Starbucks and Salvation

Pagan Christianity part 2...

This post...the Sermon, the Pastor, and Sunday Morning Costumes...

The Sermon: Protestantism's Most Sacred Cow - before I dive into Viola's thoughts on the sermon, allow me a few discretionary moments to speak on my own.  I've been on an 12 year journey into and through ministry.  I can't begin to state the number of times I've heard these type phrases (not necessarily about me, but in general); "He's an impassioned speaker!" "He has such a great delivery!" "He has a way of speaking to people that is unreal!"  You'll notice all example began with "he"...I have grown up in the Southern Baptist tradition remember. ;>) The point is this...whether it is a youth ministry event speaker, a conference speaker, or a Sunday morning preacher, you rarely if ever hear anyone talk about how incredible someone shepherds the flock or tends to the needs of their congregation or lives with kingdom mindedness...its all about the speaking.  It's as if a person only needs to have great oratory skills to make a kingdom impact...but I digress.  Viola has this to say about New Testament examples of preaching...it was comprised of different messages to different audiences; it was sporadic, not scheduled; it often revolved around specific needs or issues; it was extemporaneous and often lacked structure; it usually encouraged and welcomed feedback instead of its hearers being limited to a "sit and get" mentality.  Viola notes that sermon delivery as we are accustomed to today has its roots not in the early church, but in Greek culture and philosophy.  It was the Greeks orators who were set apart by their placement and dress and Aristotle is credited with the 3 point structure so many of today's preachers are taught in their seminaries.  Around the 3rd century active, participatory church meetings began to die out, and church services began to emerge.  During the same time, pagan leaders were being converted to Christianity (which is a good thing) and brought with them the structure and status of professional 'teachers'.  The drawback to this infusion is church meetings moved away from a participatory, all inclusive expression to a sit and get methodology.  In the early days of Roman Catholicism, the Eucharist or Lord's Supper was center stage of the church service.  With the Reformation, Luther again moved the sermon to center stage.  John Calvin argued the preacher was the "mouth of God".  As the Puritans moved forth, they sought to mimic Calvin's expository preaching style (verse by verse) and raised further the sermon in importance.  Viola believes the elevating of the sermon has harmed Christianity in the following ways: 1) it makes the preacher the "virtuoso performer" of the service, the hearers become "muted spectators" instead of active participants of the meeting; 2) the sermon actually "stalemates spiritual growth" by suffocating participation and encouraging passivity; 3) it creates an "excessive and pathological dependence on the clergy", by creating the image of the preacher as "religious specialist" and reducing all other persons' involvement; 4) instead of equipping the saints, it "de-skills" them...Viola suggest preaching and teaching in the NT actually sought to lead the church to be able to function "without" the presence of clergy; 5) Viola believes today's sermons are often "impractical" with speakers spouting as experts on things they have never experienced.  IMO, which is what a personal review is, I tend to agree with Viola in theory that the sermon as we know it today has not really fulfilled what Christ intended for His believers.  In today's consumer driven church mentality, people by the 10's of thousands file into buildings on Sunday mornings, sit back and wait for something to be delivered to them, nod their head accordingly (or shake it no if need be) and then file out having been unchanged, unchallenged, and in many ways not transformed by the Spirit and Word of God.  Some of this lies within the responsibility of the hearers...too many of them are truly seeking what God would have in store for them.  However, in recognizing that it falls upon us who are delivering the message to seek what God would have us to do in response to their lackadaisical attitude.  Jesus surely encountered many who did not really care what He had to say...but He continued to push until He hit the right button.

The Pastor: Obstacle to Every-Member Functioning - "I majored in Bible in college.  I went to the seminary and I majored in the only thing they teach there: the professional ministry.  When I graduated, I realized that I could speak Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, and the only thing on earth I was qualified for was to be pope.  But someone else had the job." Anonymous 

