Learning the hallmarks and modes of operation of the emergent movement is vital to maintaining the health and prosperity of the Lord's New Testament churches. While most American Baptist Association preachers are doctrinally sound enough to stay true to God's Word, the emergent influence that is so widely published through popular Christian authors that it can easily influence a pastor to lead his church into a direction that will dilute the doctrinal stability and harm the fellowship of the church.
The emergent's goal is to dismantle the church as we know it today, and replace it with a less formal, less authoritative body. It wants a church that establishes a dialog rather than proclaim a message. The emergent movement also wants a church that abstains from politics (thus offering no resistance to pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, anti-family and anti-religious freedom legislation), elevates women to prominent positions (in direct opposition to I Timothy 2), and basically advocates that a church become everything that scripture told it not to become, all in the name of tearing down walls of empty tradition to reach the lost.
Most Missionary Baptist preachers see that agenda coming a mile away. However, there are two premises that the emergents put forth that tend to be Achilles heels to some ABA preachers and churches. (1) The fear of becoming inept at reaching a community for Christ and (2) Ironically, the pastor and church's commitment to scripture.
Change! Change! Change! Change you can believe in! The times, they are a changin'. Listen to the winds of change. George Barna wrote in Boiling Point that life in this world is changing at such a rapid pace, that change has become the one constant in our daily life. He also wrote that the younger generation has grown up knowing nothing but change, and the absence of change bothers the younger generation because they see it as a sign of stagnation.
Our nation's demographics are changing. Political structure is changing. Technology is changing how we do things. Think about it... how has social media (Facebook and Myspace) changed your daily routine? Recently, I chatted with a missionary who is on the field in The Phillipines. Twenty years ago, that conversation would have only been possible via a high-cost international telephone conversation, or by me going to the Phillipines or he visiting me in the states. A week ago, I got to see a missionary in Indonesia address a missions conference at Sublett Road in Arlington via Skype.
Values are changing. American's attitudes are changing. The priority of faith and the church are changing in the lives of people. People are busier, more self-absorbed, more opinionated, and unfortunately, less considerate and more rude.
The emergent will point to the rapid change in our society and say, "Look, to reach this new society, the church must change with it!" I'm not talking about contemporary worship vs. traditional worship... I'm talking in method of ministry and operation and even appearance. Terminology is also under fire. Now, the emergent disdains the title of "Christian" and opts for the title of "Christ follower." In my younger and more ignorant days (two years ago), I though this was cool. Now, it bugs me. The title of "Christian" was given to the believers at Antioch by the heathen because of their faith and devotion to Christ. Now, I am told we have to abandon that title because the emergents claim that people don't like Christians.
So the premise that the emergent puts forward is that society is changing, so the churches must change, or else the churches will become irrelevant and will die off with the last baby-boomer. This premise has scared some ABA preachers into leading their congregations into territory where their congregations are rightfully uncomfortable. Some have taken to cancelling services and replacing them with home Bible studies. While a church is free to do so if it feels so led, doing so with significant opposition leads to discord in the Body of Christ. I'm not saying the preachers who do this are emergent, I'm just saying they have been influenced by emergent thought. Home Bible studies are profitable... but perhaps it is best do so in addition to the current services being offered, instead of as a replacement to them. Hebrews 10:25 says "not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as ye see the day approaching." In other words, as you see the day of Christ approaching, get together more, not less.
The premise that God's churches will be left in the dark is flawed. (1) Jesus said He'd build His church, and the gates of Hell would not prevail against it, regardless of how many Facebook groups are out there. (2) God's churches have endured for centuries. Building styles may have changed, hymn books may have different songs, but the constitution of the church has not changed, neither has its mission. To insist that it all change now is ludicrous. Since the days of the Roman empire, the dark ages, the Renaissance, the Inquisition, Napoleon, American Revolution, Civil War, French Revolution, World Wars, Industrial Revolution, two Darin's on Bewitched, the Digital Revolution, and the so called "post-modern" society, churches have remained stable. They have worshiped by singing hymns, special music (it's in scripture), and sermons have been preached.
Churches actively engaged in mission work and associated freely to assist one another in the Great Commission. The world today is vastly different than the world 2,000 years ago, but the church, it's operation, mission, values and scripture, remain the same. Why change now?
The emergent will claim that church today is nothing like church 2,000 years ago, but the church 2,000 years ago would not be an emergent church. You don't think the Apostle Paul would have taken an opportunity to speak out against abortion and homosexuality on the floor of the senate? Go back and read your Bibles and see how Paul acted in front of those in authority. If Paul could have seen souls saved by influencing the government, he would have. Did Paul establish a dialog? Or did he preach the Gospel and establish churches? Churches today are much like churches 2,000 years ago. I can defend this, scripturally. Read the book of Acts. Churches were sending out missionaries, collecting money for the poor, spreading the Gospel, and associating one with another. They were organized bodies, had membership rolls, and were committed to a mission, just like the churches today.
The second premise of the emergent movement which is a weakness of Missionary Baptist pastors is ironically that pastor's commitment to scripture. The emergent, like I mentioned in a previous post, will point to the book of Acts and highlight all the things we do that are not specifically mentioned in Acts. The Missionary Baptist Pastor, desiring to stick to God's word and not tradition, is then less enthusiastic about defending traditions and customs not clearly spelled out in Acts. Thus, little by little, the actions and activities of the church are eroded away until the church finds itself in an identity crisis. This has happened before, but out of reverence to those affected, I will not discuss those examples here.
The premises of the emergent movement paint a nightmare scenario for most Missionary Baptist preachers... a lost and dying world to whom the church is ill-equipped to minister. The fear of that nightmare entices some pastors to take steps the emergent movement pushes. This should not be so. The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believes, no matter the time period, culture, or social change. People today might be busier, but their spiritual need is the same. They might be pushier, but their need is the same. They might be angrier, but their need is the same.
In a time of constant change... don't let the emergent's desire for acceptance rob your community of the only solid Rock on which it can stand. Be the church. Worship God the way you can in your heart. Preach the Word, the way the Lord has called you to preach it. Reach out to people the way the Word, the Lord, and your pastors have taught you.
Hold fast the profession of your faith without wavering, for He is faithful that promised. Hold forth the Word of life, defend the faith once delivered to the saints, PREACH THE WORD. It is still God's sword, and His answer for a lost and dying world.
This should be my last post on the emergent movement.
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Saturday, January 16, 2010
UnGodly Holiness Pt. 3 - Rebels without a Cause
Zechariah 3:1-2 And he shewed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him.2 And the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: [is] not this a brand plucked out of the fire?
"Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father." - Jesus Christ in John 5:45.
One of the main problems I have with emergent Christianity is its hostility toward traditional Christianity. Visit any forum, blog, debate or discussion site, and you will find emergents who are unabashedly anti-church, anti-tradition, anti-leadership, anti-elder and anti-establishment. They question everything the church does from organized missions programs, associations, and even the structure of the worship services.
Noticeably absent from emergent literature and postings on blog sites and discussion boards are a clear set of principles and beliefs. So the nature of the emergent church is one of protest and accusation, not one of a constructive nature. So, the emergent church by nature is basically one that is set on protest against the establishment and questioning every practice in which God's New Testament churches have engaged.
The aim of this post is to highlight the hostility of the emergents toward Christianity, highlight the absence of a clear set of beliefs, and note the lack of scripturality and Spirituality in their movement.
The premise of the emergent movement is that modern Christianity has become pharisaical, hypocritical, and nothing more than empty traditions. They prey upon the errors committed by churches and Christian leaders.
The church, obviously, is made up of men, who still suffer from the sin nature and the temptations thereof, and so it is natural that errors will be made. By the vote of the church, or actions of the leadership, mistakes will be made, wrong decisions will be made, bad moves will occur. Doctrinal error will happen, practical error will happen, and leaders will fall to temptation. It's human nature. It happens.
Failing to see the dual nature of man, and the struggle that each Christian has within their own spirits and souls (except when it's their own struggle) the emergent will jump on any error, any sin, any wrong action, word, belief or practice, all for the sake of advancing his own agenda of deconstructing the church. His arguments are not one of "here is the way the Bible teaches us to do things," rather his arguments are, "look how rotten the modern church is. It needs to be changed."
