The Incarnate

Personal Finances, Cultural Change & the Economy

2011-12-03T10:49:00.001-06:00

It's no secret that society is changing at a dramatic pace. But most of us, rather than stopping to reflect on the seriousness of these changes, simply accept them and go with the flow. Swimming upstream is too hard and disengaging doesn't seem like a real option.

But take a minute to think about just how radical some of these changes are.

I'm 30, and have noticed some profound shifts in the financial and material "norms" of our society in just the past 2 decades.

When I was a boy, we had a computer. One, simple, inexpensive computer that lasted us probably 10 years and cost us very little to maintain. There was none of this madness of having to keep up with the "next best thing" or with perpetual planned obsolescence. There were not constant upgrades and myriads of mobile devices and their accessories. As a result, obviously, we did not spend money on these things.
We did not have cell phones. So we did not have to pay outrageous phone and/or data bills every month.
We did not have cable or dish TV, so our viewing experience was limited to network and public TV programming. No real loss there.
We never once owned a new car, never once had a car payment—not because we could afford to buy a fancy new one outright, but because we bought reliable vehicles with 80k+ miles. We saved up for them and paid cash. We also never carried full coverage on our vehicles. We carried liability—that's it. Because our cars weren't worth anything more! We played probability to our advantage. How much money do you think that saved us every month?
We (a family of 7) took infrequent and modest vacations. We never went skiing, never went to Disneyland (or world). We took a road trip to the East coast once, and several sight-seeing, camping, and waterparking trips to nearby places.
We did not own "recreational vehicles" to fuel, insure, and maintain.
We did not have expensive hobbies.
We owned probably 2 TVs in my K-12 career.
We dined out about once a month (including fast food), and then it was the $20 Mazzio's Pizza family pack (3 med. pizzas, 2 orders of breadsticks & 2 pitchers of pop).
My first personal TV, which I bought shortly after I married Melissa eight years ago, cost me $200 new (not on sale) and we still use it. We recently bought a 50" LG plasma for our family room (man cave), which cost slightly more than that (ahem).
My undergraduate tuition plus room-and-board cost about $14k/year. Today, that cost has doubled across the board.

You're well aware of how "obsolete" the above norms are in today's society. But have you considered that median incomes have not kept pace with the increasing financial/material norms? College tuition has doubled in 10 years, but incomes are about the same. I learned yesterday that some women spend $100 or more a month at beauty parlors!

Does any of this concern you?

How has this happened?

It's happened because our society has gotten used to living above their means... living off of credit... spending what we don't have. As a result, we've created lavish cultural expectations of what's "normal" and even "necessary." We stress out over the perceived need to keep pace with the changes. We hoard finances while most of the world starves. But we justify our lavish consumption patterns by comparing ourselves to "the norm" and to those who are "better off" than we are (you know, that 1% we're constantly hearing about in the news).

I'm not going to tell you what you need to do with this. You know what you need to do. Live beneath your means if possible. Live simply. Give generously. Plan and save for the future. Above all, trust God to supply your needs... your real needs. And remember that there is a direct correlation between our generosity here on earth and our reward in heaven (cf. Luke 18:18-30, 1 Tim. 6:18-19).

Leadership Meanderings: On Vision and Planning

2011-10-24T09:54:00.000-06:00

One of the things I've noticed in working with a variety of leaders in a variety of settings, sacred and secular, is that leaders tend to enshrine their personalities into values and principles. We like to sanctify our own strengths and vilify our weaknesses (which happen to be strengths of others!). And when we do that, we undermine our work.

There is perhaps no better example than the clash between visionaries and planners. Planners and administrators tend to discount the dreams and ambitions of big-picture visionary types, calling them irresponsible and out of touch with reality. Visionaries belittle planners as uptight, overly scrupulous creativity squelchers--an impediment to getting things done. Both are right and both are wrong. Left to themselves, neither type of leader would get anything done of value.