Viola makes these following statements in regards to the word 'pastor' in the scriptures...it is only used once in the NT (Ephesians 4:11...in the English Standard Version, which is touted as the closest word-for-word translation we have 'pastors' reads 'shepherds' in English); in the Ephesians passage it is plural, not singular indicating there were many pastors in the Ephesus church; the word 'poimen' which is translated to pastor or shepherd is not about an office or title but about a function within the church.  Early church leaders such as Ignatius, Clement of Rome, and Tertullian were the first to espouse or put into place hierarchical structures within the local church of leadership.  This occurred late 1st century into the 2nd century.  Over the centuries their ideas evolved into bishop/presbyter (priest) led churches.  When Constantine elevated Christianity to the official religion of the Empire, the pastor/clergy position took on a new head of steam.  Civil power was afforded to members of clergy, and Constantine issued a mandatory yearly salary to all members.  They were exempted from paying income tax (which, by the way is a great thing in my opinion ;>) ), and they were exempt from mandatory civic duties (such as serving in the army) as well as being free from trial in secular courts.  Under Constantine, leading in the church became less about a calling and more about a career choice.  During the Reformation period, Luther, Calvin and others rallied around restoring the biblical idea of the priesthood of all believers.  This was only a partial restoration according to Viola, as they continued to elevate the idea of clergy being called and ordained as opposed to being open to anyone.  In the Reformer's eyes, "ordination was the key to having power in the church."  Acts of contempt or ridicule toward a pastor were treated as serious offenses, as if they had been directed toward God Himself.  Viola states today, the single pastor position in church divides the church into "1st and 2nd class Christians" and "suffocates our functioning" in the local church.  It makes the pastor a "giant mouth" and transforms the church member into a "tiny ear".  Additionally, this position places undo stress and pressure on the pastor.  Depression, burnout, and emotional breakdown occur at abnormally high rates among pastors.  The need to be "perfect" can drain any mortal dry.  In Viola's words, the pastor position as it is in today's church "fosters dishonesty" among pastors, as their church members expect them to "always be cheerful, completely spiritual, and available at a moment's call."  They also "expect that he will have a perfectly disciplined family" and should "never appear resentful or bitter".  Anne Jackson wrote a book titled "Mad Church Disease: Overcoming the Burnout Epidemic" which hits these points Viola has made right on the head.  If you are reading this post, and are a church member or minister, I highly recommend her work.

Sunday Morning Costumes: Covering up the Problem - the practice of dressing up for church is a relatively recent phenomenon according to Viola.  In the late 18th century, dressing up for social events was only done by the very wealthy.  Common folk had 2 sets of clothing...work clothes, and another set for going into town.  With the advent of mass textile marketing and production, the middle class were born and to demonstrate their new status, they would "dress up" like the wealthy.  Interestingly, John Wesley wrote against wearing expensive or flashy clothing in church.  Even early Baptists condemned fine clothing teaching it separated the rich from the poor.  However, mainstream Christians continued to wear their 'best' whenever they could.  In the late 19th century, Horace Bushnell, a Congregational minister in Connecticut, published an essay titled "Taste and Fashion" in which he espoused traits like sophistication and refinement, including matters of dress, were attributes of God and Christians should embrace them.  Church members now wore their formal clothing not merely to honor God, but to emulate Him.  Viola believes "dressing up" for church violates these basic NT principles...1) it reflects a false division between the secular (worldly) and sacred as we have access to God's Spirit at all times, not just on Sunday morning; 2) it presents the message to those outside the church that those inside the church "have it all together" when in reality it "fosters the illusion that we are somehow good because we are dressing up for God"; 3) it "smacks against the primitive simplicity that was the sustaining hallmark of the early church."  Early Christians did not dress to exhibit their social class.  Quite the opposite, the NT is filled with exhortation that social class is abolished in Christ and His church.  James rebukes the church in chapter 2 of his letter for showing favoritism among classes.  Today, though many churches have 'loosened' the dress code for worship, in many areas of the country church appearance is more important than church involvement.  

As a pastor of a church plant, I am acutely aware of the potential of those who may join the church to be more enamored of me then they are of Christ.  I am not stating they should be, nor do I believe that of myself.  In this culture however, many people are more attracted to a pastor/leader then they are a movement of God.  At the recent Verge conference, Ed Stetzer made this statement, "We tend to build churches around dynamic personalities.  This may work for a while, but will fail in the long run."  My desire for Springwater is that it will be a church that will celebrate MANY anniversaries in the Surprise, AZ community.  For that to occur, it cannot be built around me.  I am grateful for Viola's thoughts and research concerning the pastoral position and what it is biblically.  His are not the only thoughts I've read on the subject, and prayerfully, they will impact how I lead and shepherd the church.  Next post, we tackle Music Ministers, Tithing & Clergy Salaries, and the Lord's Supper & Baptism.  Au revoir!

A personal review of "Pagan Christianity" part 1...

In January 2008 Frank Viola, with the assistance of George Barna released a book titled "Pagan Christianity", subtitled "Exploring the Roots of our Church Practices". In Viola's own words, "Our reason for writing it (the book) is simple: we are seeking to remove a great deal of debris in order to make room for the Lord Jesus Christ to be the fully functioning head of His church."

The book takes a look at these issues: are we really "doing" church by the book (Bible); the issues of the church building, order of worship, sermon, pastor and other professional ministers, tithing, the Lord's Supper and baptism, Christian education, dressing up for church, and finally looking at the New Testament and Christ more in-depth.  I've decided to tackle the 12 chapter book in four posts, looking at 3 chapters at a time.  Today I'll discuss "Have we really been doing it by the book?", "the Church building", and "the Order of Worship"...enjoy.