I remember a few years ago. A dear brother in Christ, to whom I looked up at the time, was in the midst of what I believed to be a Spiritual struggle. He struggled at 2 a.m. on Sunday morning to write a sermon. Unable to get his message together, he aired all of his grievances on his blog (which has since been deleted.) A number of preachers jumped in and encouraged this meltdown, until a notable ABA preacher, Brother Bobby Sparks, stepped in and called the meltdown for what it was worth. The initial post challenged the 21 doctrinal statements of the American Baptist Association (which are all basically non-controversial to the learned Bible student), basically saying, "You can keep your Baptist doctrine, I like Bible doctrine." His insinuation was that Baptist doctrine was not Bible doctrine, and that insinuation seemingly infuriated Brother Sparks.
Brother Sparks is still a man to whom I look up. No man preaches the Gospel like he does. Anyone who heard him preach at the 2006 Missionary Baptist Association of Texas meeting in Longview would have to agree. However, less than a year after Bro. Sparks amazing sermon at the state meeting, several preachers, lay members, and self-ascribing emergents were on Bro. Sparks' case for his statements in response to the original meltdown posts.
The posts included such statements as "Who does Bobby Sparks think he is?" and "What has Brother Sparks done for the ABA?" "His degree isn't worth the paper it's written on." and so on. Bro. Sparks comments were not debated, only his credentials and personality. Basically, Bro. Sparks was under attack from that moment on, at least in cyberspace. THESE WERE PEOPLE WITH ABA BACKGROUNDS, who were preachers, lay members, and some former members of ABA churches.
Bro. Sparks has spent much of his ministry debating the Campbellites, so this sort of controversy had little effect on how he carried out his ministry. In fact, it probably barely registered on his radar. Bro. Sparks, you might say, is a big boy. I rehash all of this for the sole purpose of highlighting the hostility and animosity the emergent movement (of whom at least one of the participants of the discussion was a part, and I suspect several more were) has toward the traditional church. As much as I regret having gotten involved in the discussion, it was a learning experience for me. I began to see the enemy at work in our own ranks.
For the record, Bro. Sparks has spent his entire ministry of preaching and defending God's Gospel, salvation by faith through grace apart from works, preaching the Gospel to the captives in the form of debates, writing books that highlight how Old Testament worship pointed to the coming of Christ (which is very important), and I understand he even has become knowledgeable in tax codes for ministers and has made that knowledge available to others. Yet this man, in the course of that discussion, was regarded as the enemy. That basically sums up the emergent movement.
The emergent views the seasoned pastor as a lord over God's heritage. He sees the church's influence on our political processes (such as Focus on the Family's lobbying for pro-family and anti-abortion legislation) as harmful. He sees traditional worship as boring and unexciting, and thus aims to change that. He sees evening services as redundant and seeks to replace those with Bible studies. Back when the ABA Survey blog was still in existence, the notion was floated that a church could conceivable have only one corporate worship service per month and spend the rest of the month in small groups. They see formal leadership as a hindrance because they believe that post-modern individuals don't trust ordained leaders. They see themselves as Jesus Christ, and the New Testament church as Caiaphas.
The emergent would be perfectly content if all the churches in America sold their buildings, scuttled their missions programs, withdrew from the political arena, accepted a secular society, then worked quietly from their homes withing that secular society. Stuart Murray, author of Post Christendom: Church and Mission in a Strangle Land says the emergent church is widely opposed to the attributes of the traditional church, including being at the center of society rather than the margins. Satan also wants Christians and churches to withdraw from society and live on the fringes. It's much easier to discredit and disregard them that way.
Other similarities between the emergents and Satan include the constant accusations made toward the church and its leaders, and the hostility toward God's churches.
Emergents think formal organization is also a hindrance. In fact, having an organized belief system is also useless to the emergent, who seeks to establish a dialog rather than deliver a message. The problem with this viewpoint is that Christ came to deliver a message and complete a mission, not to establish a dialog. When God told His people in Isaiah 1:18 "Come let us reason together," He was not asking them how they felt. He was telling them what He was going to do. He was going to cleanse them from their sin. No dialog. God gave us His message, and He commissioned the churches to spread that message and make disciples.
Perhaps the commitment to dialog and railing against the church can explain the absence of a clear belief system for the emergent movement. Christian scholar D.A. Carson wrote that the emerging church movement is primarily a movement of protest against their more conservative heritage. He concluded that emergent literature is more preoccupied with criticizing the church rather than offering a constructive agenda. In fact, the only thing an emergent will truly be dogmatic about is the need for contemporary worship service.
ABA, as well as most Baptist writers, write about the distinctions of the Baptist faith and use their research and study to affirm Bible doctrines. Emergent writers use their research to figure out why people are non-religious and seek out new ways to engage the unchurched in a dialog, conversation, or seek to interact with them via contextualization. When the focus becomes fitting in with the unchurched and being attractive to them, Bible doctrines and beliefs are abandoned, no message is conveyed, and evangelism and Bible study get reduced to "I kind of think this... but you have the right to your own belief."
Beyond the idea that church stinks, I can not find the central message of emergent Christianity. And I've tried. I've read some of the books, many of the blogs, and engaged a few online. Many emergents (and many Christians in general) don't even have a clear concept of what the Gospel is. The lack of a central message and mission relegates the emergents to being rebels without a cause. They don't like the way things are, they want to change the way things are and withdraw from the church, but they don't really know (as a group) where they are going. All they know is where they are going will be a magical land of authenticity, openness, dialog, equality, and emotional comfort. All of which are alive and well in the Lord's churches, but then again, who wants to wake up on Sunday morning?
The lack of a central message is indicative that the movement is not rooted in scripture. This is vastly different from B.M. Bogard's protesting against increasing infringements on church sovereignty back in the 1920s, or John Leland's railing against the rise of missionary societies back in the 1700s and 1800s. Both men had a core set of beliefs, that God commissioned the churches to carry out his work, not para-church organizations. They had a strict set of doctrinal beliefs, and preached and taught those beliefs. Anyone who has read either man's work will see that those beliefs were deeply rooted in their study of the scriptures.
Contrast that with the emergent's approach of studying the culture then looking for ways to blend in with that culture without violating an explicit Bible command. One example of this is the new rise in third-location churches, many of which meet in coffee shops. Now, scripture permits a church to meet anywhere it deems practical, however, the coffee-shop phenomenon was not born out of a study of the scripture, rather it was born of an idea that it would be easier to get people to show up to a coffee shop where food was being served than a brick building with a steeple. In fact, many of these third-location churches even reject the notion of calling themselves a church.
Notice the difference between studying the scriptures and letting the practice grow out of that, as opposed to studying the culture and building a practice around that. The emergent movement, by practice, lack scripturality because they seem to have no interest in deep studies in the scriptures. Rather, they look for permission to fit into a culture that they have deeply studied. The premise and starting point are flawed.
While it sounds nice to be "outwardly focused," the truth is we are to be focused on God. Any time our primary focus shifts away from God, we are drifting into idolatry. This drifting leads to a lack of spirituality. While the feeling in the room of an emergent gathering might have a spiritual feel to it, the fact that they are operating outside of God's will renders them unspiritual. The greatest action by the Holy Spirit, the empowerment of the church in Acts 2, happened as the church was praying to God and seeking His will, not as they were studying their culture.
The fatal flaw of emergent Christianity is that it seeks to deconstruct the church and remake it after its own image. God never called anyone to remake the church after his own image. We are to join the church and its mission to make disciples in all the world. If the emergents really want to see God move, they'd be well off to get on board.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Mission: Brownwood December 2009 Report
Grace Pointe Adopts Constitution and By-Laws
Pursuant to God’s directions to do all things decently and in order, Grace Pointe adopted their constitution, by-laws and articles of faith on Dec. 6. This step has given Grace Pointe much needed structure as they move toward being self-supporting. The articles of faith match the ABA doctrinal statement, although Grace Pointe did add a provision that encourages the use of the KJV.
Mission: Brownwood Still Needs Support
While Grace Pointe continues to pay her own day-to-day expenses, support is still needed to fund outreach efforts like Vacation Bible School, summer revival, facility purchase, summer youth camp and other public outreach events we feel will help Grace Pointe get a leg up toward becoming self supporting. If you currently support our work, we greatly appreciate it and hope you’ll prayerfully continue that support. If you don’t support our work, we would be grateful for any consideration you may give us.
God has blessed the support that has come in and He has built Grace Pointe well. Our prayer is that the progress we have seen this year will continue.
New PO Box for Grace Pointe
We have a new mailing address for Grace Pointe. Please address all correspondence to me personally, or to Grace Pointe MBC, PO Box 1828, Brownwood, TX 76804.
