I was reading Acts 17 the other day and was impressed by a few things I found.
As a backstory to the passage, Paul was in Athens and noticed all the idols around the city. He noticed that they even had an idol to the "Unknown God" and took the opportunity to reveal His identity to them, saying, "Now what you worship as something unknown I am going to proclaim to you." (v.23)
Paul's message to them is fascinating to me, mainly because of the details he chooses to reveal to them about this "Unknown God". He could have taught them about sin and redemption. He could have talked about grace and works. He could have preached about the Law of Moses. Instead, notice what Paul thought was most important to communicate here.
"The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands." (v.24)
Paul begins his message by affirming one of the central truths of Christianity - That God does not live in a temple made by human hands. If this is so central to our faith, then why do we put such an emphasis - and expend such obscene amounts of money - on building temples to our God?
The second point that impresses me is that Paul takes the time to stress that God has a purpose and a place for each one of us: "From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live." (v.26)
Do you realize that God put you where you live today? God has a purpose for "the exact places where (you)...live" and that means that He had a reason for doing this. Your neighbors are your mission field. Your co-workers are your assignment. God has strategically placed each of us where we are today for the purpose of proclaiming - and living out - the power of the Gospel to those around us. "God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us." (v.27)
I also love Paul's poetic, inspired statement in verse 28: 'For in him we live and move and have our being.' As some of your own poets have said, 'We are his offspring.'
Finally, I am amazed that Paul hangs every single statement he makes on one, single fact: The proof of the resurrection of Christ from the dead. "He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead." (v.31)
Do you see what a high level of confidence Paul has in the resurrection of Christ? He does not shy away from this, in fact, he is so sure of this fact that he appeals to this as a basis for everything he has said to them. If the resurrection is not true, then neither is anything else he has said.
I'm sad to admit that, sometimes, I am in need of being reminded just how solid the proof of Christ's resurrection really is. Once a year we may hear a sermon on the evidence for the resurrection, but the rest of the year we barely talk about it or meditate on the astounding reality of it all.
As I read this passage I realize that there are many Christians in America who need to hear this same message from Paul. God does not live in a temple made by human hands. He lives by His Spirit within each and every one of us. He has placed each of us as His ambassadors exactly where we live and work for His purposes. He is always at work in the world around us. In fact, God is everywhere. Every moment is sacred. Every location is full of His presence. And, best of all, we can have confidence in knowing that Jesus Christ is alive and well today. We are the ones who can boldly proclaim that "He is risen! He is risen indeed!"
Amen!
-kg
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Just In Time For Christmas
I've re-opened my [Subversive Underground] t-shirt shop for a limited time only.
We've got some new designs to choose from, including:
"HOW MANY CHRISTIANS DOES IT TAKE TO UNSCREW THE CHURCH?"
"JESUS CALLED. HE WANTS HIS CHURCH BACK"
"JESUS HAS LEFT THE BUILDING"
"WILL WORK FOR JESUS"
and several dozen more.
Check'em out
HERE
*I'm currently playing with the idea of releasing one unique shirt every week - for one week only. These "Subversive Tees of the Week" will be sold for only 7 days before being replaced by the next design.
Each new tee of the week will be sold to raise money for a worthy non-profit ministry or raise awareness for an important cause.
Watch this space for more updates to follow...
Until then, let me know if you like the idea of these t-shirts. I've got more where those came from.
-kg
We've got some new designs to choose from, including:
"HOW MANY CHRISTIANS DOES IT TAKE TO UNSCREW THE CHURCH?"
"JESUS CALLED. HE WANTS HIS CHURCH BACK"
"JESUS HAS LEFT THE BUILDING"
"WILL WORK FOR JESUS"
and several dozen more.
Check'em out
HERE
*I'm currently playing with the idea of releasing one unique shirt every week - for one week only. These "Subversive Tees of the Week" will be sold for only 7 days before being replaced by the next design.
Each new tee of the week will be sold to raise money for a worthy non-profit ministry or raise awareness for an important cause.
Watch this space for more updates to follow...
Until then, let me know if you like the idea of these t-shirts. I've got more where those came from.
-kg
Monday, October 26, 2009
A BEAUTIFUL DAY
Thanks to our friends, the Tagues (Kelly and Rachel) from the Mission, Wendy and I got to go see U2 live at the Rose Bowl yesterday.
By the grace of God, my friend Lito was in town and he managed to snag a ticket the night before.
We woke up at 7am, hit the road at 7:30am and arrived at the Rose Bowl at 8:40am. We got in the line and were given a number stamp (mine was 1205) and eventually a wristband which guaranteed our spot in the "inner circle" around the main stage.
After many hours hanging out we eventually made it inside the Rose Bowl. Over the day we had managed to get to know several people in line around us. It was pretty cool to be able to enjoy the show with these people. I don't know their names, but I will always remember:
*The girl with the red hair and her new husband. They had honeymooned in Wales and saw U2 there and now were seeing them for a second time on this tour. Thanks for sharing the night with us. It was beautiful to watch you two singing the lyrics to one another throughout the evening.
*The funny, tattoed-guy who pretended to be texting Bono. "Bono says fifteen minutes everyone. He's sorry for the delay." Thanks for helping all of us to remember that this was a beautiful day and making us all laugh together.
*The young Indian man who stood at my left shoulder during the show and worshipped during "Magnificent", "Where the Streets Have No Name" and "One". He and I both wiped away tears and even sang along loudly together during "Mysterious Ways" - 'If you wanna kiss the sky better learn how to kneel'. Thanks for reminding me that God's Family is bigger than I realize.
*The two seven foot tall guys who let us stand in front of them during Black-Eyed Peas and then lead us in closer just before U2 started saying, "Come on! You guys can stand in front of us." Thanks for giving us a great space to enjoy the show.
What an amazing night. To be able to share this with my wife, Wendy was incredible. We recently celebrated 20 years of marriage and 21 years of being in love. I couldn't have asked for a better memory to round out this month's anniversary remembrance.
How cool was it to share this memory with my oldest, and dearest friend Lito?
How incredible was it to know this was being broadcast globally via YouTube?
How amazing to know this evening was filmed for a concert DVD being released next year?
How awesome was it to enjoy all this absolutely free - thanks to our brother and sister in Christ, Kelly and Rachel Tague! (Thank you guys!)
So many other great memories of the night:
*Slash coming out to play "Sweet Child of Mine" with the Peas.
*Meeting the CEO of the company I work for for the first time because he and his wife were standing right behind us.
*Having Bono sing "I was born to sing for you" during the song "Magnificent" while he was directly above me on the moving catwalk. (I'll look for that on the DVD).
*Meeting the kid after the show who was holding the set list that The Edge had handed to him.
*Seeing how genuinely blessed and humbled Will.I.Am from the Peas was to be on that stage: "I grew up in the projects in East L.A. We used to drive over to watch the fireworks from the parking lot when I was little," he said. "Tonight I'm on the stage at the Rose Bowl singing to all of you. Thank you U2."
*Getting chills when the Peas sang "Where is the Love" and watching the faces of everyone around me as they belted out the words: "People killing people dying
Children hurtin you hear them crying. Can you practice what you preach
Would you turn the other cheek? Father Father Father help us, send some guidance from above, cause people got me got me questioning, where is the love?"
*Sensing the presence of God when Bishop Desmond Tutu said, "We will always have obstacles to justice, but if we work together God will put the wind into our sails and a song in our hearts. We are the people who will make a difference."
*Seeing Bono sing "Amazing Grace" with tears in his eyes through the tears in my eyes and singing along at the top of my lungs and thinking, "I have certainly been to Church today."
What more can be said? It was sincerely a Beautiful Day.
-kg
Friday, October 23, 2009
Brennan Manning on American Christian Culture
"If Christian men and women are to live the gospel today in our
post-industrial American culture, if we are to be in the world and not of
the world, then we must be willing to assume personal responsibility for the
ways in which our faith has been accommodated to possessiveness, pleasure,
and domination. And we must be willing to repent, reform, and be renewed."
"The church is the living extension of Jesus Christ in time and space. It is
countercurrent to the drift into cultural idolatry. The church in American
society today is, of necessity, a community of resistance to the gods of
modern life, i.e. nuclear stockpiling, money, ego, sexual muscle, racism, pride
of place."
"We are the pilgrim people of God with no lasting city here on
earth, a community of free men and women whose freedom is not limited by the
frontiers of a world that is itself in chains."
"Let us be bold enough to ask ourselves, as Christians, whether the church of
the Lord Jesus in the United States has anything to say to our nation and
its ideologies of materialism, possessiveness, and the worship of financial
security. Are we courageous enough to be a sign of contradiction to
consumerism through our living faith in Jesus Christ? Are we committed
enough to his gospel to become a counter-current to the drift? Or have we so
accommodated the faith of our fathers to consumption that the question of
simplicity of life, sharing of resources, and radical dependence on God's
providence no longer seem relevant? How do we build the kingdom of God on
earth if what we incarnate in our lives is the dogma of our culture rather
than the revelation of Jesus?" - Brennan Manning
--Still grappling with how to surrender my whole life to Christ and live as a stranger in this place.
post-industrial American culture, if we are to be in the world and not of
the world, then we must be willing to assume personal responsibility for the
ways in which our faith has been accommodated to possessiveness, pleasure,
and domination. And we must be willing to repent, reform, and be renewed."
"The church is the living extension of Jesus Christ in time and space. It is
countercurrent to the drift into cultural idolatry. The church in American
society today is, of necessity, a community of resistance to the gods of
modern life, i.e. nuclear stockpiling, money, ego, sexual muscle, racism, pride
of place."
"We are the pilgrim people of God with no lasting city here on
earth, a community of free men and women whose freedom is not limited by the
frontiers of a world that is itself in chains."