"Have We Really Been Doing it by the Book?" - a current trend in churches, both established and new churches, is to make statements on their website/brochures/bulletins such as "We are a New Testament church" or "Everything we do at XYZ Church is taken from the Word of God".  We are taught by leaders in and out of our churches to read and digest the Word of God...but we do so by the lenses of tradition, perspective, and personal experience we have in life.  This opening chapter of Viola's book serves as a springboard for the remainder.  In it he describes how "...you may be surprised to discover that a great deal of what we Christians do for Sunday morning church did not come from Jesus Christ, the Apostles, or the Scriptures."  Moreover he states, "Strikingly, much of what we do for "church" was lifted directly out of pagan culture in the postapostolic period."  Viola sets forth a strong argument for refusing to bury our heads in the sand and stating, "We've always done it this way.'  Viola's book is intended to supply the reader with enough information to spur them on to greater study, both of Scripture and of the church and her history.  

"The Church Building" - perhaps no where in the world (with the exception perhaps of Rome) is the church building more closely associated with success/validity than in America.  Upon moving here to Arizona, one of the earliest questions I had as a church planter in one of my meetings was how soon did we need to think about being in a building campaign.  You see, in my mind, I could be mobile and rent facility upon facility forever and be comfortable with that.  I was quickly told however that until we had a building, people in the community would not think we were "for real".  I have to admit, that surprised me in this area, especially a large metropolitan area.  I understand all to well the Southern mentality...that a church building means you've arrived.  I suppose I was thinking this part of the country may be different.  Viola's concern with the church building begins with this realization, "Ancient Judaism was centered on three elements: the Temple, the priesthood, and the sacrifice.  When Jesus came, He ended all three, fulfilling them in Himself."  In my own study of scripture, I see Christ becoming our lead priest/mediator, the the new Temple of God's Spirit clearly taught in the perspective of being our bodies...obviously, Christ fulfilled the ultimate sacrifice as well.  So I believe Viola to be on target with his initial thoughts re: the church building.  In the New Testament, we see the early followers of Christ meeting in homes, not extravagant buildings, and the Greek word for church (ekklesia) was not used to describe a location, but a group of people.  According to history, specific buildings for church worship were not built until the times after Constantine officially endorsed Christianity as the Roman religion.  Additionally, Viola notes that early church's were built on the idea that all believers were part of a royal priesthood unto God.  Sacrifices were done away with and replaced with spiritual practices of worship and praise and thanksgiving.  As Roman Catholicism grew, it synchronized Judaism with new Christianity and pagan (polytheistic followers in ancient Rome) practices.  Thus, the professional priesthood was born and buildings were constructed.  Early buildings began as monuments over sacred places or burial grounds.  Viola spends much of the chapter detailing the finer points of the early church buildings and how they borrowed greatly from polytheistic traditions of the day.  For brevity, I will not spend time discussing these, but jump ahead.  Late in the chapter Viola gets to the point of the chapter - what difference does all this make?  In his words, "To put a finer point on it, the church building is based on the benighted idea that worship is removed from everyday life...the disjunction between worship and everyday life characterizes Western Christianity."  He adds that worship is seen as "something detached" from our life and is packaged for "group consumption" instead of being an individual practice.  Personally, I see reality in this and have grown up in a time where "going to church" meant one thing as a believer, and the rest of one's week meant entirely something else.  Viola is spot on in challenging the reader to think outside the box when it comes to the necessity of the building.  Churches quarrel weekly and pastors pull their hair out when dealing with monetary issues of the overhead associated with today's buildings.  More importantly, believers get too wrapped up in "going to church" instead of "being the church".  Buildings also impart a potential divide between church leaders who are partial to staying away from the trappings of a building.  John Newton stated, "Let not him who worships under a steeple condemn him who worships under a chimney."  Like Viola, I believe today's Christian should take seriously the importance we place on church buildings.