VBS Dates Set
Grace Pointe’s Vacation Bible School will be held June 7-11, 2010. We are currently enlisting volunteers.
By The Numbers:
Sunday Morning
12/6 - 14
12/13 - 23
12/20 - 13
12/27 - 8
Wednesday Evening
12/2 - 12
12/9 - 7
12/16 - 11
12/23 - 11
12/30 - 6
Finances
Offerings: $1,727.66
Oakland MBC (Rusk, TX) $50
Oakland MBC (Rusk, TX) $50
Northcrest MBC (Andrews, TX) $74.74
Northcrest MBC (Andrews, TX) $68.90
Expenses:
Rent: $600
Rich Cone Air Conditioning (Heater repair) $82.50
Walmart (decorations) $111.43
TMD $82.69
MBA of Texas $82.69
Leland Acker $100
Brownwood Water $84.51
Kelso family (reimbursement for curtains) $60.27
TXU-Electricity $97.64
Banking $3
Mission: Brownwood Account
Deposits:
Missionary Bapt. Assn of TX $2,484
Rocky Springs MBC (Jacksonville, TX) $200
Muse MBC (Grapeland, TX) $200
White Rock MBC (Center, TX) $100
Quaker Ave MBC (Lubbock, TX) $100
Memory Lane MBC (Palestine, TX) $50
Heritage MBC (Missouri City, TX) $200
Muse MBC (Grapeland, TX) $200
58th Ave MBC (Amarillo, TX) $138.47
East Side MBC (Jacksonville, TX) $100
Hickory Grove MBC (Newport, AR) $64.45
Nevill’s Chapel MBC (Mt. Pleasant, TX) $151.64
Muse MBC (Grapeland, TX) $200
Wyndrock MBC (Abilene, TX) $140
Arp First Baptist Church (Arp, TX) $120
Expenses
Salary $1,784
Housing $700
CPA Services $50
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
UnGodly Holiness Part Two - Declergification
But when he saw the multitudes, he was moved with compassion on them, because they fainted, and were scattered abroad, as sheep having no shepherd. - Matthew 9:36
See, it doesn't make sense in that context either.
Declergification is the process by which a church removes all ordained pastors and deacons and becomes totally run, and led, by lay members. The intent is to eliminate the office of pastor and deacon.
There is a movement within Emergent and Postmodern Christianity to remove all titles from the church. Many even want to declergify the church, meaning they want to see the church reach the point where there is no formal leadership, no formal titles, no formal pastor, and no ordained deacons or ministers. They would like to see the church just be a collection of people who gather, study the Bible, share testimonies and fellowship. While on the surface this might sound like a utopian church, in actuality it is neither practical nor scriptural.
While we can argue whether it is more fitting to call the pastor of a church pastor or elder, we should be able to agree that God's model for the New Testament church called for organized leadership. I mean, if God's will were for the church to go without pastors, then what did Christ spend 3 1/2 years training the apostles to do? Just "be" the church? I think not. Christ was very specific in John 21 of what He wanted the apostles to do. He explicitly told Peter to "Feed my lambs." Peter was specifically told to feed the flock of God. It's no surprise that Peter emerged as the leader of the 12 in the Book of Acts.
The commandment to "feed the flock" was extended to all elders (read, pastors) in I Peter 5. The job of an elder is to feed the flock (the church). To feed the flock means to teach the church the Word of God. This is demonstrated in Acts 6:2-4:
One has to wonder if one reason our churches are in the shape that they are in is because our pastors or elders have been pulled from the Word of God and made to serve tables... in some cases by taking on too much side work at the church (mowing, cleaning, and other non-spiritual type work) and in some cases, literally waiting tables at the local cafe to make ends meet. I digress.
So, elders (pastors) have the exhortation in I Peter 5 to feed the flock of God... to teach the word to the church. However, it doesn't stop there. Elders are also to take the oversight thereof (I Peter 5:2). This means to step into a leadership role in the church. It means that a pastor is not only to teach the church, he is also to give it leadership... both Spiritual leadership and leadership in its ministries. He is also called upon to be an example (I Peter 5:3).
This scripture is in direct opposition to the idea of not having a pastor, and it is also in direct opposition to the practice in some denominations of stripping the pastor/elder/minister of all leadership roles and placing him ONLY in a position of teaching. There are some denominations where the church is led and governed by a board or committee of lay people, and the pastor only gets to teach and preach. They might let the pastor in on the board meetings, but he has little, if any, leadership or oversight.
Not only does I Peter 5:1-3 give instructions for pastoral leadership, you see this process in action in the book of Acts. In addition to that, I Timothy 3 clearly gives qualifications for the men who desire to fill the office of pastor and deacon. Not only does the first chapter of Titus reiterate these qualifications, Titus is reminded in Titus 1:5 that he was appointed to ordain elders (pastors) in every city. Establishing church leadership was just as vital to the mission of the early churches as getting people saved.
As for pastoral salary, scripture gives indication that pastors are to be supported financially. They are not to get rich from the ministry (I Peter 5:2), but they should have their needs met. How else could the apostles, the first pastors of God's church, stay in the word unless someone were feeding them. Paul praised the Philippian church for meeting his needs in their time of poverty, told the Corinthians not to muzzle the ox that treads out the corn (I Corinthians 9:9), and even apologized to the Corinthian church for making them an inferior church by failing to teach them to support their clergy (II Corinthians 12:13).
I've barely scratched the surface. Scripture discusses the need for pastors, ordained ministers, deacons, all of which could fall under the heading of "clergy." Scripture not only discusses the need, it gives instructions for ordaining clergy and what the clergy should do. While individual members of the clergy may have strayed from their God-called purpose and God-given duty, that hardly warrants direct disobedience by eliminating the clergy from the church altogether.
If the emergent and post-modern Christianity movements really want to set up utopian churches, they would be well of to go to the examples and instructions clearly given in the scriptures. Anything other than that is an apostate religion.
A church without clergy, where every member contributes to the dialogue in a "Bible study" that has no leadership is like kids on a playground playing the parachute game. The parachute game is a game where a parachute is laid out on the ground, and a ball is placed in the middle. The kids surround the parachute, grab the ends, and pull, resulting in the ball being bounced into the air. But as the kids pull on the parachute, the group moves, without solid direction, and wanders aimlessly on the playground until one of the kids collides with an object.
Churches without clergy will wander aimlessly as well, being tossed to and fro with every wind of doctrine.
Jesus looked out upon the multitudes and saw them scattered as sheep without a shepherd. May God help us if that scene ever describes the institution of the church.
Imagine for a moment...
It was a routine play... the quarterback takes the snap and tosses to the running back, who just happens to be your son. He cuts to the inside and disappears beneath a pile of linemen. Everyone gets up, except for your son.
You rush out onto the field. The trainer tells you his arm is broken. Relieved that it's not more serious, but still concerned for your son's well being, you load him up into the truck and head to the emergency room.
You arrive at the hospital, rushing in with your son.
"I NEED A DOCTOR!" You exclaim.
A Nurse at the door responds, "Here at the PostModern Method Hospital, we aren't realy big on titles... but here, let's plug you in to this lifegroup here and your peers will help you overcome the problem."
See, it doesn't make sense in that context either.
Declergification is the process by which a church removes all ordained pastors and deacons and becomes totally run, and led, by lay members. The intent is to eliminate the office of pastor and deacon.
There is a movement within Emergent and Postmodern Christianity to remove all titles from the church. Many even want to declergify the church, meaning they want to see the church reach the point where there is no formal leadership, no formal titles, no formal pastor, and no ordained deacons or ministers. They would like to see the church just be a collection of people who gather, study the Bible, share testimonies and fellowship. While on the surface this might sound like a utopian church, in actuality it is neither practical nor scriptural.
While we can argue whether it is more fitting to call the pastor of a church pastor or elder, we should be able to agree that God's model for the New Testament church called for organized leadership. I mean, if God's will were for the church to go without pastors, then what did Christ spend 3 1/2 years training the apostles to do? Just "be" the church? I think not. Christ was very specific in John 21 of what He wanted the apostles to do. He explicitly told Peter to "Feed my lambs." Peter was specifically told to feed the flock of God. It's no surprise that Peter emerged as the leader of the 12 in the Book of Acts.
The commandment to "feed the flock" was extended to all elders (read, pastors) in I Peter 5. The job of an elder is to feed the flock (the church). To feed the flock means to teach the church the Word of God. This is demonstrated in Acts 6:2-4:
Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples [unto them], and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables. Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. But we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word.