"Let us be bold enough to ask ourselves, as Christians, whether the church of
the Lord Jesus in the United States has anything to say to our nation and
its ideologies of materialism, possessiveness, and the worship of financial
security. Are we courageous enough to be a sign of contradiction to
consumerism through our living faith in Jesus Christ? Are we committed
enough to his gospel to become a counter-current to the drift? Or have we so
accommodated the faith of our fathers to consumption that the question of
simplicity of life, sharing of resources, and radical dependence on God's
providence no longer seem relevant? How do we build the kingdom of God on
earth if what we incarnate in our lives is the dogma of our culture rather
than the revelation of Jesus?" - Brennan Manning
--Still grappling with how to surrender my whole life to Christ and live as a stranger in this place.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK?
A good friend responded to my article (The Daily Church of Jesus) by pointing out that neglected to mention Acts 20:7 which indicates that the early Christians met on the “first day of the week” to share a meal and to hear Paul speak since he was about to go away the next day. (This is the infamous gathering where our poor brother Eutychus fell asleep and rolled out of the upstairs windows into the street below).
I will concede that, yes, the early church did see an importance to gathering on the first day of the week. However, I think we still don't grasp how much their expression of faith was so deeply ingrained in their daily lives, however. To us, that "first day of the week" gathering is nearly the only time we think about things like discipleship, community, evangelism, compassion, worship, studying/reading God's Word, etc. However, the early church saw these things as daily activities, not weekly rituals.
So, if you take into account that the early, New Testament church was experiencing a daily community, and a daily study of God's Word, and engaged in daily discipleship, and daily distribution of food to the poor, and meeting together daily to fellowship and pray and sing and encourage one another, etc. THEN we can grasp how significant it is that they ALSO made a point to get together on the first day of the week to share a meal together.
I have to believe that if you and I were doing all that they were doing, we'd probably set aside the first day of the week as a special day where we DIDN'T gather together. I think we’d want to find a special day where we had a break from all that meeting and gathering and constant community.
Yes, the early church did set aside the first day of the week for sharing a meal together, and that was important to them, but it should be seen as yet another example of their astounding commitment to Christ - and to one another – not as evidence to justify our own lack of commitment.
-kg
I will concede that, yes, the early church did see an importance to gathering on the first day of the week. However, I think we still don't grasp how much their expression of faith was so deeply ingrained in their daily lives, however. To us, that "first day of the week" gathering is nearly the only time we think about things like discipleship, community, evangelism, compassion, worship, studying/reading God's Word, etc. However, the early church saw these things as daily activities, not weekly rituals.
So, if you take into account that the early, New Testament church was experiencing a daily community, and a daily study of God's Word, and engaged in daily discipleship, and daily distribution of food to the poor, and meeting together daily to fellowship and pray and sing and encourage one another, etc. THEN we can grasp how significant it is that they ALSO made a point to get together on the first day of the week to share a meal together.
I have to believe that if you and I were doing all that they were doing, we'd probably set aside the first day of the week as a special day where we DIDN'T gather together. I think we’d want to find a special day where we had a break from all that meeting and gathering and constant community.
Yes, the early church did set aside the first day of the week for sharing a meal together, and that was important to them, but it should be seen as yet another example of their astounding commitment to Christ - and to one another – not as evidence to justify our own lack of commitment.
-kg
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
The Daily Church of Jesus
Once you start reading the New Testament it becomes clear that the original followers of Jesus had only one day set aside for worship, fellowship, teaching and community. That day was called “Every day”.
For example, the book of Acts tells us that “every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts.” (Acts 2:46) We also know that “the churches were strengthened in the faith and grew daily in numbers.” (Acts 16:5).
The author of Hebrews calls for Christians to “encourage one another daily, as long as it is called Today, so that none of you may be hardened by sin's deceitfulness.” (Hebrews 3:13)
Paul the Apostle took a handful of followers of Jesus to the lecture hall of Tyrannus and “had discussions daily” (Acts 19:9).
When the Grecian Jews complained that their widows weren’t being cared for it was in regards to the “daily distribution of food” to the poor which the apostles themselves were performing as true servants. (Acts 6:1)
When the Bereans were commended it was because “they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.” (Acts 17:11)
This really should come as no surprise to us, however. Jesus stressed that only those who “take up (their) cross daily” could follow him (Luke 9:23) and he taught his disciples to pray daily and to ask for “daily bread”. (Matt 6:11)
So, instead of arguing over what day of the week we should worship or gather or teach, perhaps we should stop and realize that, according to the New Testament, every single day of our lives should be devoted to God, and to the community of faith. We need to be the Church every day of our lives, not simply attend one each week.
-kg
For example, the book of Acts tells us that “every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts.” (Acts 2:46) We also know that “the churches were strengthened in the faith and grew daily in numbers.” (Acts 16:5).
The author of Hebrews calls for Christians to “encourage one another daily, as long as it is called Today, so that none of you may be hardened by sin's deceitfulness.” (Hebrews 3:13)
Paul the Apostle took a handful of followers of Jesus to the lecture hall of Tyrannus and “had discussions daily” (Acts 19:9).
When the Grecian Jews complained that their widows weren’t being cared for it was in regards to the “daily distribution of food” to the poor which the apostles themselves were performing as true servants. (Acts 6:1)
When the Bereans were commended it was because “they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.” (Acts 17:11)
This really should come as no surprise to us, however. Jesus stressed that only those who “take up (their) cross daily” could follow him (Luke 9:23) and he taught his disciples to pray daily and to ask for “daily bread”. (Matt 6:11)
So, instead of arguing over what day of the week we should worship or gather or teach, perhaps we should stop and realize that, according to the New Testament, every single day of our lives should be devoted to God, and to the community of faith. We need to be the Church every day of our lives, not simply attend one each week.
-kg
Thursday, October 15, 2009
FOUR NEW ARTICLES ALL AT THEOOZE.COM
Not sure how this happened, but I have four new articles over at theOoze.com in one day.
PROOF OF CONCEPT
published today under ministry
A RESPONSE TO THE ACCIDENTAL ANGLICAN
published today under reviews
THE GATES OF BILL SHALL NOT PREVAIL AGAINST HER
published today under culture
A PROFOUND MYSTERY
published today under faith
Read them there and leave comments here if you like.
BONUS: Be sure to read my bio section for each one. I had some fun writing those.
PROOF OF CONCEPT
published today under ministry
A RESPONSE TO THE ACCIDENTAL ANGLICAN
published today under reviews
THE GATES OF BILL SHALL NOT PREVAIL AGAINST HER
published today under culture
A PROFOUND MYSTERY
published today under faith
Read them there and leave comments here if you like.
BONUS: Be sure to read my bio section for each one. I had some fun writing those.
Friday, October 09, 2009
WHAT MATTERS MOST?
I see a lot of chatter on the internet today about Obama winning the Nobel Prize for Peace. Most of my friends are upset at the decision, and perhaps they have a point regarding our President's meager list of accomplishments in the area of peace making.
Should Obama have won the Nobel Prize for Peace? No, the Christian Church should have, and this is what should concern us more. Rather than list our President's lack of accomplishment in the area of peace, why don't we look at ourselves and ask why we, the ambassadors of the Prince of Peace, are not known for our peacemaking? Why aren't we upset at our own failure to advocate peace in our world?
Is the Christian Church largely known for her strong support of peaceful non-violence? Or is she mostly seen standing on the side of those who wave the flag and support the torture of prisoners and defend war as a means to resolution of conflict?
What we should be most ashamed of is our own failure to embrace the message of peace. What we should be most outraged about is our failure to be ministers of reconciliation.
Perhaps Obama hasn't done enough to deserve recogition for bringing peace to this planet, but the Christian Church has done far less, and she has had much more opportunity and time to make a difference.
-kg
Should Obama have won the Nobel Prize for Peace? No, the Christian Church should have, and this is what should concern us more. Rather than list our President's lack of accomplishment in the area of peace, why don't we look at ourselves and ask why we, the ambassadors of the Prince of Peace, are not known for our peacemaking? Why aren't we upset at our own failure to advocate peace in our world?
Is the Christian Church largely known for her strong support of peaceful non-violence? Or is she mostly seen standing on the side of those who wave the flag and support the torture of prisoners and defend war as a means to resolution of conflict?
What we should be most ashamed of is our own failure to embrace the message of peace. What we should be most outraged about is our failure to be ministers of reconciliation.
Perhaps Obama hasn't done enough to deserve recogition for bringing peace to this planet, but the Christian Church has done far less, and she has had much more opportunity and time to make a difference.
-kg
Wednesday, October 07, 2009
Not Perfection, Just Obedience
I had a wonderful lunch meeting today with my friend Jim Belcher. Jim's book, "Deep Church" is the number one book on Amazon.com right now in the religion section. His book is an attempt to find a middle ground for the traditional and emerging christian church to dialog in civil tones.
Jim himself is an ambassador, and an embodiment, of such an idea. I met him a few months ago when he interviewed me and visited our house church family while he was writing his book. That first meeting at Starbucks (which he recounts briefly in his book) came at a time when I was at odds with some brothers in Christ who would not sit down with me and make peace. Here was Jim, a total stranger to me, and not only did he sit down and have coffee with me, he openly, and lovingly, disagreed with me on matters of ecclesiology. When we were done I had made a new friend and discovered a new brother in Christ after spending over an hour disagreeing on the very same issues that divided me with other men of faith.
The difference was that Jim honestly believed that he and I were brothers in Christ in spite of our differences on the practice of church. It was refreshing beyond belief to hear him say, "We may disagree on ecclesiology but we still serve the same Lord. We're still Family." I must confess I nearly burst into spontaneous tears when he said that.
Today over lunch Jim and I met again. He handed me an autographed copy of his book and, once more, we shared as brothers and rejoiced over the (mostly) peaceful dialog that God was creating through his book and the ideas represented. Although I haven't read the book I'm sure there are some things I agree with, and probably a handful of other things I disagree with, but that doesn't change the fact that Jim and I are still family. I love him as a brother and I left today's lunch meeting feeling that Jim felt the same.
Driving home after work I couldn't help but think further about the different ideas of church that Jim and I have. I'm in the process of putting the final touches on my own book about the church. In it, I am sure that there are many ideas that Jim would agree with, and probably more than a few ideas that he might disagree with. Still, there's room for open dialog and honest disagreement between member of the Family of God. Jim has wonderfully demonstrated this to me and this inspires me to do the same as I look towards the inevitable backlash my book might create.
