy group”. Now, for clarification, this was not just any pastor, but a Baptist pastor. And this wasn’t just any Baptist, but a Southern Baptist. And if anyone has learned anything in the last 20 years about confronting problems, it’s the Southern Baptists. We learned in the 1980’s the true cost of turning a blind eye to problems when we worked to overcome the liberals who had run the denomination for too long. We shouldn’t be making the same mistake in allowing the liberals in society to erode our freedoms just because we don’t want to fight. I say its time to bring it to them.
Since when did Baptists stop believing in the freedom of religion? You see, if we cannot get into schools, like the Supreme Court has affirmed we have the right to as ministers to our youth, then no one associated with anything religious can, and that my friends is exactly the reason Baptists for so long have fought for freedom of religion. Do I care if a Satanist comes onto the campus of any local high school? NO WAY!!! Why? Because I believe in the freedom of religion, and because of the freedom of thought in the marketplace of ideas, I can rest assured that the best idea, the best system, always wins. It’s the capitalist way. Capitalism requires that the best system wins, and it does so without any external force or manipulation. I don’t have to try to force out anyone except Baptists from the schools. More than that, I can comfortably rely on the Truth of the Gospel to win out over the lies of Satan. Since when did we start getting scared of Satan? Let me tell you, he may have power over this world, but its time Christians start living the way they should. We must stop living like Satan has beat us, and start living like we beat him, because Christ has won the victory. We have to stop running around like frightened, victimized losers and start acting like bold, courageous winners. WE HAVE ALREADY WON THE WAR!!!! There’s no good reason to fear the free exchange of ideas unless we are limited by the fear of failure. But if your success comes from the Spirit, then it doesn’t matter who is standing against you, because He is on your side.
So the next time you are told you can’t be somewhere, you can’t go somewhere, remember that its time to stop laying down and taking it. It’s time to stand up tall and take on the liberals and beat them at their own game, because we’ve already won the war, they just keep trying to ignore our victory. You have the right to be in the schools, kids have the right to be Christians even at school, and for the love of everything people, we have the right to stand up for what we believe and tell other people. So get out there and do it!!!
Tuesday, November 22, 2005
Sunday, October 30, 2005
What Makes a Moderate?
Time for a CCC Poll. In evaluating the Conservative Resurgence within the Southern Baptist Conventtion, I have discovered a phenomenal difference of opinion regarding what makes someone a Moderate. It seems the Conservatives call the Moderates Liberals, and the Liberals don't seem to care who is what, and the Moderates call themselves, usually it seems, Conservatives. So I ask, What then makes someone a Moderate? I know it means, by definition, they are not "extreme" in their views, but does a Reader Response method of inspiration of the Bible make you a Liberal or Moderate? Or is it the claim that the Bible is not inerrant in the original manuscripts that makes you a Moderate or Liberal? Or is it a cumulative effect, so one disagreement makes you a semi-Moderate, two is full blown Moderate, and three or more makes you a Liberal? Any thoughts?
Monday, October 17, 2005
Let the Toe-Stepping Begin!!!!!
After a rather invigorating discussion with a buddy, I decided an update was fitting. I have been wrestling with the issue of how church is “done”, particularly about the failings and areas that can be improved.
Fundamentally I see two basic structures, the hierarchy, ie Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Methodists, and many more, and the Congregationalists, ie Baptists, and others we will leave out for the sake of space. While there has been much weeping and gnashing of teeth over the debates between these two structures, what the issue boils down to is the imperfect imitation of the headship of Christ and His rule over the body. And in the end, both structures try their best to model themselves after that relationship of Christ and the Body, each emphasizing different aspects.
Then it hit me. Polity isn’t the only area this imitation affects. In fact, it is present in everything we do in “doing” church, just like it is in everything we do in living our lives as Christians. The net result is that all of our debates are not and should not be about which method is better than another, but how can we achieve better methods by learning from both.
Elder rule is the attempt at perfect leadership of the congregation, and congregation rule is the attempt at perfect personal responsibility and freedom. Witnessing is the attempt to recreate the impact of one Man upon the 12 individuals He ministered to and led to faith. Preaching is the attempt to formulate the most effective communication of the inconceivable. In the end, in every area, we must fall short, must be imperfect, must miss the mark, because we fall short, are not perfect, and miss the mark.
Jesus will always be a better evangelist than we ever could be. Jesus will always be a better preacher than we ever could be. Jesus will always be a better leader than we ever could be. So lets stop vain debates over which method is better, and just start doing our best to emulate, imitate, personify, magnify and mirror the One who did it all perfectly. Lets stop leaving the example of Christ in the arena of Christian living and bring it into every area of life, including how we “do” church.