Planners understand a basic leadership principle that Jesus himself articulated: counting the cost. In Luke 14:28-30, Jesus illustrates what is required to be His disciple. What builder, He reasons, commits to a project without first determining (a) what it will cost and (b) whether/how he can afford it? Only a fool. Proverbs 24:27 illustrates the principle of preparedness: "Prepare your work outside; get everything ready for yourself in the field, and after that build your house." Visionaries need planners to help make their dreams a reality.

But what good will planning do without a vision? You might research and develop and execute a plan beautifully. But if that plan doesn't serve a worthwhile vision, who cares how good it was? Visionaries and planners need each other. And in order to create a truly fruitful partnership, both must respect the strengths of the other and not allow themselves to be frustrated by them.

Are you a visionary or a planner? Do you see a tendency in yourself to demonize those whose strengths are opposite yours--to make them your enemies instead of your allies? If so, you're doing yourself--and them--a great disservice. Consider the apostle Paul's timeless words to the church in 1st century Corinth:

"To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good" (12:7).
"For the body does not consist of one member but of many" (v. 14).
"But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. If all were a single member, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, yet one body" (vv. 18-20).
"Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it" (v. 27).

Each of us has different gifts in the economy of God. And that includes leaders! Don't make the error of the Corinthian church by belittling the gifts of others different from yourself. Learn to appreciate them. Understand where their gifts complement yours and vice versa. Only then will the body of Christ serve the mission of Christ in a manner that honors Christ.

"To Him be the glory in the church" (Eph. 4:21)!

A Philosophy of Pastoral Leadership

2011-10-12T10:09:00.000-06:00

This video illustrates the confusion many people--pastors and congregations alike--experience with regard to the nature of the pastoral calling. What is a pastor? This is a crucial question that rarely gets asked so pointedly, much less considered with any seriousness.

One common trend that concerns me is the tendency to "anachronize" (read modern notions into ancient terms) the various biblical terms for pastoral leadership. The most obvious is "shepherd," which through the Westernized anachronism means a spiritual nurse of sorts... and usually a spiritual nurse on wheels... someone akin to Richard Baxter's Reformed Pastor. But is that what the Bible means by the term poimen (shepherd/pastor)?

Read my Philosophy of Pastoral Leadership or do your own research and see. The truth might surprise you.

Resolved: To Love

2011-10-08T22:40:00.001-06:00

I am changing my personal mission statement to reflect a change God is effecting in my heart. For the past several years I have tried to live out the mission of knowing God and making Him known in increasing measure. Yet I have come to the sobering realization that (a) I am failing at the second part and (b) my love for God has waned. I have been an ambitious person without being a truly loving person. Ambitious "for the kingdom" without actually living "in the kingdom" according to Jesus' description of it.

By God's grace, I am repenting. Some people may be capable of being both highly ambitious (striving for "influence" or power or control or whatever) and highly loving towards God and man. But at this point, I am not. For me to change, I need a shift of priorities. No longer shall I fret about impressing others or trying to walk the constant tightrope of performance.

My new mission statement is this: To love God and love others deeply, all the time. That's it.

If you think that's too simplistic or short-sighted, then I challenge you to try fulfilling my previous mission statement without fulfilling my new one. It can't be done. If you aim for influence, you probably will gain it only at the expense of love. But if you aim for love, then you will wield the kind of influence that God desires for you and me. And a kind much more like the kind He himself has demonstrated.

Will you join me in this mission? Will you help me as you are able? Will you pray for me as I consider this very different outlook on life?

Clean

2011-09-27T09:04:00.001-06:00

"Already you are clean because of the word that I have spoken to you." --Jesus (John 15:3)

Do you ever just feel dirty? My daughter and son come in from playing in the yard, usually in the sandbox and almost always in their Crocs. Although they're great for air flow, Crocs excel as repositories of grime. When they come off, the kids' feet are pretty well caked in crud, earning them an immediate trip to the tub (on our good days). Otherwise, they'll be tracking that junk all over the floors that I walk on, and then I'm all grimy, and that just ain't right!

Or how about the times when I get back from a long bike ride or a game of basketball and I'm drenched with sweat. I walk through the door and my wife runs to me, throws her arms around my neck and gives me a big hug and smooch, right? In my dreams! I'm nasty and I need to go clean up before entering her presence, let alone getting up close and personal.