One has to wonder if one reason our churches are in the shape that they are in is because our pastors or elders have been pulled from the Word of God and made to serve tables... in some cases by taking on too much side work at the church (mowing, cleaning, and other non-spiritual type work) and in some cases, literally waiting tables at the local cafe to make ends meet. I digress.
So, elders (pastors) have the exhortation in I Peter 5 to feed the flock of God... to teach the word to the church. However, it doesn't stop there. Elders are also to take the oversight thereof (I Peter 5:2). This means to step into a leadership role in the church. It means that a pastor is not only to teach the church, he is also to give it leadership... both Spiritual leadership and leadership in its ministries. He is also called upon to be an example (I Peter 5:3).
This scripture is in direct opposition to the idea of not having a pastor, and it is also in direct opposition to the practice in some denominations of stripping the pastor/elder/minister of all leadership roles and placing him ONLY in a position of teaching. There are some denominations where the church is led and governed by a board or committee of lay people, and the pastor only gets to teach and preach. They might let the pastor in on the board meetings, but he has little, if any, leadership or oversight.
Not only does I Peter 5:1-3 give instructions for pastoral leadership, you see this process in action in the book of Acts. In addition to that, I Timothy 3 clearly gives qualifications for the men who desire to fill the office of pastor and deacon. Not only does the first chapter of Titus reiterate these qualifications, Titus is reminded in Titus 1:5 that he was appointed to ordain elders (pastors) in every city. Establishing church leadership was just as vital to the mission of the early churches as getting people saved.
As for pastoral salary, scripture gives indication that pastors are to be supported financially. They are not to get rich from the ministry (I Peter 5:2), but they should have their needs met. How else could the apostles, the first pastors of God's church, stay in the word unless someone were feeding them. Paul praised the Philippian church for meeting his needs in their time of poverty, told the Corinthians not to muzzle the ox that treads out the corn (I Corinthians 9:9), and even apologized to the Corinthian church for making them an inferior church by failing to teach them to support their clergy (II Corinthians 12:13).
I've barely scratched the surface. Scripture discusses the need for pastors, ordained ministers, deacons, all of which could fall under the heading of "clergy." Scripture not only discusses the need, it gives instructions for ordaining clergy and what the clergy should do. While individual members of the clergy may have strayed from their God-called purpose and God-given duty, that hardly warrants direct disobedience by eliminating the clergy from the church altogether.
If the emergent and post-modern Christianity movements really want to set up utopian churches, they would be well of to go to the examples and instructions clearly given in the scriptures. Anything other than that is an apostate religion.
A church without clergy, where every member contributes to the dialogue in a "Bible study" that has no leadership is like kids on a playground playing the parachute game. The parachute game is a game where a parachute is laid out on the ground, and a ball is placed in the middle. The kids surround the parachute, grab the ends, and pull, resulting in the ball being bounced into the air. But as the kids pull on the parachute, the group moves, without solid direction, and wanders aimlessly on the playground until one of the kids collides with an object.
Churches without clergy will wander aimlessly as well, being tossed to and fro with every wind of doctrine.
Jesus looked out upon the multitudes and saw them scattered as sheep without a shepherd. May God help us if that scene ever describes the institution of the church.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
UnGodly Holiness: Part One - Deconstructing the Church
Have you ever stopped to think about how much of what we do in the way of corporate worship and ministry as a church is actually spelled out in scripture? Does scripture mandate three-four songs, an offering, a special music, a 30-45 minute sermon, an invitation and dinner on the grounds? Are youth programs found in scripture? What about associations?
You may have thought about these things, and you may have concluded that even though there is no scripture to mandate reducing most hymns to three verses, God has given us the freedom to worship Him in Spirit and Truth. God has mandated our worship, our assembling, and our mission, and given us the freedom to do so as He calls us and as He has given us the ability.
Your conclusion on Biblical mandates for youth programs may very well come from verses such as "train up a child in the way he should go." Your conclusion that church associations are scriptural may come from the Jerusalem Council. Many have asked themselves these questions, and many have come to the conclusion that what we as Baptists do is well and good in the eyes of God. One of our members at Grace Pointe once told me (we were discussing whether or not scripture mandates that we vote to receive members) that if a practice has been around long enough in the Lord's churches, it may very well be the way God wants it.
Others have asked these questions, however, and come to a different conclusion. They have concluded that since there is no Biblical mandate for church buildings, it is sin to spend so many resources on acquiring and maintaining worship facilities. Since there is no Biblical mandate for the traditional format for worship, perhaps we should dump our worship traditions and start over. Since there is no Biblical mandate for church associations the way we use them (three messengers per church and a missions program, plus a publishing house) then we should just dump that and get back to basics. These have rejected the church the way most Baptists have come to understand the church. They claim that the younger generation is turned off by the church, views the church as irrelevant, and to reach the younger generation, we must shirk the "unnecessary burdens of the Pharisaical mindset of the church and get back to what Christianity was meant to be." There is no formal church organization. If you gather, you are part of the church. Baptism is de-emphasized, and even structure is a thing of the past. Two Christians sit next together at an airport terminal waiting for their flight, there's a church.
Popular Christian writers have also latched onto this trend, claiming that the post-Modern culture (watch that term, it is very popular among the Emergent Church movement) has rejected all of our traditional values, and to reach them, we have to leave behind our traditions and start anew. Otherwise, we'll miss the younger generation and God's church will die off as it's members age and pass away.
I have weighed these arguments, I have measured them, and I find them wanting. There are those who constantly scream out "change!" Should we find ourselves blindly following these calls, we will find ourselves just as disillusioned as the American electorate in 2008-2009.
My arguments against the Emergent belief system and the "post-modern" Christianity belief system is based on the fact that we have seen these arguments all before. (Well, maybe you did, I wasn't born yet). Didn't we hear all this back in the 60s when the Baby Boomers were coming of age? Didn't we hear about how the younger generation was dumping the traditional values of their parents and we would have to change and get back to basics to reach them? Didn't we hear that if we didn't change, the Baby Boomer generation would be a lost generation and the churches would die without them? Who makes up the majority of the membership today? Baby Boomers. Mega churches have flourished, false religion has abounded, but the Lord's churches continue on today. Today, we hear that the church will die with the last Baby Boomer if we don't dump all of our traditions to reach the younger generation. See the irony?
Furthermore, the idea that all church activities that are not clearly spelled out in the Bible is sin is flawed thinking. Read the book of Acts the way it was meant to be read. The Emergent Christian will read the book of Acts looking for the absence of the things we do to point out the sinfulness of doing what we do... like singing hymns, supporting our clergy, sending out missionaries, and gathering at the associational meeting to raise funds for missionaries.
The Book of Acts, popularly referred to as a how-to book for churches, is in fact historical record written by Luke under inspiration of the Holy Spirit to show how God can spread His Gospel if the churches are obedient to Him. A closer reading of Acts shows a church that gathers... often. This church sat under preaching, sometimes for hours (to the point that men were falling asleep and falling out of windows.) Imagine how your average Emergent would react to that?
Furthermore, the Bible clearly mandates singing hymns, spiritual songs, and Psalms. I & II Corinthians clearly gives instruction for orderly worship and formal membership. If a church deems it orderly to purchase or build a worship facility, sing four hymns every Sunday, have a special or two, and learn from a 30-90 minute sermon, then that is no more sinful than if an emergent church decided to go all vegetarian for their post-Bible study meal.
While some who follow the Emergent theology ignorantly, earnestly seeking God's will, the fact is those who propagate this theology are truly seeking to deconstruct the institution of the church, God's institution, the one He bought and established, the one through whom the Gospel would be preached to all nations. This attempt to deconstruct the church is veiled in a pseudo-holiness, a holiness that says "we are so holy that we no longer need the church." This holiness, which has a form of Godliness but denies the power thereof, is in fact, unGodly.
The intent of the Emergent church to deconstruct God's church is clearly spelled out here. Wikipedia describes the Emergent church as "...disillusionment with the organized and institutional church and their support for the deconstruction of modern Christian worship, modern evangelism, and the nature of modern Christian community."
They seek to deconstruct modern Christian worship, because for some reason these "holy" Emergents can not worship God to the words of Amazing Grace (unless it is cleverly rearranged to sound like "The House of the Rising Sun.") They can not worship in an environment that is decent and in order. They seek to deconstruct modern evangelism (door-knocking and witnessing to strangers in public) because they don't want to be offensive. After all, Jesus wouldn't be offensive, would He? (The Gospel is by nature offensive, because it is through scriptural preaching and teaching of the cross that man becomes convicted of his sin. When a man is brought face-to-face with his sin, he in his natural state becomes offended because his sin-nature sends him into self-justification mode).