One final thought: Our ecclesiology doesn't make us better people. One look at the New Testament will proove this. You can have the most New Testament model church since the one in Jerusalem and you will still have weak, foolish, selfish, broken people who need to be constantly immersed in the presence of Christ and daily in need of forgiveness and grace.
What our ecclesiology can do is to help us to be more like what Jesus intended His Church to embody- a family where He is the Lord, a body where He is he Head, and a temple where He is the center of everything.
At minimum we who are called by His name are commanded to be known by our love.
My hope is that God will continue to show us, especially me, how to love in truth and not just in word or tongue, especially when it comes to the household of faith.
Peace,
Keith
Jim himself is an ambassador, and an embodiment, of such an idea. I met him a few months ago when he interviewed me and visited our house church family while he was writing his book. That first meeting at Starbucks (which he recounts briefly in his book) came at a time when I was at odds with some brothers in Christ who would not sit down with me and make peace. Here was Jim, a total stranger to me, and not only did he sit down and have coffee with me, he openly, and lovingly, disagreed with me on matters of ecclesiology. When we were done I had made a new friend and discovered a new brother in Christ after spending over an hour disagreeing on the very same issues that divided me with other men of faith.
The difference was that Jim honestly believed that he and I were brothers in Christ in spite of our differences on the practice of church. It was refreshing beyond belief to hear him say, "We may disagree on ecclesiology but we still serve the same Lord. We're still Family." I must confess I nearly burst into spontaneous tears when he said that.
Today over lunch Jim and I met again. He handed me an autographed copy of his book and, once more, we shared as brothers and rejoiced over the (mostly) peaceful dialog that God was creating through his book and the ideas represented. Although I haven't read the book I'm sure there are some things I agree with, and probably a handful of other things I disagree with, but that doesn't change the fact that Jim and I are still family. I love him as a brother and I left today's lunch meeting feeling that Jim felt the same.
Driving home after work I couldn't help but think further about the different ideas of church that Jim and I have. I'm in the process of putting the final touches on my own book about the church. In it, I am sure that there are many ideas that Jim would agree with, and probably more than a few ideas that he might disagree with. Still, there's room for open dialog and honest disagreement between member of the Family of God. Jim has wonderfully demonstrated this to me and this inspires me to do the same as I look towards the inevitable backlash my book might create.
One final thought: Our ecclesiology doesn't make us better people. One look at the New Testament will proove this. You can have the most New Testament model church since the one in Jerusalem and you will still have weak, foolish, selfish, broken people who need to be constantly immersed in the presence of Christ and daily in need of forgiveness and grace.
What our ecclesiology can do is to help us to be more like what Jesus intended His Church to embody- a family where He is the Lord, a body where He is he Head, and a temple where He is the center of everything.
At minimum we who are called by His name are commanded to be known by our love.
My hope is that God will continue to show us, especially me, how to love in truth and not just in word or tongue, especially when it comes to the household of faith.
Peace,
Keith
Monday, October 05, 2009
SEVEN MISTAKES EVERY CHURCH SHOULD AVOID
My article is now up at theOoze.com. Be sure to take a look and post your comments here if you like.
The article link is
HERE
Enjoy!
kg
The article link is
HERE
Enjoy!
kg
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
THE GATES OF BILL SHALL NOT PREVAIL AGAINST HER
by Keith Giles
“But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?" Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." - (Matthew 16: 15-19)
The Christian Church is resilient and irresistable as long as it remains built upon the right foundation. Even the Gates of Hell aren't strong enough to withstand the advance of the Body, according to our Lord Jesus.
So, when we read that the current economic downturn threatens to cripple the American church it makes me wonder – “What is our Church built upon?” If we were built upon Christ and His identity as the Messiah, I believe that nothing could shake us or weaken our effectiveness.
As the article in the link points out, “organized religion was already in trouble before the fall of 2008. Denominations were stagnating or shrinking, and congregations across faith groups were fretting about their finances.” So, the decline of the American Church is nothing new. The Great Recession we’re in now only accentuates the problem. In America, the Church has aligned herself with a political agenda, and has embraced a business model, rather than to take a New Testament approach.
Usually whenever I point these things out I get the most vehement responses from my brothers and sisters in Christ. They either defend the business model of church or the political solution, or they deny that such an association exists. Others simply insult me for attacking the Bride – as if calling God’s people to a more New Testament approach is somehow an act of violence rather than an appeal to repent and be healed.
I’m honestly flabbergasted by the Church’s lust for the business model. If it had brought us any real fruit over the years I could understand our attraction for adopting the Bill Gates’ philosophy of ecclesia. However, most pastors will readily admit that the current model of traditional church hasn’t produced better disciples, more loving followers of Jesus or an increase in moral or ethical advancement in the Body. If anything we see the opposite. Not just in the church, but those outside the church are increasingly turned off by our “bigger is better” approach and our constant focus on money as a fuel for growth or a benchmark of God’s approval.
Being bigger doesn’t correlate to deeper faith, more earnest discipleship or transformed lives. Attracting a crowd isn’t a required skill for those who seek to follow Jesus and put his words into practice. Scoring converts isn’t a fulfillment of the Great Commission to teach people all that Jesus commanded and make disciples of all nations.
Just think about the environment you work in. Does your workplace inspire a sense of family? Does it foster a pervasive sense of belonging to a greater cause? Does it help you generate a stronger sense of love for your co-workers? Does it inspire you (or anyone else) to adopt the mission statement into a way of living life? Do you ever find yourself wishing that your church family could be more like your workplace? I simply cannot understand why we would look to an organizational model for the Church when it accomplishes nothing for the Kingdom and only succeeds in growth at the expense of others.
This is why the Church in America can, with a straight face, demand that pastors sign non-compete clauses before they’re considered for the pulpit. We wouldn’t want to invest in this person, and the success of our church, only to have this charismatic individual leave and start his own franchise down the road – taking key investors (tithers) with him.
These behaviors do not encourage church growth, they inhibit and discourage the planting of churches in a community based on the need for success - and this definition of success has nothing to do with making disciples or serving others or meeting the needs of people within the community. No, in this new business model of church, success is strictly defined as growing larger and increasing the size of the bank account.
Because we have built our American Church on the business model, we are now suffering right along with every other business as our economy slows down and spending is at an all-time low. Churches are laying off ministers, cutting youth budgets, selling their buildings and liquidating their assets. What will we do now? After nearly two thousand years enduring persecution and the lions of the coliseum, even the Gates of Hell itself, will the Church now be overcome by the Gates of Bill? Will we finally be defeated by our own greed and misplaced values? No, I don’t think so.
If anything, I believe that more and more churches in America will discover, the hard way, that they really can be the church they were called to be without a building, or a paid staff of professionals, or a thirty thousand dollar sound system. In fact, many others have already discovered this. Not only have these followers of Jesus discovered their ability to be the church outside of the American business model, they’ve also discovered that they can actually grow the size, and the quality, of their congregations by empowering them to be the church in their community and take responsibility for their own spiritual growth and the well-being of one another in the Body.
Truthfully, the majority of our brothers and sisters in Christ around the globe are already experiencing exponential growth, new conversions to the faith, and powerful moves of the Holy Spirit completely apart from paid staff, million dollar structures or a business plan. All they have is the New Testament, the indwelling presence of Almighty God and a simple faith in the Son of God that nothing will stand against the power of the Gospel of the Kingdom.
Sounds like a great business plan to me.
**
“But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?" Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." - (Matthew 16: 15-19)
The Christian Church is resilient and irresistable as long as it remains built upon the right foundation. Even the Gates of Hell aren't strong enough to withstand the advance of the Body, according to our Lord Jesus.
So, when we read that the current economic downturn threatens to cripple the American church it makes me wonder – “What is our Church built upon?” If we were built upon Christ and His identity as the Messiah, I believe that nothing could shake us or weaken our effectiveness.
As the article in the link points out, “organized religion was already in trouble before the fall of 2008. Denominations were stagnating or shrinking, and congregations across faith groups were fretting about their finances.” So, the decline of the American Church is nothing new. The Great Recession we’re in now only accentuates the problem. In America, the Church has aligned herself with a political agenda, and has embraced a business model, rather than to take a New Testament approach.
Usually whenever I point these things out I get the most vehement responses from my brothers and sisters in Christ. They either defend the business model of church or the political solution, or they deny that such an association exists. Others simply insult me for attacking the Bride – as if calling God’s people to a more New Testament approach is somehow an act of violence rather than an appeal to repent and be healed.
I’m honestly flabbergasted by the Church’s lust for the business model. If it had brought us any real fruit over the years I could understand our attraction for adopting the Bill Gates’ philosophy of ecclesia. However, most pastors will readily admit that the current model of traditional church hasn’t produced better disciples, more loving followers of Jesus or an increase in moral or ethical advancement in the Body. If anything we see the opposite. Not just in the church, but those outside the church are increasingly turned off by our “bigger is better” approach and our constant focus on money as a fuel for growth or a benchmark of God’s approval.
Being bigger doesn’t correlate to deeper faith, more earnest discipleship or transformed lives. Attracting a crowd isn’t a required skill for those who seek to follow Jesus and put his words into practice. Scoring converts isn’t a fulfillment of the Great Commission to teach people all that Jesus commanded and make disciples of all nations.
Just think about the environment you work in. Does your workplace inspire a sense of family? Does it foster a pervasive sense of belonging to a greater cause? Does it help you generate a stronger sense of love for your co-workers? Does it inspire you (or anyone else) to adopt the mission statement into a way of living life? Do you ever find yourself wishing that your church family could be more like your workplace? I simply cannot understand why we would look to an organizational model for the Church when it accomplishes nothing for the Kingdom and only succeeds in growth at the expense of others.
This is why the Church in America can, with a straight face, demand that pastors sign non-compete clauses before they’re considered for the pulpit. We wouldn’t want to invest in this person, and the success of our church, only to have this charismatic individual leave and start his own franchise down the road – taking key investors (tithers) with him.
These behaviors do not encourage church growth, they inhibit and discourage the planting of churches in a community based on the need for success - and this definition of success has nothing to do with making disciples or serving others or meeting the needs of people within the community. No, in this new business model of church, success is strictly defined as growing larger and increasing the size of the bank account.