"The Order of Worship: Sunday Mornings Set in Concrete" - growing up in church, it didn't take long to memorize the order of things to come on Sunday mornings.  Oh, it was printed each Sunday for you in bulletin form, but if the copy machine ever failed to work you knew from the previous X number of Sunday's what was coming in terms of the service.  Even in churches that don't publish bulletins, at times they can fall into a trap of doing the same thing in the same order.  Viola describes the standard Protestant order of worship in this way: the greeting, prayer/scripture reading, a song service, announcements, an offering, a sermon, a benediction/dismissal...additionally there may be an altar call/invitation, additional singing, and the Lord's Supper and/or baptism. There may be some minor rearranging of things, but can you see these aspects in your church?  Viola states early church meetings were marked by "...every member-functioning, spontaneity, freedom, vibrancy, and open participation."  Early church was not marked by strict structure of service or even by starting at 10:50 and ending by 11:55!  In the 16th century, during Martin Luther's campaign against Roman Catholic policy and worship, specifically the manner in which they viewed the Lord's Supper.  His revisions of the Catholic Mass are largely the basis for Protestant order of services today.  Many critics of Luther state he did nothing more than shorten the Catholic Mass and made no real changes other then a few choice words or phrases.  There was still little in the way of participation, and the entire thing was still directed by "professional" clergy or pastors.  Luther's order of service was singing, prayer, sermon, admonition to the people, Lord's Supper, singing, prayer, benediction.  Look familiar?  In the coming years, other changes were made by other church fathers such as adding what is known today as the Lord's Supper Table...some did away with all musical instruments and sung a cappella....in all areas however, the lead pastor/clergy led the whole thing from the central point, the pulpit.  Very little interaction occurred and the people were encouraged to enter in with somber (sometimes called reverent) attitudes as opposed to biblical instruction to enter His gates with thanksgiving!  Later additions to the order of service included a greater focus on the sermon (17th/18th century) as well as the practice of the altar call/invitation of the Frontier-Revivalists.  Viola is quick to point out there is nothing inherently wrong with any of these principles...just that it is clear they did not originate with Christ, the apostles, or the New Testament Scriptures.  It doesn't mean they are wrong...just that it is wrong to state a church is doing things "by the book" when it comes to their order of worship.  Viola does have these concerns however with this style of worship...1) it represses participation and growth.  The participants of worship are largely silent, sitting, and stoic (my words, not his).  2) the headship of Christ is strangled...the entire service is directed by 1 or at most 2 persons.  There is no freedom for Christ to speak through His body.  (interestingly, in my tribe...baptists...much is made of Christ speaking through His body in certain times/places such as business meetings and other standards of congregational polity, just not in worship...this, to me, is bothersome)  3) for many, this order of worship is shamefully boring.  There is little variety or spontaneity.  The routine becomes tired, meaningless, and invisible.  Viola properly notes seeker-sensitive or contemporary churches have made moves to "upgrade" the worship service with media, theatrical modernizations and technology.  However, in many of these cases the service is still painfully predictable and dominated by a few.  4) Viola states the repetitive nature of the service hinders transformation as it encourages a passive lifestyle, limits functioning of the Spirit, and implies that one hour a week is the key to living victoriously in Christ.  In this chapter, Viola does a fantastic job of examining the barriers a worship service can potentially place in the life of a believer.  Opponents of this style of thinking concern themselves with worship becoming a "free-for-all"  with no regard for order or control.  However, Viola notes that indeed the Apostle Paul did give us guidelines for orderly worship (for example 1st Corinthians 14) in his letters.  Granted, some of his guidelines must be looked at in context of his day and the specific church at Corinth (such as verses 34 and 35) but indeed he did give good advice.  Personally, some of the greatest services I was blessed to attend at my church in Kentucky were services were we allowed people to pray aloud, share scripture, or bless the Lord with their words during the service.  Those days we recognized the work of Christ in people's lives in a much different way.  

Viola raises many interesting points throughout this book and in large part, I agree with them.  In my next post I'll deal with the issues of the sermon, the pastor, and dressing up for church.  I look forward to your comments and thoughts!

Money money money money....MONEY!

Tell me if you've heard these statements before (or similar ones) in church-life...

"God doesn't need your money!" "God owns the cattle on a thousand hills, what is your checkbook to Him?"
"The owner of everything in the universe doesn't need your stuff, He owns it all!"

There has been, since I can remember even as a young child, movement in churches on the part of preachers, deacons, evangelists, Sunday School teacher, and everybody else in-between to remind all who would hear that God doesn't need any of our money to do anything with, as He owns it all and has it all.  We talk at length about God's provision, and how if He wants something to succeed He will make it happen financially.  We speak of His unlimited resources and how giving to the church (tithing) is just an obedience aspect...that God doesn't NEED us to give, but asks us to in order that our priorities in life are changed and challenged.

IF we really believe that God will make things happen financially, and IF we really believe that He is going to pour out His resources (financial) on those things He is involved in and wants to succeed then the following information is troublesome...Southern Seminary and Southwestern Seminary are pulling programs due to financial reasons (see link for moreinfo http://www.kencoffee.com/2010/02/finances-hurting-seminaries.html)...according to this report from the Barna Group, 57% of pastors state the economy has hurt their local church budgets (http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/18-congregations/327-the-economys-impact-on-churches-congregational-budgets-part-1-of-3)...according to part 2 of the Barna report, the 3 ways churches are reacting to financial woes are to reduce spending, cut staff & missions, and reduce facility budgets (http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/18-congregations/334-the-economys-impact-on-churches-part-2-of-3-how-churches-have-adapted)...