They seek to deconstruct the modern Christian community... which contrary to popular belief does in fact center around the church. There are worship services, Bible studies, Bible schools, Sunday schools, Awanas and Discovery, youth programs, choir programs, and we haven't even gotten into the heart of the church, missions and ministry. Do those who seek to deconstruct the Christian community really seek to deconstruct the mission efforts of that community? Do they seek to deconstruct the benevolent efforts of that community? Can a loose-nit band of friends calling themselves an Emergent church really spread the Gospel with the same resources and God's power as an organized church?
Jesus told His disciples, "Upon This Rock will I build my church, and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it." He also promised His church that "Lo, I am with you alway, even until the end of the world." Could these promises have been kept true had the church been nothing more than an aposthetic brand of phariseeism, even if just for a few decades? No. If the true church ever ceased to exist, then these promises could not have been kept, which means that the premise of the Emergent movement is flawed from the beginning. Church is Biblically mandated. True churches have existed continually since Christ was on earth. Those churches follow God's direction, meaning the things they do are not empty traditionalism, and carry far more weight with God than the Emergent's unGodly holiness, a holiness that is by definition man-centered.
The Emergent latches on to that which he likes, that which he finds pleasurable and comfortable, and rejects that which he does not. That is a self-centered, a man-centered way of thinking, not a God centered way of thinking. So their practice, mindset and perceived holiness is done apart from God, and thus, is an unGodly holiness.
You may have thought about these things, and you may have concluded that even though there is no scripture to mandate reducing most hymns to three verses, God has given us the freedom to worship Him in Spirit and Truth. God has mandated our worship, our assembling, and our mission, and given us the freedom to do so as He calls us and as He has given us the ability.
Your conclusion on Biblical mandates for youth programs may very well come from verses such as "train up a child in the way he should go." Your conclusion that church associations are scriptural may come from the Jerusalem Council. Many have asked themselves these questions, and many have come to the conclusion that what we as Baptists do is well and good in the eyes of God. One of our members at Grace Pointe once told me (we were discussing whether or not scripture mandates that we vote to receive members) that if a practice has been around long enough in the Lord's churches, it may very well be the way God wants it.
Others have asked these questions, however, and come to a different conclusion. They have concluded that since there is no Biblical mandate for church buildings, it is sin to spend so many resources on acquiring and maintaining worship facilities. Since there is no Biblical mandate for the traditional format for worship, perhaps we should dump our worship traditions and start over. Since there is no Biblical mandate for church associations the way we use them (three messengers per church and a missions program, plus a publishing house) then we should just dump that and get back to basics. These have rejected the church the way most Baptists have come to understand the church. They claim that the younger generation is turned off by the church, views the church as irrelevant, and to reach the younger generation, we must shirk the "unnecessary burdens of the Pharisaical mindset of the church and get back to what Christianity was meant to be." There is no formal church organization. If you gather, you are part of the church. Baptism is de-emphasized, and even structure is a thing of the past. Two Christians sit next together at an airport terminal waiting for their flight, there's a church.
Popular Christian writers have also latched onto this trend, claiming that the post-Modern culture (watch that term, it is very popular among the Emergent Church movement) has rejected all of our traditional values, and to reach them, we have to leave behind our traditions and start anew. Otherwise, we'll miss the younger generation and God's church will die off as it's members age and pass away.
I have weighed these arguments, I have measured them, and I find them wanting. There are those who constantly scream out "change!" Should we find ourselves blindly following these calls, we will find ourselves just as disillusioned as the American electorate in 2008-2009.
My arguments against the Emergent belief system and the "post-modern" Christianity belief system is based on the fact that we have seen these arguments all before. (Well, maybe you did, I wasn't born yet). Didn't we hear all this back in the 60s when the Baby Boomers were coming of age? Didn't we hear about how the younger generation was dumping the traditional values of their parents and we would have to change and get back to basics to reach them? Didn't we hear that if we didn't change, the Baby Boomer generation would be a lost generation and the churches would die without them? Who makes up the majority of the membership today? Baby Boomers. Mega churches have flourished, false religion has abounded, but the Lord's churches continue on today. Today, we hear that the church will die with the last Baby Boomer if we don't dump all of our traditions to reach the younger generation. See the irony?
Furthermore, the idea that all church activities that are not clearly spelled out in the Bible is sin is flawed thinking. Read the book of Acts the way it was meant to be read. The Emergent Christian will read the book of Acts looking for the absence of the things we do to point out the sinfulness of doing what we do... like singing hymns, supporting our clergy, sending out missionaries, and gathering at the associational meeting to raise funds for missionaries.
The Book of Acts, popularly referred to as a how-to book for churches, is in fact historical record written by Luke under inspiration of the Holy Spirit to show how God can spread His Gospel if the churches are obedient to Him. A closer reading of Acts shows a church that gathers... often. This church sat under preaching, sometimes for hours (to the point that men were falling asleep and falling out of windows.) Imagine how your average Emergent would react to that?
Furthermore, the Bible clearly mandates singing hymns, spiritual songs, and Psalms. I & II Corinthians clearly gives instruction for orderly worship and formal membership. If a church deems it orderly to purchase or build a worship facility, sing four hymns every Sunday, have a special or two, and learn from a 30-90 minute sermon, then that is no more sinful than if an emergent church decided to go all vegetarian for their post-Bible study meal.
While some who follow the Emergent theology ignorantly, earnestly seeking God's will, the fact is those who propagate this theology are truly seeking to deconstruct the institution of the church, God's institution, the one He bought and established, the one through whom the Gospel would be preached to all nations. This attempt to deconstruct the church is veiled in a pseudo-holiness, a holiness that says "we are so holy that we no longer need the church." This holiness, which has a form of Godliness but denies the power thereof, is in fact, unGodly.
The intent of the Emergent church to deconstruct God's church is clearly spelled out here. Wikipedia describes the Emergent church as "...disillusionment with the organized and institutional church and their support for the deconstruction of modern Christian worship, modern evangelism, and the nature of modern Christian community."
They seek to deconstruct modern Christian worship, because for some reason these "holy" Emergents can not worship God to the words of Amazing Grace (unless it is cleverly rearranged to sound like "The House of the Rising Sun.") They can not worship in an environment that is decent and in order. They seek to deconstruct modern evangelism (door-knocking and witnessing to strangers in public) because they don't want to be offensive. After all, Jesus wouldn't be offensive, would He? (The Gospel is by nature offensive, because it is through scriptural preaching and teaching of the cross that man becomes convicted of his sin. When a man is brought face-to-face with his sin, he in his natural state becomes offended because his sin-nature sends him into self-justification mode).
They seek to deconstruct the modern Christian community... which contrary to popular belief does in fact center around the church. There are worship services, Bible studies, Bible schools, Sunday schools, Awanas and Discovery, youth programs, choir programs, and we haven't even gotten into the heart of the church, missions and ministry. Do those who seek to deconstruct the Christian community really seek to deconstruct the mission efforts of that community? Do they seek to deconstruct the benevolent efforts of that community? Can a loose-nit band of friends calling themselves an Emergent church really spread the Gospel with the same resources and God's power as an organized church?
Jesus told His disciples, "Upon This Rock will I build my church, and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it." He also promised His church that "Lo, I am with you alway, even until the end of the world." Could these promises have been kept true had the church been nothing more than an aposthetic brand of phariseeism, even if just for a few decades? No. If the true church ever ceased to exist, then these promises could not have been kept, which means that the premise of the Emergent movement is flawed from the beginning. Church is Biblically mandated. True churches have existed continually since Christ was on earth. Those churches follow God's direction, meaning the things they do are not empty traditionalism, and carry far more weight with God than the Emergent's unGodly holiness, a holiness that is by definition man-centered.
The Emergent latches on to that which he likes, that which he finds pleasurable and comfortable, and rejects that which he does not. That is a self-centered, a man-centered way of thinking, not a God centered way of thinking. So their practice, mindset and perceived holiness is done apart from God, and thus, is an unGodly holiness.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Mission: Brownwood blog is back
Over the past several months, my blogging has slacked off due to a couple of reasons. (1) My first and foremost priority is to lead Grace Pointe to become a self supporting doctrinally sound Missionary Baptist Church. (2) The continued economic downturn wreaked havoc on ad sales at KSTA, thus forcing me to put in extra effort. My efforts were in vain, however. I have resigned KSTA and will be full time in the ministry for 2010. (3) A wise man speaks when he has something to say. A fool speaks because he has to say something. I really haven't had much to say outside of pointing out new state/interstate mission fields to go to. That is, I haven't had much to say until now.