Will this produce some differences? You bet. Is that okay? Absolutely. Of course, we must guard against heresy and false teachers, but lets wake up and smell the coffee folks!!! If your theological “debate” can’t make it to the pew, is shouldn’t be happening. If it doesn’t make an impact on the people, then it isn’t worth it. Advocating right doctrine is not bad, but advocating sectarian doctrine to the loss of right doctrine as of primary importance does nothing but hurt everyone.
Highview Baptist Church here in Louisville, KY is a good example of positive steps in this direction. While they may or may not like to admit it, their new approach is semi-Presbyterian though they are Congregational in their polity. They have two campuses for one church. Technically, there should be two separate congregations for two campuses in the strict congregational model. Yet, they have flexed the boundaries a bit, learned something from the Presbyterian model it seems, and in the end, have a stronger ministry because of it. Andy Stanley in Atlanta leads two congregations in much the same way.
While I am not advocating a thesis-antithesis=synthesis approach, for I don’t think the two can adequately be blended into one form (mostly because that’s Heaven!), I think that in our imperfection, maybe we can find a way to continue to learn from one another and our right, biblical, and true understandings of the teachings of Scripture and continually allow this greater understanding of the Word to lead us to continual refinement. What I am saying is lets quit thinking and acting like the 1500’s are the pinnacle of theology and polity. Lets continue to avoid Liberalism, Postmoderism, Modernism, heresy, and every other theological error we can name, yet allow new, fresh thinking into our methods.
Another first step we could take is start learning from our views on anthropology and cultural anthropology about how to reach people here in the US and not just overseas like we have. Sojourn is a church here in Louisville that seems to have done this. Lets learn from this and start having fewer conferences where we try to learn exactly how X Baptist Church in Somewhere Else did it and they try to recreate the exact thing in our completely different situations and start having more conferences where we try to learn the exact principles behind the success of X Baptist Church, like Sojourn, and apply those principles to our situation. This then takes what is reproducible and leaves behind the rest. We had to learn this lesson in the mission field, but we never applied it here at home. If a white Englishman cannot minister to people anywhere other than England without analyzing the culture and adjusting the methods of evangelism (as any successful missionary soon learned they had to do, ie William Carey, and just about every other modern missionary movement leader), then perhaps we ought to realize that just because two people live in the same country, state, and even city, does not mean they have the same culture. We have no problem admitting there are multiple cultures with multiple variations in methodology needed because of this if it is in Africa or South Asia, but we seem to be unable to admit the same variation in North America. Tanzania is a country where the IMB (International Mission Board, the Southern Baptist foreign missions organization) has recognized both multiple people groups and the need for multiple methods of evangelism. You cannot reach the urban hard-core Muslims on the coast of Tanzania the same way you reach a tribe in the interior jungles of Tanzania. And just the same, you cannot reach an urban, hard-core atheist at a major university the same way you reach a family in the upper reaches of the Appalachian Mountains. Yet we don’t usually bother with anthropological investigations into the best way to take our Message, the Gospel once for all delivered to the Saints, to those different groups in the best way possible since they are both in the US.
So, those Willow Creek and Purpose Driven things may work for the ones that they worked for, but lets stop trying to grow a Purpose Driven Willow Creek where the creek bed is dry and there has not been a purpose for years. Lets instead learn the principles that can be gleaned, from Presbyterians, Seeker-sensitives, and maybe even some of the better Postmoderns, and apply them to our situations. In the end we will have relevant, radical, reformational (as in life-changing) churches that are perfect for our target culture. And for heaven’s sake (literally) lets stop competing with one another and figure out how to work together for the glory of His Kingdom. What do you say, is the Gospel worth it? I think so, and I hope you do too.
Fundamentally I see two basic structures, the hierarchy, ie Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Methodists, and many more, and the Congregationalists, ie Baptists, and others we will leave out for the sake of space. While there has been much weeping and gnashing of teeth over the debates between these two structures, what the issue boils down to is the imperfect imitation of the headship of Christ and His rule over the body. And in the end, both structures try their best to model themselves after that relationship of Christ and the Body, each emphasizing different aspects.
Then it hit me. Polity isn’t the only area this imitation affects. In fact, it is present in everything we do in “doing” church, just like it is in everything we do in living our lives as Christians. The net result is that all of our debates are not and should not be about which method is better than another, but how can we achieve better methods by learning from both.