Additionally on the money front, comes the charge that preachers/pastors/teachers who lead their church to consider giving/tithing from an aspect of grace as opposed to law (10% tithe) are "against" the law of God and borderline heretical.  For an excellent post on the subject, read here... http://kerussocharis.blogspot.com/2010/02/free-from-law-oh-blessed-condition.html The general idea is if you don't tell people they HAVE to give 10% to the church you're against God and His plans (even though it has been proven time and again the actual tithe of the Old Testament is closer to 25% and the New Testament teaches more about giving generously ABOVE your means as opposed to a percentage).  Interestingly enough, individuals who hammer the 10% issue rarely hammer home other Old Testament commands such as not wearing clothing of 2 types of material, not cutting the hair at the sides of the head, or rising in the presence of the aged/gray-haired (Leviticus 19:19, 27, 32 for example).  

If churches are cutting staff, missions, and facility funds due to the lack of financial support (God's support?) aren't those thing 3 pretty critical issues for the way church is done in America today?  Think God knows that?  Or maybe He knows a better way...maybe He knows by cutting "professional" ministers the church learns to rely on the people that make up the church to get things done a la the book of Acts. Maybe He knows that cutting back on facilities means that more people will realize the church is the group of people, not the building and they will actually get going in their communities.  Maybe not having money available to travel around the world missionally will get people to realize the mission opportunity across their street (NOTE: I AM for funding/participating missions around the world...it just seems sometimes we may not help our neighbor when we would rather spend a week in Barbados doing beach ministry...just saying).  Perhaps instead of looking at the current financial crisis as a huge negative in our churches, we should see what it is God is really saying to us.  

I know in my setting, both personally and as a church planter, one of the first things we are going to offer community-wise as a church is Financial Peace University.  We're going to band together with people in the church and community to assist one another in unloading debt, getting control of our finances, and putting ourselves in a position to give so sacrificially that a 10% mark is laughable.  As a church planter one of the things I will work at the hardest over our beginning months/years is developing a structure that leans toward people's tithes going less towards administrative stuff and more towards what the "storehouse" was intended for...distribution to the community.  Francis Chan of Cornerstone Church in Simi Valley, CA (http://www.cornerstonesimi.com/) currently has CC giving 40-50% of its budget to missions and instead of building a huge facility decided to meet outside in an amphitheater.  Eugene Cho of Quest Church in Seattle manages a non-profit coffee house in conjunction with Quest to minister to the community, provide jobs as well as outlets for local artists of all types and has led to the organization of One Day's Wages, a non-profit grassroots organization to fight global poverty (http://eugenecho.wordpress.com/).  The movement is rising...pastors/preachers/leaders who are tired of the status quo of church life...begging your people to give/volunteer/respond to God's vision.  Perhaps it has been the projection of vision that has been the problem.  Generations today respond to the cause, the personal story, to their role in that story...they won't respond to large buildings, huge budgets, and enormous overhead.  

Has God pulled His resources from the American church?  It's hard to say...one thing we KNOW He hasn't pulled is His Spirit.  His Son promised, "I will never leave you or forsake you."  If we place our focus there, we'll be just fine no matter what the economy looks like.

The importance of being who you're supposed to be...

Yesterday I picked our oldest daughter Katie up from school as usual, and began to head home.  She is 8 years old and in the 2nd grade.  As we drove home, we went through the usual song and dance of "How was your day?", "What did you do today?", etc...about 30 seconds into the conversation, Katie teared up a bit and said, "Well, there is something that is not making me have a very good day."  A learning lesson began...

Katie had been put into the position of class leader for the week, voted on by her peers.  Among other things, the class leader is responsible for monitoring their classmates during specific times of the day to see if they are paying attention.  If a fellow student is not paying attention, their name is written down by the leader and reported to the teacher.  That student then misses a portion of recess.  Katie had inevitably written some names down, and of course, those students had proceeded to call her names, tell her she was mean, and in general, just make the day tough for Katie.  We talked about the reasons she wrote their name down (they were all legit) and discussed Katie speaking w/ her teacher this morning about giving Katie specific infractions to look for and announcing those to the class (which had not been done) so that everyone would be on the same page in terms of behavior.  Katie's fear was that next week, when someone else was leader, she would get treated unfairly.  The bigger lesson of the day was in terms of who Katie is...

At one point, Katie asked her mother and me if she should stop being the leader this week.  We talked about how her classmates must have recognized something about her as they voted her leader (this was the first time this was done all school year).  We also talked about learning how to lead and leading in a just and fair manner.  We stressed to Katie that she has leadership qualities, and that conflict was no reason for her to abandon who she is...just an opportunity to learn how to lead better.

You see, life is really simple...God (whether you believe in Him or not) gifted and designed you for a purpose.  He created your personality, attitude, and other attributes you carry for you to be a specific person.  Most people find themselves in some type of life-crisis because they come to this startling discovery...they don't like who they are.  The reality of those discoveries is their dislike is for who they've become, not who they really are.  If we can teach children to embrace the way they are made, and reinforce that early on, then perhaps we can prevent crisis later in life.  If you're an adult reading this, and you're struggling, know that God created you specifically according to His design for your life, and He wants you to excel, not struggle.  Don't stop being who you're supposed to be...and if you're not being that person, then start today.