There are three things on my heart right now.
(1) I want to encourage the brethren who read this blog. I know that I am not "somebody come" as Brother Brooks would say, but I know there are days that I find encouragement in what other brethren are writing and I hope to be a blessing to others as well.
(2) I am noticing the economic collapse of our nation. The focal point of my observation is Detroit. If any city shows the pain that accompanies a shift from a manufacturing to a service economy, it would be Detroit. My heart goes out to those people. Michigan, and many of the Great Lakes states have traditionally voted liberal. Why? Because many don't know the truth. How can we expect them to know the truth if we don't take it to them. Imagine a life where God was a distant being, and where no one shared the Gospel of Jesus Christ with you. Hard to imagine, isn't it?
(3) I am noticing more fervent attacks on our churches, not just individually, but institutionally. Many, if not most, of these attacks are coming from within the church itself. It seems the only way to sell a book in a Christian bookstore these days is to rip the institution of the church and advocate throwing out all of our practices and starting all over with a whole new "revolution." I plan to compose a series of blog posts that will show that those who are in opposition to God's church are also in opposition to God's Word and even God Himself.
May God bless you and may we be blessings to each other as we share our faith and encouragement online.
There are three things on my heart right now.
(1) I want to encourage the brethren who read this blog. I know that I am not "somebody come" as Brother Brooks would say, but I know there are days that I find encouragement in what other brethren are writing and I hope to be a blessing to others as well.
(2) I am noticing the economic collapse of our nation. The focal point of my observation is Detroit. If any city shows the pain that accompanies a shift from a manufacturing to a service economy, it would be Detroit. My heart goes out to those people. Michigan, and many of the Great Lakes states have traditionally voted liberal. Why? Because many don't know the truth. How can we expect them to know the truth if we don't take it to them. Imagine a life where God was a distant being, and where no one shared the Gospel of Jesus Christ with you. Hard to imagine, isn't it?
(3) I am noticing more fervent attacks on our churches, not just individually, but institutionally. Many, if not most, of these attacks are coming from within the church itself. It seems the only way to sell a book in a Christian bookstore these days is to rip the institution of the church and advocate throwing out all of our practices and starting all over with a whole new "revolution." I plan to compose a series of blog posts that will show that those who are in opposition to God's church are also in opposition to God's Word and even God Himself.
May God bless you and may we be blessings to each other as we share our faith and encouragement online.
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
On the Road Again
Since Grace Pointe does not currently have evening services, I thought it would be wise to check back in with some of our supporting churches, as well as some churches who are interested in the work. If you would be interested in having me share what the Lord is doing in Brownwood, TX with your church, please call me at (325) 200-8531.
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Soul-winning made "easy"
Call me crazy, but I think I have found a less-intimidating method of soul winning. I must admit a couple of things first. (1) I got the idea from watching "The Way of the Master." (No, I'm not just going to parrot their approach.) (2) The phrase "All things old will become new again" has never been truer than what I am about to say.
In soul-winning (which is STILL something I don't do enough of), you must first get used to talking with complete strangers. Just saying those first few words is a daunting task for some, unless you live in Texas where you can make an instant friend out of almost anyone by declaring the idiodessy that is Jerry Jones.
A good exercise to use to get comfortable talking to strangers would be to get in the habit of greeting everyone you meet. You're walking down the produce aisle at Walmart, and another customer is walking toward you. As you pass by, just greet them. New Yorkers might say, "How you doin'?" Texans might say, "Howdy." In the Deep South, the greeting might sound like "Hey y'all." Whatever the official greeting in your language is, just get used to saying it.
Before long, you may find yourself totally engrossed in a conversation with a complete stranger. In doing this, it is entirely important to remember names. Remembering names is the chief way people will know that you care about them. Plus, people like to hear their names. My favorite name memory trick is to use their name as soon as possible after they tell me. It goes like this.
"Howdy."
"Hey, y'all."
"Cool weather these days, huh."
"Man, you ain't kiddin'. It's cold enough out there to freeze your Winnebego."
"Hi, I'm Leland Acker. Pleased to meet you."
"Good to meet you Leland. I'm Bob Barker."
"Bob, it's good to know you. So how are you liking Texas?"
"Pretty good. Hey! How'd you know I was a foreigner."
"Your Winnebego is frozen."
As soon as they give you their name, turn around and use it again. Get used to doing that, and you'll get used to knowing people by name.
People love to talk. In Texas, talk ranges from the weather, to the Dallas Cowboys, to the weather, to whether or not the Longhorns are going to win another title, to the weather, to the Dallas Cowboys, to the weather, to whether or not Texas A&M will ever play Division I football again. (Hey, 6-6 ain't too shabby. Sherman really has worked hard to clean that mess up.)
If you wait on a natural opening in the conversation to work in the Gospel, you'll likely be dissappointed. For one thing, Satan's forces are all around to make sure the natural progression of the conversation stays as far away from spiritual matters as possible. For another, the Gospel sounds so ridiculous when you try to say that Jesus paid the yardage for your penalty flags. No, you must intentionally steer the conversation over to spiritual matters. Doing so is easier than you think.
To intentionally steer a conversation toward the Gospel, all you need is a little courage (faith of a mustard seed) and a pocket full of tracts. Simply pull the tract from your pocket, hand it to your new friend, and say, "Did you get one of these? It's a Gospel tract."
Chances are they'll take the tract, if only to be polite. You may then ask, "Do you go to church anywhere?" or "Do you have a Christian background?" or so on. Regardless of how they answer the question, you have now successfully steered the conversation into matters of eternal significance and have a real opportunity to share the Gospel. Once the conversation has been steered into this place, I have found it effective to utilize the methods of the Way of the Master... but you should do what God leads you to do and what works for you.
People are amazingly tolerant of discussing these things. You'll find that more often than not, people wil be polite and talk with you. Some may turn away in disgust. Don't let that discourage you. Now, let's get out there and win some souls for Christ!
In soul-winning (which is STILL something I don't do enough of), you must first get used to talking with complete strangers. Just saying those first few words is a daunting task for some, unless you live in Texas where you can make an instant friend out of almost anyone by declaring the idiodessy that is Jerry Jones.
A good exercise to use to get comfortable talking to strangers would be to get in the habit of greeting everyone you meet. You're walking down the produce aisle at Walmart, and another customer is walking toward you. As you pass by, just greet them. New Yorkers might say, "How you doin'?" Texans might say, "Howdy." In the Deep South, the greeting might sound like "Hey y'all." Whatever the official greeting in your language is, just get used to saying it.
Before long, you may find yourself totally engrossed in a conversation with a complete stranger. In doing this, it is entirely important to remember names. Remembering names is the chief way people will know that you care about them. Plus, people like to hear their names. My favorite name memory trick is to use their name as soon as possible after they tell me. It goes like this.
"Howdy."
"Hey, y'all."
"Cool weather these days, huh."
"Man, you ain't kiddin'. It's cold enough out there to freeze your Winnebego."
"Hi, I'm Leland Acker. Pleased to meet you."
"Good to meet you Leland. I'm Bob Barker."
"Bob, it's good to know you. So how are you liking Texas?"
"Pretty good. Hey! How'd you know I was a foreigner."
"Your Winnebego is frozen."
As soon as they give you their name, turn around and use it again. Get used to doing that, and you'll get used to knowing people by name.
People love to talk. In Texas, talk ranges from the weather, to the Dallas Cowboys, to the weather, to whether or not the Longhorns are going to win another title, to the weather, to the Dallas Cowboys, to the weather, to whether or not Texas A&M will ever play Division I football again. (Hey, 6-6 ain't too shabby. Sherman really has worked hard to clean that mess up.)
If you wait on a natural opening in the conversation to work in the Gospel, you'll likely be dissappointed. For one thing, Satan's forces are all around to make sure the natural progression of the conversation stays as far away from spiritual matters as possible. For another, the Gospel sounds so ridiculous when you try to say that Jesus paid the yardage for your penalty flags. No, you must intentionally steer the conversation over to spiritual matters. Doing so is easier than you think.
To intentionally steer a conversation toward the Gospel, all you need is a little courage (faith of a mustard seed) and a pocket full of tracts. Simply pull the tract from your pocket, hand it to your new friend, and say, "Did you get one of these? It's a Gospel tract."