Because we have built our American Church on the business model, we are now suffering right along with every other business as our economy slows down and spending is at an all-time low. Churches are laying off ministers, cutting youth budgets, selling their buildings and liquidating their assets. What will we do now? After nearly two thousand years enduring persecution and the lions of the coliseum, even the Gates of Hell itself, will the Church now be overcome by the Gates of Bill? Will we finally be defeated by our own greed and misplaced values? No, I don’t think so.
If anything, I believe that more and more churches in America will discover, the hard way, that they really can be the church they were called to be without a building, or a paid staff of professionals, or a thirty thousand dollar sound system. In fact, many others have already discovered this. Not only have these followers of Jesus discovered their ability to be the church outside of the American business model, they’ve also discovered that they can actually grow the size, and the quality, of their congregations by empowering them to be the church in their community and take responsibility for their own spiritual growth and the well-being of one another in the Body.
Truthfully, the majority of our brothers and sisters in Christ around the globe are already experiencing exponential growth, new conversions to the faith, and powerful moves of the Holy Spirit completely apart from paid staff, million dollar structures or a business plan. All they have is the New Testament, the indwelling presence of Almighty God and a simple faith in the Son of God that nothing will stand against the power of the Gospel of the Kingdom.
Sounds like a great business plan to me.
**
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
TWO NEW ARTICLES AT POVERTYINTHEOC.COM
Just posted two new articles over at
POVERTYINTHEOC.COM
*NEW HOMELESS DOLL FROM AMERICAN GIRL STORES - ONLY $95
*GAP BETWEEN RICH AND POOR WIDENS IN THE U.S.
POVERTYINTHEOC.COM
*NEW HOMELESS DOLL FROM AMERICAN GIRL STORES - ONLY $95
*GAP BETWEEN RICH AND POOR WIDENS IN THE U.S.
JESUS: THE PRINCE OF PEACE (PART 4 OF 4)
The final article is up now at theOoze.com. Drop by and leave comments if you like, or leave them here.
READ THE ARTICLE
HERE
READ THE ARTICLE
HERE
Monday, September 28, 2009
A PROFOUND MYSTERY
When you consider that the Bible as we know it today was written over a period of thousands of years, by wide variety of authors, and assembled as a single document nearly two thousand years ago, it's fairly miraculous that the first three chapters of the Bible correspond so symmetrically with the last three chapters of the Bible.
In the first three chapters of the Bible, in the book of Genesis, we see a series of events that are mirrored in the last three chapters of Revelation.
First, we see the creation of heaven and earth. At the end of Revelation we see a new creation.
In the first three chapters we see Satan ensnaring mankind and in the last three we see Satan cast down and doomed forever.
In the first three chapters we see a garden, and in the last three chapters we see a garden city. Both gardens include the tree of life.
In the first three chapters we have a curse given to man for his sins, and in the last three chapters the curse if forever removed.
In the first three chapters God visits the garden once per day, and in the last three chapters God is at home with man forever.
In the first three chapters man and woman are cast out, but in the last three chapters they are welcomed in.
In the first three chapters a bride is created from out of Adam’s side, and in the last three chapters a Bride is ushered in for the Son of God and a wedding feast is celebrated.
In the first three chapters we have the beginning of Time, and in the last three we have the beginning of Eternity.
DEEPER THINGS
The Scriptures reveal the Church to be the Bride of the Lamb. It is one of the most common metaphors used by God to describe His people throughout the Bible. However, as I began tracing these threads between Genesis and Revelation I noticed even more about what Paul the Apostle refers to as "a profound mystery".
In Ephesians 5:25-33, Paul uses the metaphor of marriage to teach us something astounding about Jesus and about our identity as the Bride of Christ. I've edited the text to highlight the main thoughts:
"...just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless." – Eph 5:25-27
"'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.' This is a profound mystery — but I am talking about Christ and the church." – Eph 5:31-32
Because this passage is so often used to counsel men and women in regards to the marriage relationship, I have removed those references so that we can see what Paul says he is actually talking about: "Christ and the church".
First, Paul tells us how Christ has given himself up for us (the Bride) and how he cleanses and washes us through the word of God so that we might be ready for our wedding day. Paul also quotes from Genesis chapter 2 in this passage and this reminds us of how God put Adam to sleep and made a woman for him because "God saw that it was not good for man to be alone". Notice it was God's idea, not Adam's, for man to have a wife. Somehow this reference points to God's plan for the Church. As Paul reminds us - "For this reason" the man is to "leave his father and mother and be united with his wife and the two will become one flesh". This is where Paul pauses and remarks that "this is a profound mystery". Why? Because he is not talking about Adam and Eve now. He's not talking about Christian marriage between a man and a woman. No, he is talking about Jesus and the Church "becoming one flesh".
THE MYSTERY OF THE BRIDE
We know from God’s word that we (the Church) are the Bride of Christ (Eph 5:22-33). But in Revelation we learn that the Bride is also a City:
"One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues came and said to me, 'Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb.' And he carried me away in the Spirit to a mountain great and high, and showed me the Holy City, Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God." – Rev 21:9-10
We are the Bride, and the Bride is a City.
THE MYSTERY OF THE TEMPLE
We also know that we are the Temple of God (Eph 2:21), but in Revelation we discover that it is Christ who is the Temple in us:
"The great street of the city was of pure gold, like transparent glass. I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple." – Rev 21:21-22
So, we are the Temple where God dwells within, but we are also the Bride which is a city and in that city is a Temple which is the Lord Himself.
ONE IN CHRIST JESUS
Want to see how this is played out in the rest of the Scriptures? In the Gospel of John, beyond the prayer of Jesus to the Father that we (the Bride) would be one even as Jesus and the Father are one, Christ also prays:
"Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me." – John 17:21-23.
In Ephesians 2:21 we are told that we are the Temple of God, as we have already seen, but look at what this passage actually communicates. Try to guess where God ends and we begin here:
"In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit." – Eph 2:21-22
Here we see that we (the Church/Bride/Body/Temple) are being built to become a dwelling in which God lives, and yet the Temple is being built "in him". So, we are being built in Christ to become a Temple where God will dwell by His Spirit. Who is on the inside? Who is dwelling where? We are in Christ, and we contain God's Spirit all at the same time.
THE MYSTERY OF THE BODY
In 1 Corinthians 12, and in Ephesians 4:15, Paul gives us another wonderful illustration of how the Body is to function. He refers to the Church as the Body of Christ and explains that we are dependent upon one another for life, and yet that Christ is our Head and without Him we can do nothing (see also John 15:5). Here we have a wonderful picture of the unity which Jesus prayed we would have (John 17:21-23) and a fulfillment of the picture that we are "one flesh" (Genesis 2:24, Eph 2:21), with Christ since we are His Body and He is our head.
As I look at who we are in Christ, (His Body, Temple and Bride), and as I see God's sovereign plan from the beginning (to find a Bride for His Son, and a Temple for His presence), and as I hear the prayer of Jesus that we be in Him and that we be one even as He and the Father are one, I cannot help but feel an urgency to tear down our man-made divisions and embrace our identity as members of one Body, with one Head.
THE GLORIOUS MYSTERY OF GOD
This mystery is quite profound. One worthy of our awe. It is not my goal to explain or understand this mystery. One dear brother I shared this with recently said to me, "Let it continue to be a mystery in your heart" and that is my intention. This is a profound mystery and what we must contemplate is not how to make sense of it, but instead how to live out our part of it. How can we be one in Christ? How can we make Christ the head of our Body? How can we be the Temple of the Living God? How can we make ourselves ready for that glorious wedding day to come?
THE END IS THE BEGINNING
The last thing I see as I look at the symmetry between Genesis and Revelation is that all of History ends with a wedding. All that we have known, and all that we now experience is only the courtship. This is just the engagement phase of our life with Christ. One day we will become the Bride of Christ and be one with Him. Yet, a wedding is not the end of life, it is only the very beginning. God's Word ends with a beginning.
This is a very profound mystery, indeed.
**
kg
In the first three chapters of the Bible, in the book of Genesis, we see a series of events that are mirrored in the last three chapters of Revelation.
First, we see the creation of heaven and earth. At the end of Revelation we see a new creation.
In the first three chapters we see Satan ensnaring mankind and in the last three we see Satan cast down and doomed forever.
In the first three chapters we see a garden, and in the last three chapters we see a garden city. Both gardens include the tree of life.
In the first three chapters we have a curse given to man for his sins, and in the last three chapters the curse if forever removed.
In the first three chapters God visits the garden once per day, and in the last three chapters God is at home with man forever.
In the first three chapters man and woman are cast out, but in the last three chapters they are welcomed in.
In the first three chapters a bride is created from out of Adam’s side, and in the last three chapters a Bride is ushered in for the Son of God and a wedding feast is celebrated.
In the first three chapters we have the beginning of Time, and in the last three we have the beginning of Eternity.
DEEPER THINGS
The Scriptures reveal the Church to be the Bride of the Lamb. It is one of the most common metaphors used by God to describe His people throughout the Bible. However, as I began tracing these threads between Genesis and Revelation I noticed even more about what Paul the Apostle refers to as "a profound mystery".
In Ephesians 5:25-33, Paul uses the metaphor of marriage to teach us something astounding about Jesus and about our identity as the Bride of Christ. I've edited the text to highlight the main thoughts:
"...just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless." – Eph 5:25-27
"'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.' This is a profound mystery — but I am talking about Christ and the church." – Eph 5:31-32
Because this passage is so often used to counsel men and women in regards to the marriage relationship, I have removed those references so that we can see what Paul says he is actually talking about: "Christ and the church".
First, Paul tells us how Christ has given himself up for us (the Bride) and how he cleanses and washes us through the word of God so that we might be ready for our wedding day. Paul also quotes from Genesis chapter 2 in this passage and this reminds us of how God put Adam to sleep and made a woman for him because "God saw that it was not good for man to be alone". Notice it was God's idea, not Adam's, for man to have a wife. Somehow this reference points to God's plan for the Church. As Paul reminds us - "For this reason" the man is to "leave his father and mother and be united with his wife and the two will become one flesh". This is where Paul pauses and remarks that "this is a profound mystery". Why? Because he is not talking about Adam and Eve now. He's not talking about Christian marriage between a man and a woman. No, he is talking about Jesus and the Church "becoming one flesh".