I'm living in the desert...

Some of you will read the blog title and respond, "Of course you are!  You're living in Phoenix!"  Allow me to clarify a bit...

I'm living in the desert...like Israel when they wandered...like Moses when he felt all alone...that type of desert living.  I know the popular conception of pastors/preachers is that they never feel apart from God, and never struggle to know what's coming next.  We've raised up entire generations to believe if you're "on stage", you've always got it all together in every phase of life.  You know what?  That's a lie.  I'm living in the desert.

Almost a year ago I received a phone call concerning a church planting possibility in the Phoenix area.  A few months after that, we flew out to meet with prospective partners.  A week after that, we said "yes" to moving.  Less than 2 months after that I set out cross country with Katie, my oldest daughter, and we began a journey to the area.  After arriving, my wife and youngest daughter flew out to be with us.  The journey began.  Now, nearly 5 months later, there is less clarity in my life then there was a year ago. Through some moving and shaking we felt led to look to the Surprise area to plant the church, in the west valley.  All signs pointed to that being the right decision...and personally, I still think all signs point that way.  But I'm in the desert.  We're 35 days away from our lease expiring on our rental and still don't have a legitimate contract on a house...which takes at least 30 days to close.  We continue to get the "its in process" or "the taxes are almost done" on one home that we thought back in December would be not only a quick sale but a good move...yet nothing.  We look at other properties in hopes that one of them will be the right move...yet nothing.  We pray for God to show up, to do His thing, to remind us that this is indeed His plan for us...yet nothing.  We walk the tightrope between sitting back and allowing Him to work, and being proactive enough on our own to make things happen...yet nothing.

How is this possible?  How do you move cross country, to a place you never dreamed of moving to and find yourself in such a neutral state?  Maybe God is planning on showing up in the nick of time to remind us that indeed He is always working things out for us.  Or maybe this is His way of saying we're heading the wrong direction.  Maybe this is His way of saying we shouldn't have ever moved at all.  I don't know.  All I know is living in the desert stinks.  Imagine being in love with the most incredible person you know, and wanting to spend the rest of your life with them.  Now imagine you can't hear them.  That's what it's like for me.  Don't worry...I haven't lost my faith in Him.  I haven't lost my passion for Him.  I haven't stopped believing He is who He says He is.  I just can't hear him.  I don't know what I'm supposed to do.  I don't know how much is expected of me to take care of things, and how much He expects me to sit back and let Him work. 

The people we have met so far in Surprise have been amazing!  The area is ripe for harvest!  The workers are few!  So why can't we get there?  Am I making too big a deal about getting there?  Why can't I find peace?  There is nothing within me that screams we should not have moved...I suppose at this point I just sit and wait...in the desert.  I hate that place.  I sure pray the lessons learned from it are amazing.  Then again...His lessons always are.

When were the disciples/apostles saved?

Sometimes, my mind gets stuck on certain things scripturally that I can't seem to wrap my head around.  I usually have the toughest time reconciling these things with what I've been taught through years of church life and my current theological journey.  This post is about one of those things...

All my life I've been taught, and believed, that a person cannot 'lose' their salvation.  I believe the bible spells that out scripturally in places like John 5:24, 6:37-40, 10:29-30 and many others.  The concept of being able to lose your salvation would lend to the opposite concept of being able to gain or win your salvation by similar human effort.  Though I agree that human choice is involved in believing, we are prompted to that choice by the Spirit of God and our salvation is achieved supernaturally by the work of Christ on the cross, not by anything we do.  So I still stand on the belief that you cannot lose your salvation...but there is something lately I can't push aside.

In Matthew 10:32,33 we have the words of Jesus which state; "Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven.  but whoever disowns (some translations read denies) me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven." (NIV)  When Jesus speaks of disowning/denying in Matthew 10, the Greek word means denying Him as Master of one's life.  This is also the same word Peter uses in his denial of Christ in Matthew 26:69-75.  Similarly in Luke's Gospel, chapter 12, verses 8,9 Luke records a similar statement from Jesus.  In both Matthew and Luke, when Jesus speaks of denying a person in heaven (before God and the angels of God) a strengthened form of the Greek word for deny is used, emphasizing and affirming no connection between the two persons (Jesus and the person).  This strengthened version of the word is used at the end of the Matthew 26 passage in verse 75, to emphasize Peter denying any connection to Christ, which would lead to Christ's denying a connection to Peter in heaven.

Matthew, Mark, and Luke do not record any reinstatement of a connection between Peter and Jesus.  In John's Gospel however, we have an account of a conversation between the risen Christ and Peter.  Chapter 21:15-19 tell us that 3 times Jesus asks Simon Peter if he loves Him and 3 times Peter responds he does.  Each time Peter responds yes, Jesus commands him to tend/feed my sheep, a reference to taking care of Christ's followers.  In addition the 3 questions to Peter correspond to the 3 times Peter denied Him.  This segment is commonly referred to as Christ's reinstatement of Peter.