Chances are they'll take the tract, if only to be polite. You may then ask, "Do you go to church anywhere?" or "Do you have a Christian background?" or so on. Regardless of how they answer the question, you have now successfully steered the conversation into matters of eternal significance and have a real opportunity to share the Gospel. Once the conversation has been steered into this place, I have found it effective to utilize the methods of the Way of the Master... but you should do what God leads you to do and what works for you.
People are amazingly tolerant of discussing these things. You'll find that more often than not, people wil be polite and talk with you. Some may turn away in disgust. Don't let that discourage you. Now, let's get out there and win some souls for Christ!
Friday, November 27, 2009
Encouraging Signs
Over the past couple of years, I have noticed some encouraging trends, especially at the Missionary Baptist Association of Texas meetings.
One trend I am noticing is a renewed emphasis on state missions. More churches are participating in state missions by either (a) sending out missionaries or (b) supporting missionaries. While this has not translated into increased support through the secretary-treasurer's office, it is translating to new mission works getting started and supported. I cite the works in the Rio Grande Valley, San Antonio, Kerrville, East Texas, and Midland as examples. Some missionaries like myself enjoy the support of the state salary, while others (like Bro. Phil Babcock in Midland) work solely on free-will offerings and support from sister churches.
Another encouraging trend is the acceptance of different mission methods. While some still believe that missions should not organize into churches until they are self-supporting (and ready to pay a full-time pastor) there is growing support for missions organizing into churches as soon as a body is formed. This is a good trend as I believe it will lead to missions organizing and getting off associational support sooner, creates more potential sending churches and lessens the confusion of the Landmark ecclesiology.
One thing that I have noticed is how associational meetings in Texas have become calmer, with whatever debate that does happen being done so out of a spirit of love and respect. No one is raking the MBA churches over the coals for not being progressive enough, and no one is standing up launching false allegations at a sister church. Issues of order are addressed respectfully, and while the decisions don't always go our way, we accept those decisions and move on for the honor and glory of God.
A couple of things do trouble me, however. One is the growing immorality that is plaguing our churches, and even our pulpits. Pastors getting divorced used to be unheard of. Today, you hear of it happening at least two or three times per year. Sometimes the pastor's wife runs off, and many times that is not the fault of the pastor. Other times, the pastor runs off. The divorce rate among church members is also alarming.
Another thing that troubles me is the difficulty in finding a pastor for a local church, especially if that church can not afford to pay a full-time salary. It is not a good thing for our sister churches to go long periods of time without the solid leadership of a man of God. Those of us on the mission field worry about our supporting churches who are without pastors. We worry about the future of those churches. Our goal is to see new churches planted and existing churches flourish. This is not likely to occur if men do not answer God's call to the ministry he has laid out for them.
I greatly appreciate the love and support I have received from our supporting churches and the churches of the Missionary Baptist Association of Texas. Over the next year, I will minister full-time to try to lead Grace Pointe to a place where she can be totally self-supporting. It's a tall order, but with God's help, anything is possible. God bless you where you labor. Be encouraged. Be empowered. We serve the One True God. We are on the right side of the scriptures, we are on the right side of History, because we are on His side.
Things will get tougher. Economics will be worse, those willing to endure sound doctrine will decrease in number, the general public will become less friendly to our presence. Though there will be highlights, like the Manhattan Declaration, you can expect the overall condition of things to deteriorate. Never-the-less, be strong, and of a good courage, because the Lord is with us.
One trend I am noticing is a renewed emphasis on state missions. More churches are participating in state missions by either (a) sending out missionaries or (b) supporting missionaries. While this has not translated into increased support through the secretary-treasurer's office, it is translating to new mission works getting started and supported. I cite the works in the Rio Grande Valley, San Antonio, Kerrville, East Texas, and Midland as examples. Some missionaries like myself enjoy the support of the state salary, while others (like Bro. Phil Babcock in Midland) work solely on free-will offerings and support from sister churches.
Another encouraging trend is the acceptance of different mission methods. While some still believe that missions should not organize into churches until they are self-supporting (and ready to pay a full-time pastor) there is growing support for missions organizing into churches as soon as a body is formed. This is a good trend as I believe it will lead to missions organizing and getting off associational support sooner, creates more potential sending churches and lessens the confusion of the Landmark ecclesiology.
One thing that I have noticed is how associational meetings in Texas have become calmer, with whatever debate that does happen being done so out of a spirit of love and respect. No one is raking the MBA churches over the coals for not being progressive enough, and no one is standing up launching false allegations at a sister church. Issues of order are addressed respectfully, and while the decisions don't always go our way, we accept those decisions and move on for the honor and glory of God.
A couple of things do trouble me, however. One is the growing immorality that is plaguing our churches, and even our pulpits. Pastors getting divorced used to be unheard of. Today, you hear of it happening at least two or three times per year. Sometimes the pastor's wife runs off, and many times that is not the fault of the pastor. Other times, the pastor runs off. The divorce rate among church members is also alarming.
Another thing that troubles me is the difficulty in finding a pastor for a local church, especially if that church can not afford to pay a full-time salary. It is not a good thing for our sister churches to go long periods of time without the solid leadership of a man of God. Those of us on the mission field worry about our supporting churches who are without pastors. We worry about the future of those churches. Our goal is to see new churches planted and existing churches flourish. This is not likely to occur if men do not answer God's call to the ministry he has laid out for them.
I greatly appreciate the love and support I have received from our supporting churches and the churches of the Missionary Baptist Association of Texas. Over the next year, I will minister full-time to try to lead Grace Pointe to a place where she can be totally self-supporting. It's a tall order, but with God's help, anything is possible. God bless you where you labor. Be encouraged. Be empowered. We serve the One True God. We are on the right side of the scriptures, we are on the right side of History, because we are on His side.
Things will get tougher. Economics will be worse, those willing to endure sound doctrine will decrease in number, the general public will become less friendly to our presence. Though there will be highlights, like the Manhattan Declaration, you can expect the overall condition of things to deteriorate. Never-the-less, be strong, and of a good courage, because the Lord is with us.
Monday, October 19, 2009
Monday Mission Fields - Fredericksburg, TX
Fredericksburg is the stereotypical Texas Hill Country town. It's downtown buildings are historic, it boasts a culture that is heavily influenced by it's German residents, is full of antique stores and unique gift shops, and makes for a good weekend getaway. In fact, when West-Central Texas towns try to build up their downtown districts (as Coleman and Brownwood are doing now), Fredericksburg is the example they go by.Don't let the population figure of 10,000 fool you. Fredericksburg fills up every weekend with shoppers, hunters, tourists and travelers. It is a major cultural center in the Texas Hill Country. As influencial as the city of Fredericksburg is, it is without the influence of a doctrinally sound ABA church.
A mission work in Fredericksburg would have some advantages. Close proximity (by West Texas standards) to sister churches in San Antonio, Round Rock, Kerrville and even Brownwood lends the prospect of financial and prayer support, as well as friendships. A work in Fredericksburg would also qualify for state missions support.
Please pray for a missionary to answer the call and go to Fredericksburg today. The Texas Hill Country is one of the most vital mission fields in the state of Texas.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
What to do if you didn't get a report...
If you are the pastor or a member of one of Mission: Brownwood's supporting churches and your church is not receiving a monthly report in the mail, please let me know. I compose the reports in Brownwood, then email the report to Jacksonville where it is copied, and then sent out to our mailing list.
Over the past couple of months, we have had major computer issues which have wiped out our mailing list in the computer. We know who our supporters are and have most of the addresses, however, there are some we are still missing. So, if your church has not been getting a Mission: Brownwood report in the mail, please email the church's mailing address to gracepointembc@aol.com.
If you are not a supporting church, but want a report anyway, go ahead and send your address to me as well, and we'll add you to the list.
I really want to make sure that our supporters as well as our sister churches be well informed about what's happening in Brownwood.
The September report will be composed and sent out this weekend.
Over the past couple of months, we have had major computer issues which have wiped out our mailing list in the computer. We know who our supporters are and have most of the addresses, however, there are some we are still missing. So, if your church has not been getting a Mission: Brownwood report in the mail, please email the church's mailing address to gracepointembc@aol.com.
If you are not a supporting church, but want a report anyway, go ahead and send your address to me as well, and we'll add you to the list.
I really want to make sure that our supporters as well as our sister churches be well informed about what's happening in Brownwood.