THE MYSTERY OF THE BRIDE
We know from God’s word that we (the Church) are the Bride of Christ (Eph 5:22-33). But in Revelation we learn that the Bride is also a City:
"One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues came and said to me, 'Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb.' And he carried me away in the Spirit to a mountain great and high, and showed me the Holy City, Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God." – Rev 21:9-10
We are the Bride, and the Bride is a City.
THE MYSTERY OF THE TEMPLE
We also know that we are the Temple of God (Eph 2:21), but in Revelation we discover that it is Christ who is the Temple in us:
"The great street of the city was of pure gold, like transparent glass. I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple." – Rev 21:21-22
So, we are the Temple where God dwells within, but we are also the Bride which is a city and in that city is a Temple which is the Lord Himself.
ONE IN CHRIST JESUS
Want to see how this is played out in the rest of the Scriptures? In the Gospel of John, beyond the prayer of Jesus to the Father that we (the Bride) would be one even as Jesus and the Father are one, Christ also prays:
"Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me." – John 17:21-23.
In Ephesians 2:21 we are told that we are the Temple of God, as we have already seen, but look at what this passage actually communicates. Try to guess where God ends and we begin here:
"In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit." – Eph 2:21-22
Here we see that we (the Church/Bride/Body/Temple) are being built to become a dwelling in which God lives, and yet the Temple is being built "in him". So, we are being built in Christ to become a Temple where God will dwell by His Spirit. Who is on the inside? Who is dwelling where? We are in Christ, and we contain God's Spirit all at the same time.
THE MYSTERY OF THE BODY
In 1 Corinthians 12, and in Ephesians 4:15, Paul gives us another wonderful illustration of how the Body is to function. He refers to the Church as the Body of Christ and explains that we are dependent upon one another for life, and yet that Christ is our Head and without Him we can do nothing (see also John 15:5). Here we have a wonderful picture of the unity which Jesus prayed we would have (John 17:21-23) and a fulfillment of the picture that we are "one flesh" (Genesis 2:24, Eph 2:21), with Christ since we are His Body and He is our head.
As I look at who we are in Christ, (His Body, Temple and Bride), and as I see God's sovereign plan from the beginning (to find a Bride for His Son, and a Temple for His presence), and as I hear the prayer of Jesus that we be in Him and that we be one even as He and the Father are one, I cannot help but feel an urgency to tear down our man-made divisions and embrace our identity as members of one Body, with one Head.
THE GLORIOUS MYSTERY OF GOD
This mystery is quite profound. One worthy of our awe. It is not my goal to explain or understand this mystery. One dear brother I shared this with recently said to me, "Let it continue to be a mystery in your heart" and that is my intention. This is a profound mystery and what we must contemplate is not how to make sense of it, but instead how to live out our part of it. How can we be one in Christ? How can we make Christ the head of our Body? How can we be the Temple of the Living God? How can we make ourselves ready for that glorious wedding day to come?
THE END IS THE BEGINNING
The last thing I see as I look at the symmetry between Genesis and Revelation is that all of History ends with a wedding. All that we have known, and all that we now experience is only the courtship. This is just the engagement phase of our life with Christ. One day we will become the Bride of Christ and be one with Him. Yet, a wedding is not the end of life, it is only the very beginning. God's Word ends with a beginning.
This is a very profound mystery, indeed.
**
kg
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
JESUS: PRINCE OF PEACE (3 OF 4)
The third article at theOoze.com is up now. Please read and comment here if you like.
Read Part 3 of 4
HERE
Blessings,
Keith
Read Part 3 of 4
HERE
Blessings,
Keith
Friday, September 18, 2009
RESPONSE TO THE ACCIDENTAL ANGLICAN
Todd Hunter has been a mentor to me for several years now. I have known him for over ten years and I love and respect him and consider him to be a wise and sincere brother in Christ. My own personal epiphany concerning the Gospel of the Kingdom was the direct result of a series of phone interviews I did with Todd for an article I was writing for Relevant Magazine a few years ago. (These interviews are both on my main blog). Since that time he has encouraged me, and provided practical wisdom for me during times when I needed guidance or advice about matters of faith.
Todd was recently interviewed by Christianity Today Magazine regarding his newest spiritual adventure as a Bishop in the Anglican Church. Todd Hunter is someone who started out in Calvary Chapel, and who played an instrumental role in the formation of the Vineyard movement, and who left that expression to coach church-planters in the Emerging Church. For many who have called Todd their mentor, like myself, this new step Todd is taking towards liturgical, traditional church is a confounding one. I don’t think I can express that in terms that are strong enough to convey the real impact on people who have, like me, looked to Todd as a spiritual leader for all these years.
This article does a good job of addressing the question and Todd’s answers are clear, but there’s still a very real disconnect for why Todd would choose to abandon the more organic expressions of faith he's participated in previously for the Anglican tradition.
On some levels it’s really none of our business. Todd can do whatever he wants and, clearly, he feels a genuine calling from God to become an Anglican Bishop and plant liturgical churches in America. Just because I may not agree with him, or understand the logic, doesn’t mean that God isn’t actually compelling Todd to move in this direction. If we look at the Scriptures we can see numerous times when God asks men and women to do things that make absolutely no sense to those around them. I can relate to that as someone who felt called to leave the traditional church and plant a house church where 100% of the money would go to help the poor in our community. There were many who didn’t understand (and still don’t) and who openly opposed me, dared me to do it (and fail), and branded me a heretic for my actions and for my stand against hierarchy in the church. What matters is, “Is God calling?” and “Will you obey?” and in Todd’s case it’s all between him and the Lord. I for one am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.
EQUAL TIME
Still, reading this article I cannot help but feel compelled to interject some thoughts into what Todd says about the liturgy and about the Emerging movement (of whom I am not a participant, although I am often lumped into this group due to the fact that I do not embrace traditional church practice).
As you read my responses to these quotes, please understand I do not intend these as criticisms of Todd Hunter, whom I love as a brother in the Lord. My responses here are meant to provide a counter-point of sorts to some of the things that are said, if for no other reason than to attempt something like “equal time” for those who find themselves on the outside of traditional church and have made a conscious decision to step away from any denominational identity or division in favor of following Christ alone. To quote Lance Lambert, “I could no longer be a Baptist. I could only be a Christian. Anyone who follows Christ is a member of me and I am a member of him because there is only one Body and one Family of God.”
TWO BIG PROBLEMS
In the interview, Todd Hunter mentions “two big problems” with the Emerging movement. (I have my own problems with the movement but we’ll discuss those at another time). Todd’s problems with the Emerging movement are:
“First, the emergents are so sensitive to issues of community, relationship, egalitarianism, and being non-utilitarian in their relationships, that evangelism has simply become a synonym for manipulation—a foul ball, relationally. If you and I were work colleagues and I built a relationship in which I could influence your journey toward Christ, that would be considered wrong in these circles. I cannot be friends with you if I intend to lead you to Christ. “
As Todd points out, the Emerging Movement isn’t something you can “broad-brush”. It’s much too slippery to get a handle on enough to make any real, substantial criticisms, (which is one of my problems with it, but I digress).
In Todd’s response I would tend to agree, as he states it, but I would also agree with those who feel it’s manipulative to make friends for the purpose of evangelism. I guess I would amend Todd’s statement to say, “I cannot be friends with you only because I intend to lead you to Christ.” It’s the recruitment motive that bothers me, and I think a few others, when it comes to targeting people as conquests rather than learning to love people no matter what their faith, or whether or not they eventually become followers of Jesus. I think what has to be intentional is our love of others, not evangelism itself. I believe in intentionally loving someone and praying for God to reveal Himself to them, but I do not believe in intentionally targeting someone simply to convert them to my faith.
One helpful question I believe we should ask is, “Am I willing to be someone’s friend for the rest of my life, even if they never convert to my faith?” If at any point in the relationship I would abandon the friendship and move on to a better prospect then, I believe, we’re not really fulfilling the Lord’s command to love others. Love isn’t conditional. It should remain and be sustained regardless of whether or not it is reciprocated. Love should continue apart from agreement on matters of faith.
Todd’s second problem is the one I take the most issue with.
“Second, after 10 or 12 years of the emerging church, you have to ask where anything has been built. Evangelism has been so muted and the normal building of structures and processes hasn't moved forward because there's no positive, godly imagination for doing either evangelism or leadership.”
Where do I even begin to respond to this? Perhaps I am misunderstanding him. I don't think I am but if so, I look forward to apologizing later. However, as I read this it seems that Todd’s second problem with the Emerging faith isn’t based on their lack of spiritual fruit. He doesn’t say that, “…after 10 or 12 years of the emerging church you have to ask where the fruit is.” Instead, he has a problem with them for not building structures. He says, “…the normal building of structures and processes hasn’t moved forward because there’s no positive, godly imagination for doing either evangelism or leadership.”
Really? What we should expect to see from a healthy understanding of evangelism and leadership is an $11 million dollar church building? Not followers of Jesus who make disciples of others? Not a deeper love for Christ? Not the fruit of the Spirit but….”the normal building of structures and processes.”
The Church in America spends billions of dollars on itself every year. Mainly on the building of structures and the financial support of leaders. I would hardly call that “Church for the sake of others” as Todd often refers to it. That seems like Church for the sake of itself, to me.
I want to ask, “Can the Church be the Church, in all of its’ original Spirit-filled DNA of love for others and mission to the least, without buildings, or paid clergy?” I believe that if we look to the first 300 years of Christian history we will see that the answer is a resounding, “Yes!” In fact, the Church in most of the world today is more vibrant and missional and evangelistic than anything we see here in the West without any “normal building of structures and processes.”