So let's recap for a moment...Jesus states if a person denies Him before men that person will be denied in heaven.  Most commentators believe that heavenly denial to be a denial on judgment day, similar to the scenario described in Matthew 7:21-23.  Peter not only denies Christ before men, but Jesus predicts it in Matthew 26:31-35 (which incidentally includes a phrase in verse 35, "And all the other disciples said the same" in response to Peter's statement he would never disown Jesus...yet all the disciples did at His death).  Only John records a private reinstatement of Peter by Jesus.  Now let me throw one more thing into the pot...

Scripture spells out when a person receives Christ as Savior, that person is the recipient of a new Spirit, the Holy Spirit of God.  Jesus predicts the Spirit's arrival in places like John 14:15-31, 16:5-16, and as the risen Christ, Acts 1:4-8.  Prior to the Holy Spirit's arrival, the righteousness of God is spoken in scripture as being "credited" to followers of God who lived prior to Christ's life on earth.  Paul records in places like Romans 4, and Galatians 3:6 that those who believed in God prior to Christ (and therefore w/out the infusion of the Holy Spirit) had righteousness credited to them. James records in his letter, chapter 2:23 that Abraham was called God's friend by his belief and that belief was credited as righteousness.  So for people prior to the Holy Spirit's arrival, their belief in God that resulted in their following God is credited as righteousness to them at Judgment.  After the Holy Spirit's arrival, the infusion of the Spirit is evidenced of a changed life by Christ, and at judgment the righteousness of God is seen in a person through the substitutionary death of Christ on the cross and our acceptance of His work to cover our sins.  So....

When was Peter (and the other disciples) saved?  Since the denial and reinstatement occurred pre-Holy Spirit, had righteousness already been credited to the 12 disciples?  Or was Peter's denial and consequential reinstatement mere formality?  Was he truly not saved until the arrival of the Holy Spirit on him and the others as recorded in Acts 2:1-4?  IF God's righteousness was already credited to the disciples pre-Holy Spirit, then what of Judas the betrayer?  IF Peter was considered "saved" by a credit of God's righteousness pre-Holy Spirit (and this seems plausible since Jesus had to "reinstate" him) can we state by this exchange between Jesus and Peter it is possible to love your salvation?  Or was this simply a reinstatement of Peter to an earthly position of leadership and his fellowship with Christ, not an eternal destiny as some think?

Ultimately, I still believe the sum of scripture points to those who are brought into a saving relationship with Christ, by Christ's work on the cross, cannot "lose" their salvation...this may be one of those mysteries we'll not have answers to on earth.  I'm interested in your thoughts...

Focus on the problem, not what you think the solution is...

This is a really random post...

Obviously my mind has been racing the past couple of months with regards to the beginnings of Springwater Community Church in Surprise, AZ.  I'm an avid reader, and that passion has just increased over the past few months.  Consequently, I'm in 'overload' mode in terms of thoughts about the church and who we will be.  I have my vision of the church...I'm dissecting it as I read articles and books about the church...and I'm trying to line it all up under the direction of what Jesus thinks about the church since of course, that's most important. 

One of the things about church is declaring what you're about, or more commonly, what you're against.  I've had people ask (in nice fashion) what our stance on alcohol, homosexuality, abortion, and many other hot-topic issues will be.  I'm old enough and smart enough to know that some people are asking out of a real interest, and others are asking so they can dissect my answer later on after I turn my back on them.  I know these things will come up and I'm working on the best way(s) to address them, but it has me thinking...how often do we focus on what we think the solution is instead of the problem?  For example...we think the solution to the issue of abortion is to make it illegal again.  Certainly, that would have merit in decreasing numbers by some percentage, but it that really the problem?  (Note: I'm still fleshing all this out, so my thoughts in this post are still in transit to their final stage)  At the heart of the abortion problem is women...women who think there is no other choice, no way out, no chance for redemption in their life other than terminating one life to save another (their own), women who think so poorly of themselves as mothers they think they are actually doing the right thing by sparing their unborn baby life with them.  Or alcohol abuse...some think the solution is going back to the days of prohibition.  The evil associated with alcohol is not in the bottle or can.  It's associated with the people who bury their emotions, their struggles, their faults under the wave of alcohol (not that those people are evil, but what tempts them is).  Rid the world of all alcohol, and people who need to get 'numb' will find another way to do it.  