Elder rule is the attempt at perfect leadership of the congregation, and congregation rule is the attempt at perfect personal responsibility and freedom. Witnessing is the attempt to recreate the impact of one Man upon the 12 individuals He ministered to and led to faith. Preaching is the attempt to formulate the most effective communication of the inconceivable. In the end, in every area, we must fall short, must be imperfect, must miss the mark, because we fall short, are not perfect, and miss the mark.
Jesus will always be a better evangelist than we ever could be. Jesus will always be a better preacher than we ever could be. Jesus will always be a better leader than we ever could be. So lets stop vain debates over which method is better, and just start doing our best to emulate, imitate, personify, magnify and mirror the One who did it all perfectly. Lets stop leaving the example of Christ in the arena of Christian living and bring it into every area of life, including how we “do” church.
Will this produce some differences? You bet. Is that okay? Absolutely. Of course, we must guard against heresy and false teachers, but lets wake up and smell the coffee folks!!! If your theological “debate” can’t make it to the pew, is shouldn’t be happening. If it doesn’t make an impact on the people, then it isn’t worth it. Advocating right doctrine is not bad, but advocating sectarian doctrine to the loss of right doctrine as of primary importance does nothing but hurt everyone.
Highview Baptist Church here in Louisville, KY is a good example of positive steps in this direction. While they may or may not like to admit it, their new approach is semi-Presbyterian though they are Congregational in their polity. They have two campuses for one church. Technically, there should be two separate congregations for two campuses in the strict congregational model. Yet, they have flexed the boundaries a bit, learned something from the Presbyterian model it seems, and in the end, have a stronger ministry because of it. Andy Stanley in Atlanta leads two congregations in much the same way.
While I am not advocating a thesis-antithesis=synthesis approach, for I don’t think the two can adequately be blended into one form (mostly because that’s Heaven!), I think that in our imperfection, maybe we can find a way to continue to learn from one another and our right, biblical, and true understandings of the teachings of Scripture and continually allow this greater understanding of the Word to lead us to continual refinement. What I am saying is lets quit thinking and acting like the 1500’s are the pinnacle of theology and polity. Lets continue to avoid Liberalism, Postmoderism, Modernism, heresy, and every other theological error we can name, yet allow new, fresh thinking into our methods.
Another first step we could take is start learning from our views on anthropology and cultural anthropology about how to reach people here in the US and not just overseas like we have. Sojourn is a church here in Louisville that seems to have done this. Lets learn from this and start having fewer conferences where we try to learn exactly how X Baptist Church in Somewhere Else did it and they try to recreate the exact thing in our completely different situations and start having more conferences where we try to learn the exact principles behind the success of X Baptist Church, like Sojourn, and apply those principles to our situation. This then takes what is reproducible and leaves behind the rest. We had to learn this lesson in the mission field, but we never applied it here at home. If a white Englishman cannot minister to people anywhere other than England without analyzing the culture and adjusting the methods of evangelism (as any successful missionary soon learned they had to do, ie William Carey, and just about every other modern missionary movement leader), then perhaps we ought to realize that just because two people live in the same country, state, and even city, does not mean they have the same culture. We have no problem admitting there are multiple cultures with multiple variations in methodology needed because of this if it is in Africa or South Asia, but we seem to be unable to admit the same variation in North America. Tanzania is a country where the IMB (International Mission Board, the Southern Baptist foreign missions organization) has recognized both multiple people groups and the need for multiple methods of evangelism. You cannot reach the urban hard-core Muslims on the coast of Tanzania the same way you reach a tribe in the interior jungles of Tanzania. And just the same, you cannot reach an urban, hard-core atheist at a major university the same way you reach a family in the upper reaches of the Appalachian Mountains. Yet we don’t usually bother with anthropological investigations into the best way to take our Message, the Gospel once for all delivered to the Saints, to those different groups in the best way possible since they are both in the US.
So, those Willow Creek and Purpose Driven things may work for the ones that they worked for, but lets stop trying to grow a Purpose Driven Willow Creek where the creek bed is dry and there has not been a purpose for years. Lets instead learn the principles that can be gleaned, from Presbyterians, Seeker-sensitives, and maybe even some of the better Postmoderns, and apply them to our situations. In the end we will have relevant, radical, reformational (as in life-changing) churches that are perfect for our target culture. And for heaven’s sake (literally) lets stop competing with one another and figure out how to work together for the glory of His Kingdom. What do you say, is the Gospel worth it? I think so, and I hope you do too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)