If anything, I would question the use of the word “normal” in Todd’s response. What is normal? Shouldn’t the definition of normative Christian practice come from the New Testament? Why should the definition of “normal” come from our man-made human traditions? Isn’t that part of what Jesus was critical of the Pharisees about? (Matt 15:3-9)
I’ve already written at length about how the New Testament expression of Church differs from our man-made traditions. Simply put, the Old Testament prophesies that the Messiah would build the Temple of the Lord. (Zechariah 6, 2 Sam 7, etc.) When Jesus came there was already a Temple in Jerusalem. So, what did he build? In fact, Jesus went to the Temple in Jerusalem and prophesied that it would be destroyed (and it was) and that he would build it up again (speaking of the temple of his body). This was fulfilled at the cross when Jesus laid down his life for us and then resurrected from the dead. However, it was also fulfilled when his Body (the Church) was built into a house of living stones and a new temple of God was formed-(Eph 2:20, Heb 3:5, 1 Cor 3:16, etc.).
In the New Testament expression of faith, the new Temple is the Body of Christ, the Church. We are the only building God is interested in building. We are the new priesthood. We are the fulfillment of the prophecy in Joel that God would pour out His Spirit on all flesh (men and women, Jew and Gentile, Slave and Free). We are now the place where the Glory and Presence of the Living God dwells. Not in a house of stone built by men, but in a house of flesh filled with the Holy Spirit of the Living God. We are the fulfillment of the promise that one day no one will ever seek for the Ark of the Covenant, because it is now only an empty box.
“And it shall come to pass, when ye be multiplied and increased in the land, in those days, saith the LORD, they shall say no more, The ark of the covenant of the LORD: neither shall it come to mind: neither shall they remember it; neither shall they visit it; neither shall that be done any more" - Jeremiah 3:16
Why is the Ark no longer remembered or visited? Because the presence of Almighty God now resides in each and every one of us.
Why was the veil torn in two at the moment Christ said, "It is finished"? Wasn't it to seal the end of one expression (a physical temple and singular expression of God's presence) and the beginning of a new one (a living temple of human followers with an exponential expression of God's presence in each one of them)?
Why do we continually go back and repair the veil in the Temple?
The Church is not a building and we do not need a building to be the Church.
I believe it’s one of the most powerful and liberating truths of the Gospel of Christ, that you and I are the Temple of God and that there is no longer any need for any man-made temple to be built.
ON LEADERSHIP AND PRIESTHOOD
Of course, my disagreement with Todd’s theology also extends to a difference of opinion when it comes to leadership and clergy. Again, I probably don’t need to repeat my arguments here, but in essence the early church had no clergy class of Christian. Every baptized believer in Christ was empowered, authorized and expected to baptize new believers, share communion, preach the Gospel, and actively participate in the function of the Body. The first letter of Paul to the church in Corinth is pretty clear on the fact that there are many gifts which are given by the one Spirit to the Body for the building up of the Church. He does not say that there are many gifts given to one man for the healthy function of the Body (which is what we have in our traditional church today).
So, I find a few things to disagree with in this article, although I still love and support Todd Hunter and I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that God has indeed called him to pursue this new direction.
I AGREE WITH TODD
What I agree with Todd about is that people today are looking for a faith to practice, not so much a religion to join or a church to belong to. Of course, not everyone feels this tug towards faith in practice, but I do see a large, and growing number of Christians gravitating towards the practice of authentic Christianity in their actual lives. As much as Todd fans that desire into flame I am with him and I support that activity.
I also agree with Todd on the concept of faith in Christ as the starting line and not the finish line. There is a very real need to change our culture in America away from salvation as a goal and towards salvation as the beginning of a life lived under Christ as Lord. For that I am with him as well and I applaud his efforts to change the way we think of evangelism, discipleship and the Gospel of the Kingdom.
I understand that Todd wants to use liturgy as a tool to help Christians understand how to live out their faith and practice following Jesus, however I think it’s better to allow them to understand their place as members of the priesthood of all believers rather than to be the one leader who does all the teaching, leading and modeling for them. At some point you have to allow the people to wear the vestments of a servant to one another – and even to you – in order to facilitate true discipleship and complete the circle of fellowship in the Body.
In the interview, Todd describes how he uses the liturgy as a tool to teach his church how to love and forgive- and this is helpful. (I think I was actually present the first time he did this). However, if you really want people to learn to love and relate to one another in the Body, I suggest that it’s better if everything they do is shared and relational, not just this one blip on the program where everyone says, “It’s time to be relational now”.
I also agree with Todd about the value of practical apologetics (our actual lives of faith in submission to Christ) versus verbal apologetics (engaging in debates with non-believers about who is more right or wrong). This is also something I can see we, as a Church, need to embrace more often. How we live our lives is very important. We are the “Proof of Concept” for the validity of our message. If we say, “Jesus loves you” but we’re not loving people ourselves, we make our message false. If we say, “Jesus can transform your life” but we ourselves are not any different from the world around us, we give people reason to doubt the validity of the Gospel.
I would also add that we cannot say to one another, “You are the Temple of the Holy Spirit” and then place so much emphasis on buildings and structures. We cannot say, “You are a member of the priesthood of believers” and then tell people they need a professional priest or clergy to embody all of the various gifts outlined in 1Corinthians 12. We cannot say, “Go into all the world and make disciples of all creatures, teaching them to obey all that (Jesus) has commanded” and then tell people to coerce their unsaved friends to come to us so that the Pastor can make a convert out of them. We cannot say, “Jesus is the head over all the Church” and then say, “Submit to the authority of your Pastor” when the New Testament tells all of us to submit to one another out of love and that the Holy Spirit will lead us into all Truth.
CONCLUSION
This article was sent to me by someone who has looked to Todd for spiritual direction, like me, for many years. He has also expressed confusion over these new developments in Todd’s life. My response to him was that I have ceased looking to men for spiritual wisdom or guidance and I have begun to seek the wisdom of Jesus and to re-discover the New Testament.
I am still blessed and inspired and encouraged by many brothers and sisters in the faith, including Todd Hunter, but these days I’ve begun to understand that God really is capable of revealing His will to me, and to His Body, apart from special, holy men. God is powerful enough to guide us Himself, and I am very interested in being part of a Church that embraces Him as the Head, and the actual leader.
-kg
Todd was recently interviewed by Christianity Today Magazine regarding his newest spiritual adventure as a Bishop in the Anglican Church. Todd Hunter is someone who started out in Calvary Chapel, and who played an instrumental role in the formation of the Vineyard movement, and who left that expression to coach church-planters in the Emerging Church. For many who have called Todd their mentor, like myself, this new step Todd is taking towards liturgical, traditional church is a confounding one. I don’t think I can express that in terms that are strong enough to convey the real impact on people who have, like me, looked to Todd as a spiritual leader for all these years.
This article does a good job of addressing the question and Todd’s answers are clear, but there’s still a very real disconnect for why Todd would choose to abandon the more organic expressions of faith he's participated in previously for the Anglican tradition.
On some levels it’s really none of our business. Todd can do whatever he wants and, clearly, he feels a genuine calling from God to become an Anglican Bishop and plant liturgical churches in America. Just because I may not agree with him, or understand the logic, doesn’t mean that God isn’t actually compelling Todd to move in this direction. If we look at the Scriptures we can see numerous times when God asks men and women to do things that make absolutely no sense to those around them. I can relate to that as someone who felt called to leave the traditional church and plant a house church where 100% of the money would go to help the poor in our community. There were many who didn’t understand (and still don’t) and who openly opposed me, dared me to do it (and fail), and branded me a heretic for my actions and for my stand against hierarchy in the church. What matters is, “Is God calling?” and “Will you obey?” and in Todd’s case it’s all between him and the Lord. I for one am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.
EQUAL TIME
Still, reading this article I cannot help but feel compelled to interject some thoughts into what Todd says about the liturgy and about the Emerging movement (of whom I am not a participant, although I am often lumped into this group due to the fact that I do not embrace traditional church practice).
As you read my responses to these quotes, please understand I do not intend these as criticisms of Todd Hunter, whom I love as a brother in the Lord. My responses here are meant to provide a counter-point of sorts to some of the things that are said, if for no other reason than to attempt something like “equal time” for those who find themselves on the outside of traditional church and have made a conscious decision to step away from any denominational identity or division in favor of following Christ alone. To quote Lance Lambert, “I could no longer be a Baptist. I could only be a Christian. Anyone who follows Christ is a member of me and I am a member of him because there is only one Body and one Family of God.”
TWO BIG PROBLEMS
In the interview, Todd Hunter mentions “two big problems” with the Emerging movement. (I have my own problems with the movement but we’ll discuss those at another time). Todd’s problems with the Emerging movement are:
“First, the emergents are so sensitive to issues of community, relationship, egalitarianism, and being non-utilitarian in their relationships, that evangelism has simply become a synonym for manipulation—a foul ball, relationally. If you and I were work colleagues and I built a relationship in which I could influence your journey toward Christ, that would be considered wrong in these circles. I cannot be friends with you if I intend to lead you to Christ. “
As Todd points out, the Emerging Movement isn’t something you can “broad-brush”. It’s much too slippery to get a handle on enough to make any real, substantial criticisms, (which is one of my problems with it, but I digress).
In Todd’s response I would tend to agree, as he states it, but I would also agree with those who feel it’s manipulative to make friends for the purpose of evangelism. I guess I would amend Todd’s statement to say, “I cannot be friends with you only because I intend to lead you to Christ.” It’s the recruitment motive that bothers me, and I think a few others, when it comes to targeting people as conquests rather than learning to love people no matter what their faith, or whether or not they eventually become followers of Jesus. I think what has to be intentional is our love of others, not evangelism itself. I believe in intentionally loving someone and praying for God to reveal Himself to them, but I do not believe in intentionally targeting someone simply to convert them to my faith.
One helpful question I believe we should ask is, “Am I willing to be someone’s friend for the rest of my life, even if they never convert to my faith?” If at any point in the relationship I would abandon the friendship and move on to a better prospect then, I believe, we’re not really fulfilling the Lord’s command to love others. Love isn’t conditional. It should remain and be sustained regardless of whether or not it is reciprocated. Love should continue apart from agreement on matters of faith.
Todd’s second problem is the one I take the most issue with.