We could play this game with all the issues.  Perhaps what we need to do is not play the game from a distance anymore and instead get into the game up close.  Perhaps instead of seeking to close the bars we go to the bars, in wise fashion, and make friends with people...not make friends with them in a 'spiritual notch on our belt' fashion just waiting to say the sinners' prayer with them.  Make friends with them like Jesus did.  Dinners, fellowship times, life...our world has seen in the past few decades the church 'befriend' them in order to count them in our monthly quotas; may they now see us in the next few decades befriending them on a whole other level. 

This is simply amazing...

Carlos Whitaker was filming a video for his song "God of Second Chances" in a rough part of the city, when Danny, a homeless man, comes up and joins in for impromptu praise...I love, love, love this.

I can't keep my mouth shut anymore...

When news of the Tiger Woods scandal broke weeks ago, I promised myself I wouldn't blog about it.  I told myself to stay away from it.  I advised myself to leave it alone.  Turns out, I don't listen to myself any better than I did to my mom and dad when I was little...sorry mom :)

My first statement is this: there will be no defense of Tiger in this post.  He was wrong.  The news that he is in an Arizona rehab center for his sexual addiction does not lessen his choice in the matter as far as I'm concerned.  He is not outside of forgiveness and restoration, but he is still wrong.

My second statement is this: where is the outrage and frustration with all of these women who KNEW they were messing with a married man?!?!  Before Christmas I was in the KIA dealership waiting on my car to be serviced, and one of the women was on the Today show on the t.v.  She talked about how "Yes", she knew Tiger was married when he came on to her and "Yes" the thought crossed her mind before their first encounter as well as afterwards that he was married but she "just didn't care".  This morning a Phoenix radio station was interviewing one of the women who talked about how hurt she was because she really thought she was the "only one" for Tiger...but how she also dated other guys when Tiger wasn't around because you know, she's "single".  Now news comes out about one of the girls who wants to start a new reality show with another woman who has a support group titled, Mistresses Anonymous (you can't make this stuff up folks).  Her support group, she states, is a group for "...women who are bad relationships with married men."  She'd like to do a reality show with all of Tiger's mistresses, where they can discuss the "downside" of being the other woman and also discuss how he was in bed...excuse me while I throw up in my mouth just a little.

Listen America...these women are not victims.  They were not drugged, placed under hypnosis, or seduced like little teenage girls.  They are predators themselves, seeking the next celebrity, athlete, or musician they can have a roll in the sack or 2 with and then parlay those incidents into fortune, free stuff, and 15 minutes of fame.  We have made it possible for these women to exist because we give them notoriety.  Tiger was wrong...and so were they.  You can't bash one without the other. 

It's all about perspective...

I'm learning more and more that life is all about perspective...a comical example of that is above.

I went to a University of Kentucky website the other day to order my wife a t-shirt.  While browsing, I saw a UK coffee mug that I wanted, pictured above...

When the mug came in, it was not quite what I expected...

Apparently I missed the part in the description that the mug was a miniature decorative item, not something I could consume large amounts of java in...

Perspective...it can change how you feel about many things.  Take for example health care.  For years health care was the furthest thing from my mind.  We had a good plan, my work paid for it, and we just went whenever we needed.  When we moved to Arizona, we had to switch to an individual plan, pay for it ourselves, and couldn't find anyone who would cover our youngest daughter Kenzie's asthma and allergy conditions for they were "pre-existing", even though we had coverage on them prior to moving.  This past week I found myself in an intense discussion with a local pediatrician because we took Kenzie for her 3 year checkup in December, a visit which our insurance considered preventive and therefore would pay for it, and the pediatrician who saw her wrote in her notes that Kenzie had a history of asthma, and their billing dept. billed it as an asthma related visit thereby causing our insurance to kick it out.  I talked to 4 people before I could get someone to understand it WASN'T asthma related, it was a well child visit, and the doctor only did a medical history of Kenzie.  Her response at that point was that she would "talk" to billing, but couldn't guarantee they would change it.  After these incidents, my perspective on health care has changed...it needs reforming and doesn't work for most people.

Perspective...it changes how you feel about many things.  We've been trying to find churches to partner with us in planting Springwater Community.  I met with one church, and thought the meeting went very well.  Then the next week we hear they are not interested...oh, they are interested in planting churches, but only churches that look/act/sound like them...be sure and let me know how that goes.

Perspective...I was asked last night at a meeting I attended to give the highlight and lowlight of the past month.  As I contemplated lowlight's, I thought of our frustration at not having a home in Surprise yet...of needing a second car...of not feeling like I had enough time to do everything.  Then I thought about dear friends in KY who are dealing with illnesses, needs, and frustrations much bigger than I have...I thought about Sam and Tracy, 2 homeless men in North Phoenix we met on Christmas Eve who just need a break to come their way...I thought about good friends in Honduras who chucked life here as they know it and moved their to see what God had in store for them.  Perspective let me see I really haven't had a "lowlight" the past month.

Perspective...what's yours?  It just might be the difference between having a great day, or coming home miserable.