The September report will be composed and sent out this weekend.
The Core Group is Solidifying
Based on our attendance last night and last Sunday, and looking at who is coming, and the fact that we have seen the same faces since the summer, I'd say we have identified our core group at Grace Pointe. Most of these folks have been around since last spring, but they are becoming more closely knit together and fellowshipping more and more.
We have also picked up some more folks who have become very stable in their attendance. It has gotten to where we know we will have approximately 10-12 people present whenever we open the doors. I had hoped for more, but in all reality, we are where I thought we'd be about this time. Our people at Grace Pointe are good people who are getting on fire about doing something for the Lord.
I'm really excited to see what God does next at Grace Pointe!
We have also picked up some more folks who have become very stable in their attendance. It has gotten to where we know we will have approximately 10-12 people present whenever we open the doors. I had hoped for more, but in all reality, we are where I thought we'd be about this time. Our people at Grace Pointe are good people who are getting on fire about doing something for the Lord.
I'm really excited to see what God does next at Grace Pointe!
Friday, October 9, 2009
It's about Missions
When was the last time you heard someone say, "I can't wait until the state meeting. I really look forward to the CyberSpace report." Well, maybe the guy giving the report, but other than that, the state association meeting is popular for two reasons. (1) Fellowship and (2) Missions.
The fellowship is going to happen. Anytime 300 or so preachers get together, there will be fellowship.
Missions is the top-priority agenda item on the list. We open the meeting on Tuesday evening to a moderator's address, a message, and proposed changes to the mission policy or requests to set the policy aside. Then, the first item of business Wednesday morning (after the songs, music specials and devotional) is approving missionaries, and any subsequent policy change. Everything after that is all reporting and information sharing, from which we hope that the brethren are encouraged, enlightened, and motivated.
I bring this up for a reason. Over the past few years, there has been a movement toward rushing the missionary approval process. I understand the reasons. (1) If the association is ready to approve or reject a request, why belabor it with ongoing debate? (2) The quicker the missions part is over, the less likelihood for disharmony. (3) Many people leave after lunch.
I'm actually fine with this too. I just don't want to see a bad decision made, or a debate that gets ended before all sides are heard just for the sake of getting finished in time for lunch. We all deserve better than that type of situation.
All that being said, I think we have a good group of missionaries coming up for support this year. After we finish the missions business, we can enjoy some great reports. I'm actually looking forward to the CyberSpace report. With all the new things coming out and going mainstream, there's no telling what we might be able to discuss.
The fellowship is going to happen. Anytime 300 or so preachers get together, there will be fellowship.
Missions is the top-priority agenda item on the list. We open the meeting on Tuesday evening to a moderator's address, a message, and proposed changes to the mission policy or requests to set the policy aside. Then, the first item of business Wednesday morning (after the songs, music specials and devotional) is approving missionaries, and any subsequent policy change. Everything after that is all reporting and information sharing, from which we hope that the brethren are encouraged, enlightened, and motivated.
I bring this up for a reason. Over the past few years, there has been a movement toward rushing the missionary approval process. I understand the reasons. (1) If the association is ready to approve or reject a request, why belabor it with ongoing debate? (2) The quicker the missions part is over, the less likelihood for disharmony. (3) Many people leave after lunch.
I'm actually fine with this too. I just don't want to see a bad decision made, or a debate that gets ended before all sides are heard just for the sake of getting finished in time for lunch. We all deserve better than that type of situation.
All that being said, I think we have a good group of missionaries coming up for support this year. After we finish the missions business, we can enjoy some great reports. I'm actually looking forward to the CyberSpace report. With all the new things coming out and going mainstream, there's no telling what we might be able to discuss.
Why I support the proposed mission policy for the MBA of Texas
The proposed mission policy of the MBA of Texas holds superiority to the current policy in that it allows decisions to be made by sponsoring churches and missionaries without fear of interference of policy-driven debate. The proposed policy defines what a missionary is, and what state mission work is. It affirms the authority of the sponsoring church, the autonomy of local churches, yet protects the finances of the association.
Under the new policy, eligible mission work will be new church starts, work with struggling churches to prevent their demise, and works that assist churches with the Great Commission (this is where TMD, Berean Ministries, etc could qualify.) The policy allows for mission projects (such as building funds) and missionary salary.
Instead of paying salary, the mission money would be given to the sponsoring church in the form of "support" that could then be paid by the sponsoring church to the missionary as salary.
Protections for the association come in the form that the messengers are given the authority to set the amount of support to be paid to the missionary.
So far, I have only heard two complaints about the proposed mission policy.
(1) There needs to be a provision that the policy is not a set of laws, but guidelines. This article is in the current policy and introduces a lot of controversy. In my mind, the requirements of the sponsoring church and missionary in the proposed policy are minimal... if one can't live up to the expectations in the proposed policy, one has no business in missions.
(2) There needs to be more missionary accountability. Actually, I'm kind of tired of hearing about missionary accountability. All the association can really expect from the missionary is that he stay on the field and continue the work, and report on that work. What more should be expected?
Hopefully, the policy will be put up for a vote in November. If so, I'll be voting yes.
Under the new policy, eligible mission work will be new church starts, work with struggling churches to prevent their demise, and works that assist churches with the Great Commission (this is where TMD, Berean Ministries, etc could qualify.) The policy allows for mission projects (such as building funds) and missionary salary.
Instead of paying salary, the mission money would be given to the sponsoring church in the form of "support" that could then be paid by the sponsoring church to the missionary as salary.
Protections for the association come in the form that the messengers are given the authority to set the amount of support to be paid to the missionary.
So far, I have only heard two complaints about the proposed mission policy.
(1) There needs to be a provision that the policy is not a set of laws, but guidelines. This article is in the current policy and introduces a lot of controversy. In my mind, the requirements of the sponsoring church and missionary in the proposed policy are minimal... if one can't live up to the expectations in the proposed policy, one has no business in missions.
(2) There needs to be more missionary accountability. Actually, I'm kind of tired of hearing about missionary accountability. All the association can really expect from the missionary is that he stay on the field and continue the work, and report on that work. What more should be expected?
Hopefully, the policy will be put up for a vote in November. If so, I'll be voting yes.
Catch up!
I've been absent from the blog for a week and a half now. Oh, if only I weren't so tied up with mission work, I could blog more. (That's a sarcastic comment. I prefer mission work to blogging, as is evident by my absence from this site.)
Here's what's happening in my world.
Here's what's happening in my world.
- We're recovering from an active September. During September, we canvassed for "Back to Church Sunday," canvassed the Brownwood Reunion Celebration, and held a pumpkin patch outreach (which was attended by 60 people, most of whom came as a result of the Reunion outreach.)
- The preparation for the outreaches was very intense, and the execution thereof really wore us out. So far, we have seen little fruit from this, which is making me think that we need to simplify our approach to disciple making... but how?
- Went to the MBA of Texas pre-Association meeting. One question was asked of me... "You're working a job there, right?" "Yes." I appreciate Bro. Bobby Sparks. Had it not been for his question, I'd have driven five hours to be quiet.
- I've been invited to speak at the Faith Promise Missions Conference at Faith MBC in Round Rock on Oct. 26.
- I'm back to coaching youth soccer... this time I'm coaching JJ's team. 1-1 so far on the season.
- All three kids are in soccer this year, all on different teams. Between their practice schedules, Rachel's piano lessons and practice, the outreach we do on Tuesdays at the local apartments, and so on, afternoon shuttling is getting hectic.
- Still broadcasting Coleman High School football. We're 0-5 so far this season, but we're up against Dublin, another 0-5 team tonight.
- High school buddy is getting married tomorrow night.
- Looking forward to the MBA of Texas meeting in November.
- Working on church covenant, by-laws and consitution for Grace Pointe.
I think that about covers it.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
A clutch play on 3rd and long
Isn't it amazing how right when you think you're going to have to back up and punt, God gives you a break-through at just the right moment? That's the way it's been with our apartment ministry at the Brownwood Apt. Phase II Community Room. Attendance has been slack as the folks who followed us over to the new building haven't been attending the on-site ministry at the apartments. In fact, it has been just my family and two kids and their mother.
However, last night, the attendance was not only higher than normal, but Jessica wound up ministering to some ladies who needed to talk. It's always good when God gives you a break-through, letting you know that he's not finished yet.
However, last night, the attendance was not only higher than normal, but Jessica wound up ministering to some ladies who needed to talk. It's always good when God gives you a break-through, letting you know that he's not finished yet.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)