“Second, after 10 or 12 years of the emerging church, you have to ask where anything has been built. Evangelism has been so muted and the normal building of structures and processes hasn't moved forward because there's no positive, godly imagination for doing either evangelism or leadership.”
Where do I even begin to respond to this? Perhaps I am misunderstanding him. I don't think I am but if so, I look forward to apologizing later. However, as I read this it seems that Todd’s second problem with the Emerging faith isn’t based on their lack of spiritual fruit. He doesn’t say that, “…after 10 or 12 years of the emerging church you have to ask where the fruit is.” Instead, he has a problem with them for not building structures. He says, “…the normal building of structures and processes hasn’t moved forward because there’s no positive, godly imagination for doing either evangelism or leadership.”
Really? What we should expect to see from a healthy understanding of evangelism and leadership is an $11 million dollar church building? Not followers of Jesus who make disciples of others? Not a deeper love for Christ? Not the fruit of the Spirit but….”the normal building of structures and processes.”
The Church in America spends billions of dollars on itself every year. Mainly on the building of structures and the financial support of leaders. I would hardly call that “Church for the sake of others” as Todd often refers to it. That seems like Church for the sake of itself, to me.
I want to ask, “Can the Church be the Church, in all of its’ original Spirit-filled DNA of love for others and mission to the least, without buildings, or paid clergy?” I believe that if we look to the first 300 years of Christian history we will see that the answer is a resounding, “Yes!” In fact, the Church in most of the world today is more vibrant and missional and evangelistic than anything we see here in the West without any “normal building of structures and processes.”
If anything, I would question the use of the word “normal” in Todd’s response. What is normal? Shouldn’t the definition of normative Christian practice come from the New Testament? Why should the definition of “normal” come from our man-made human traditions? Isn’t that part of what Jesus was critical of the Pharisees about? (Matt 15:3-9)
I’ve already written at length about how the New Testament expression of Church differs from our man-made traditions. Simply put, the Old Testament prophesies that the Messiah would build the Temple of the Lord. (Zechariah 6, 2 Sam 7, etc.) When Jesus came there was already a Temple in Jerusalem. So, what did he build? In fact, Jesus went to the Temple in Jerusalem and prophesied that it would be destroyed (and it was) and that he would build it up again (speaking of the temple of his body). This was fulfilled at the cross when Jesus laid down his life for us and then resurrected from the dead. However, it was also fulfilled when his Body (the Church) was built into a house of living stones and a new temple of God was formed-(Eph 2:20, Heb 3:5, 1 Cor 3:16, etc.).
In the New Testament expression of faith, the new Temple is the Body of Christ, the Church. We are the only building God is interested in building. We are the new priesthood. We are the fulfillment of the prophecy in Joel that God would pour out His Spirit on all flesh (men and women, Jew and Gentile, Slave and Free). We are now the place where the Glory and Presence of the Living God dwells. Not in a house of stone built by men, but in a house of flesh filled with the Holy Spirit of the Living God. We are the fulfillment of the promise that one day no one will ever seek for the Ark of the Covenant, because it is now only an empty box.
“And it shall come to pass, when ye be multiplied and increased in the land, in those days, saith the LORD, they shall say no more, The ark of the covenant of the LORD: neither shall it come to mind: neither shall they remember it; neither shall they visit it; neither shall that be done any more" - Jeremiah 3:16
Why is the Ark no longer remembered or visited? Because the presence of Almighty God now resides in each and every one of us.
Why was the veil torn in two at the moment Christ said, "It is finished"? Wasn't it to seal the end of one expression (a physical temple and singular expression of God's presence) and the beginning of a new one (a living temple of human followers with an exponential expression of God's presence in each one of them)?
Why do we continually go back and repair the veil in the Temple?
The Church is not a building and we do not need a building to be the Church.
I believe it’s one of the most powerful and liberating truths of the Gospel of Christ, that you and I are the Temple of God and that there is no longer any need for any man-made temple to be built.
ON LEADERSHIP AND PRIESTHOOD
Of course, my disagreement with Todd’s theology also extends to a difference of opinion when it comes to leadership and clergy. Again, I probably don’t need to repeat my arguments here, but in essence the early church had no clergy class of Christian. Every baptized believer in Christ was empowered, authorized and expected to baptize new believers, share communion, preach the Gospel, and actively participate in the function of the Body. The first letter of Paul to the church in Corinth is pretty clear on the fact that there are many gifts which are given by the one Spirit to the Body for the building up of the Church. He does not say that there are many gifts given to one man for the healthy function of the Body (which is what we have in our traditional church today).
So, I find a few things to disagree with in this article, although I still love and support Todd Hunter and I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that God has indeed called him to pursue this new direction.
I AGREE WITH TODD
What I agree with Todd about is that people today are looking for a faith to practice, not so much a religion to join or a church to belong to. Of course, not everyone feels this tug towards faith in practice, but I do see a large, and growing number of Christians gravitating towards the practice of authentic Christianity in their actual lives. As much as Todd fans that desire into flame I am with him and I support that activity.
I also agree with Todd on the concept of faith in Christ as the starting line and not the finish line. There is a very real need to change our culture in America away from salvation as a goal and towards salvation as the beginning of a life lived under Christ as Lord. For that I am with him as well and I applaud his efforts to change the way we think of evangelism, discipleship and the Gospel of the Kingdom.
I understand that Todd wants to use liturgy as a tool to help Christians understand how to live out their faith and practice following Jesus, however I think it’s better to allow them to understand their place as members of the priesthood of all believers rather than to be the one leader who does all the teaching, leading and modeling for them. At some point you have to allow the people to wear the vestments of a servant to one another – and even to you – in order to facilitate true discipleship and complete the circle of fellowship in the Body.
In the interview, Todd describes how he uses the liturgy as a tool to teach his church how to love and forgive- and this is helpful. (I think I was actually present the first time he did this). However, if you really want people to learn to love and relate to one another in the Body, I suggest that it’s better if everything they do is shared and relational, not just this one blip on the program where everyone says, “It’s time to be relational now”.
I also agree with Todd about the value of practical apologetics (our actual lives of faith in submission to Christ) versus verbal apologetics (engaging in debates with non-believers about who is more right or wrong). This is also something I can see we, as a Church, need to embrace more often. How we live our lives is very important. We are the “Proof of Concept” for the validity of our message. If we say, “Jesus loves you” but we’re not loving people ourselves, we make our message false. If we say, “Jesus can transform your life” but we ourselves are not any different from the world around us, we give people reason to doubt the validity of the Gospel.
I would also add that we cannot say to one another, “You are the Temple of the Holy Spirit” and then place so much emphasis on buildings and structures. We cannot say, “You are a member of the priesthood of believers” and then tell people they need a professional priest or clergy to embody all of the various gifts outlined in 1Corinthians 12. We cannot say, “Go into all the world and make disciples of all creatures, teaching them to obey all that (Jesus) has commanded” and then tell people to coerce their unsaved friends to come to us so that the Pastor can make a convert out of them. We cannot say, “Jesus is the head over all the Church” and then say, “Submit to the authority of your Pastor” when the New Testament tells all of us to submit to one another out of love and that the Holy Spirit will lead us into all Truth.
CONCLUSION
This article was sent to me by someone who has looked to Todd for spiritual direction, like me, for many years. He has also expressed confusion over these new developments in Todd’s life. My response to him was that I have ceased looking to men for spiritual wisdom or guidance and I have begun to seek the wisdom of Jesus and to re-discover the New Testament.
I am still blessed and inspired and encouraged by many brothers and sisters in the faith, including Todd Hunter, but these days I’ve begun to understand that God really is capable of revealing His will to me, and to His Body, apart from special, holy men. God is powerful enough to guide us Himself, and I am very interested in being part of a Church that embraces Him as the Head, and the actual leader.
-kg
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
FOLLOW JESUS AND JOIN THE SCUM OF THE EARTH
“To this very hour we go hungry and thirsty, we are in rags, we are brutally treated, we are homeless. We work hard with our own hands. When we are cursed, we bless; when we are persecuted, we endure it; when we are slandered, we answer kindly. Up to this moment we have become the scum of the earth, the refuse of the world.” - 1 Corinthians 4:11-13
What does it mean to identify oneself with Jesus? In this passage, Paul paints a pretty stark picture of the Apostles as one’s who are dishonored, poor, weak and foolish. Then he goes further to describe himself and his fellow Apostles as hungry, thirsty, in rags and homeless.
Didn’t anyone explain to Paul the power of positive thinking? Why isn’t he using his faith to pray for riches and a new chariot? Why doesn’t he ask for an offering to be made so that he and the other Apostles could enjoy the finer things in life? I thought that Jesus wanted all of us to be rich? Yet, somehow, Paul and the other Apostles appear to be weak, humble, hungry and homeless.
I wonder what would happen today if our mega-famous Christian leaders took this approach to leadership? What if they became poor so that others might become rich? What if they went hungry so that others could eat? What if they became homeless so that others might sleep in comfort?
Even more, what if our high-powered Christian teachers, authors and celebrities today identified themselves as the “scum of the earth, the refuse of the world”? One obvious change would be that they might beat others to the punch, of course. But greater still, how wonderful would it be if it were literally true that our leaders were on the bottom lifting everyone else up?
Can you imagine how powerful it would be if even half of our Christian leaders actually took the yoke of a servant and made themselves nothing in order to identify with Christ and demonstrate the power of humble service to others? Wouldn’t it be amazing if we could point to men and women of God who willingly sacrificed their own comfort and fame and power and position to empower their brothers and sisters in Christ?
In a recent article, Jon Zens questioned whether or not we can even fully comprehend the new testament, and the writings of Paul especially, apart from taking into account the suffering which he and the early church endured. He says:
“Paul wrote out of the context of anguish, tears, rejection by others, physical infirmity and imprisonment. Are we not deceiving ourselves to suggest that Paul’s writings can be properly handled outside of a cross-bearing atmosphere? Can hermeneutics be healthy in an environment where the interpreters are on “flowery beds of ease”? I doubt it.” – Jon Zens, From the article “Is Cross-Bearing A Precondition For Hermeneutic Activity?”
I think that, not only do we need to acquaint ourselves with suffering and cross-bearing to understand the New Testament, we also need to practice these things if we’re going to fulfill the New Testament and the commands of Christ.
“To this we were called, because Christ suffered for us on the cross, and His life was an example for you, we should follow in His footsteps.”-1 Peter 2:21
This is for me. I am called to follow in His footsteps. I am called to follow the example of His life. I am called to acquaint myself with suffering and to humble myself to serve others. Serving others in humility is what Jesus modeled for us. Paul, Peter, James, John and the other Apostles took their cues from Jesus and they also served the Body in humility and love.
A good friend recently read through a few of my older articles and caught me referring to myself as “the pastor of The Mission”. It helped me to see how my understanding of Church and leadership has evolved over the last few years, and yet how far I still have to go when it comes to being a servant leader in the Body.
Over the last several months I have managed to fade into the shadows at our House Church in many ways. It’s exciting to see how others step forward and take ownership as I drop back. But as I become more superfluous to the ongoing life and health of the Body I find my interest fading as well. Being “just another member in the Body” has been more challenging than I ever imagined. Suddenly no one needs me to function. I am no longer the source of direction or wisdom. As we lean more on one another, and especially as we learn to surrender to the Lordship and leadership of Jesus, my role becomes more and more ordinary. I’ve never really considered the implications of fostering a true “priesthood of believers” in our Body, and now I can see that it forces me to humble myself in ways I never imagined.
Can I learn to lead others from the background – or from the bottom? Can I step into the shadows and shine the spotlight on them? Can I be the sort of leader that Jesus was, and that Jesus calls me to be in the Body of Christ? I’m not sure. It’s one of those questions that I never expected to have to answer, and it makes me realize that, once again, I am an absolute beginner in all of this. I know nothing.
“Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others. Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death—even death on a cross!” – Philippians 2:3-8
To this point it’s nothing short of a miracle that the Mission House Church has survived my ego thus far. Time and again God reveals to me that I am still carrying the baggage of the old, traditional, man-made Church with me, even as I do my best to avoid it. The truth is that I am still far away from embracing the badge of honor that Paul claims for himself when he declares that he is the “scum of the earth, the refuse of the world”. I only hope that one day this could be truthfully said of me as a leader who lifts others up from the bottom.
Peace,
kg
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
JESUS: PRINCE OF PEACE (2 OF 4)
The second article in the series is now live over at TheOoze.com.
Check it out there and comment here if you like:
HERE
Peace,
Keith
Check it out there and comment here if you like:
HERE
Peace,
Keith
Monday, September 14, 2009
PROOF OF CONCEPT
Definition: The evidence that a product, technology or an information system is viable and capable of solving an organization's particular problem. A proof of concept is often developed for new products that have not yet come to market.
At the core of the Gospel is the idea that a person can be transformed by the power of the resurrected Christ and indwelled by the Holy Spirit of the Living God to become a new creation; a person capable of loving the unlovely, forgiving the most vile and serving others as Jesus did.
In the early days of the Christian faith this theory was proven true in the lives of the disciples who suffered persecution without retaliation, shared everything they owned with people in need, and were known for their radical compassion, astounding love and uncommon inclusivity.
Somewhere along the way our message got circumvented, the idea of living ones' life after the pattern of Jesus became supplanted with a softer approach where one need only agree with a set of beliefs and doctrines in order to call oneself a "little Christ".
The fruit of that original tribe of Jesus followers was quite unlike the fruit we see of today's Believers. In the first few hundred years it was unheard of for a Christian to take another human life. In fact, we have no known record of such a thing occuring, even from Pagan sources. Today there are hundreds of such examples.
In the early Church it was unheard of for a Christian to ignore the poor. Today it's all too common for the Church to spend billions of dollars on new buildings and pastoral salaries and large-screen plasma screens, and give less than 2 percent of the offering to the poor.
In the early Church, no one was coerced to tithe or to give anything. They gave freely and with gladness to care for anyone who had need. In fact, the Christian church didn't institute a mandatory Tithe until nearly 700 years after Christ, surviving mainly on the charity of the people and being served by leaders who took no salary from the money received.
In the early church, Christians were primarily concerned with preaching the Gospel, making disciples and caring for the poor. Today, Christians are primarily concerned with gaining political power, promoting their specific local church, attracting new tithers and finding a larger building.
In the early Church there was no segregation of age, sex, race, music preference, ethnic background, or anything else. Everyone who named the name of Christ was immediately a fully functional and valued member of the Body of Christ.
In today's Church we separate children from youth, youth from singles, singles from young married and young married from the elderly. We also separate from one another by theology, doctrine, practice, worship preference, race, and style.
In the early Church the followers of Jesus were simple, humble and loving people. They did not politically oppose the oppressive Roman government or pagan religions of the day. Instead they chose to rebel by living counter to their culture and learned to live radical lives of love within the community.
In the early Church, there was no one place where the Church could be located because they did not see the building they gathered in as sacred or holy. Instead, they saw that they, themselves, were holy and sacred by the Blood of the Lamb and the trasformative power of Christ.
In the early Church there was no one special day when they stopped what they were doing to worship God. Instead they gathered daily to break bread, fellowship, and devote themselves to the teaching of Jesus. To them, worship was seen as a way of life where each Believer continually submitted themselves to Christ as a living sacrifice.
In the early Church, Love was the only Law. They were not concerned in any way with amassing wealth, becoming politically powerful, changing laws, or selling products with their church name, cross, or scripture verse attached.
In the formative stages of this Christian faith it was the proof of concept that convinced people that the Gospel was true, and in spite of the high cost of following Jesus, many hundreds of thousands of people risked everything to identify with Christ.
The proof of a concept is something that must be demonstrated outwardly for everyone to see. If it cannot be demonstrated, it is rejected as false and another concept must be found which can accomplish the task.
Our lives as followers of Jesus prove, or disprove, the truth of the Gospel. When it comes to the Christian faith, people are looking for a proof of concept and, so far, they’re not very impressed by what they see.
-kg
Saturday, September 12, 2009
WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY...?
CLEARING UP CONFUSION- On my blog and elsewhere I often identify myself as “a pastor who doesn’t take a salary at a church where 100% of the offering goes to the poor in our community”. Some people have been confused by this and I felt it was about time to address these questions.
What do you mean by ‘Pastor’?
I mean this in the most New Testament way possible. I have the spiritual gift to pastor the Body. This means I do what I can to serve my brothers and sisters in Christ and I care for and encourage their spiritual development.
It does NOT mean that I preach or that I am the CEO of our Church. In fact, I never preach anything and we all practice the priesthood of the believer. So, when I refer to myself as a "Pastor" I mean that I, like many others in our Body, have a gift from the Holy Spirit to serve the Body as a foot-washing equal.
What do you mean by ‘Offering’?
I mean that we have a basket at the back of the room and randomly people will place their offerings in this basket. We do not pass the basket or observe an offering time. If people give they give, if they do not that's between them and the Lord. We do not keep giving records and we also do not give tax exemptions (since we also are not a 501(c)3 non-profit organization.
Wendy and I started this house church because we felt a calling to plant a church where 100% of the offerings could go to help the poor in our community. For the last 4 years we've seen giving increase exponentially - not because we've emphasized giving or taught on giving - but because people can see for themselves that every penny they give is going to help and bless actual people in need every week.
Why aren't you a non-profit?
Well, we know many house churches that are. In fact, nearly all of them we know of are registered with the State as a non-profit organization. Our conviction is that we do not need the State or any Government body to declare us a Church. We're a Church because we are called by God and we have placed Him at the Head of our lives.
Secondly, we feel strongly that Church is not meant to be a business, therefore we have no need to operate as one. Furthermore, since we have no expenses to "write off" there's no point (or benefit) to us for being a registered non-profit organization. All of the money that comes in goes right back out to help buy groceries or help people in need.
If you want to know about the Mission House Church and how we function I've posted an MP3 from a recent House Church weekend where I answered questions in detail.
The message, "House Church: How it Works" is available as a free MP3 download at the link on the lower left sidebar.
For any other specific questions, please email me directly at "elysiansky" (at) hotmail (dot) com.
Blessings,
Keith
**
What do you mean by ‘Pastor’?
I mean this in the most New Testament way possible. I have the spiritual gift to pastor the Body. This means I do what I can to serve my brothers and sisters in Christ and I care for and encourage their spiritual development.
It does NOT mean that I preach or that I am the CEO of our Church. In fact, I never preach anything and we all practice the priesthood of the believer. So, when I refer to myself as a "Pastor" I mean that I, like many others in our Body, have a gift from the Holy Spirit to serve the Body as a foot-washing equal.
What do you mean by ‘Offering’?
I mean that we have a basket at the back of the room and randomly people will place their offerings in this basket. We do not pass the basket or observe an offering time. If people give they give, if they do not that's between them and the Lord. We do not keep giving records and we also do not give tax exemptions (since we also are not a 501(c)3 non-profit organization.
Wendy and I started this house church because we felt a calling to plant a church where 100% of the offerings could go to help the poor in our community. For the last 4 years we've seen giving increase exponentially - not because we've emphasized giving or taught on giving - but because people can see for themselves that every penny they give is going to help and bless actual people in need every week.
Why aren't you a non-profit?
Well, we know many house churches that are. In fact, nearly all of them we know of are registered with the State as a non-profit organization. Our conviction is that we do not need the State or any Government body to declare us a Church. We're a Church because we are called by God and we have placed Him at the Head of our lives.
Secondly, we feel strongly that Church is not meant to be a business, therefore we have no need to operate as one. Furthermore, since we have no expenses to "write off" there's no point (or benefit) to us for being a registered non-profit organization. All of the money that comes in goes right back out to help buy groceries or help people in need.
If you want to know about the Mission House Church and how we function I've posted an MP3 from a recent House Church weekend where I answered questions in detail.
The message, "House Church: How it Works" is available as a free MP3 download at the link on the lower left sidebar.
For any other specific questions, please email me directly at "elysiansky" (at) hotmail (dot) com.
Blessings,
Keith
**
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)