It's kind of like that with God. There's no denying that we're sinful people. We wallow in the grime of sin, even delighting in it at times, like pigs in a mud sty. God lays out His blueprint for the truly blessed, joy-filled, God-glorifying life, and we smear black paint all over it--on purpose. God says, "I love you. I desire your best. Trust me and love me by following my commands." Then we give Him the finger and turn and do the opposite. That's humankind. That's me at times.

We spurn God's grace and muck up His image in us. We become impure in the presence of Purity. We are unworthy in the presence of the Divine Majesty, and destined for the judgment we've earned. But this God is compassionate and merciful. He desires to make us clean again so that we can experience a relationship with Him. So He sent Jesus to die for our sins and make us clean, for "without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins" (Heb. 9:22).

This is what Jesus was pointing forward to when He washed the feet of His disciples (John 13) and pronounced them "completely clean" (v. 10). Because Jesus is God, He can do that. All He has to do is say the word. And yet He showed us the full extent of His love by giving His life for ours on the cross.

If you have trusted in Christ to forgive your sins and reconcile you to God, this word is for you: "You are clean." Even when you feel dirty. Even when you screw up and fall back into sin. You're clean. Not because you're awesome or super righteous by your own merits. But because Christ has made and pronounced you clean. Let that truth free you forever from a life of shame.

Listen

2011-08-16T09:55:00.000-06:00

The first task of the pastor is always to listen.
Listen to God.
And listen to those He has placed in your path.

Listen! And once you have heard, then, and only then, speak.

Meditation of the Day: Psalm 33:1-3

2011-07-07T07:48:00.003-06:00

"Shout for joy in the Lord, O you righteous!
          Praise befits the upright.
Give thanks to the Lord with the lyre;
          make melody to him with the harp of ten strings!
Sing to him a new song;
          play skillfully on the strings, with loud shouts!"
               (Ps. 33:1-3, ESV)

Lessons for Worshipers:

Worship involves joyful shouting (as well as quiet reverence)! God wants the whole of our being (including emotions!) engaged. He wants us to wear our hearts on our sleeves sometimes! Are you holding back?
Only the righteous can worship! (cf. Ps. 24) God repeatedly warns against bringing "worshipful words" before Him when our lives are full of blatant disregard for His commands (cf. Isa. 1:10-17; Micah 6:8). But the truth here is made even more glorious through the cross of Jesus Christ: God has attributed the righteousness of His Son to all those who embrace Him by faith (Rom. 3:21-26, 2 Cor. 5:21)! Because of HIS righteousness and HIS sacrifice for US, WE can come before God's throne in confidence! Amen?
Skillful music played unto the Lord is worship. God loves music and values excellence (cf. Exod. 31:1-11, 35:10-19)! Even instruments, when played skillfully, are offerings of THANKSGIVING to Him! Striving for excellence in "performance" is never futile: it glorifies God! (But beware of the potential for idolatry!!!)
God loves NEW music (as much as old music). He commands us to sing Him new songs. This is a perpetual decree for all generations. Of course, we should sing old songs as well (as the canonization of the Psalms as Scripture attests; cf. also Col. 3:16)! Some critics of "contemporary" (i.e., new) worship music warn that newness doesn't necessary equal quality or usefulness in worship. Agreed! (We are not only to play skillfully, but also to write skillfully!) But we must strive to continue to write and lift up new songs of praise to our Lord, because, at the very least, God has not ceased gifting His children for this task! The church NEEDS a steady infusion of new music. (This, of course, has practical implications for Sunday worship song selection; but that's another topic for another time!)

Hope these words were a challenge and encouragement to you! Please feel free to contribute your thoughts.

Good day, friends!

Is Our Highest Goal Attainable in This Life?

2011-07-02T13:26:00.004-06:00

I am a pastor. But I am still a human being. I have my questions, my concerns, my hang ups. One of the things I continuously wrestle with God about is, How does my message translate to the utmost reaches of society and of the world? In other words, when I go to apply God's Word to specific situations in my culture, can the same general principles hold up in other cultures?

To give but one example (and not a small one), one of my convictions developed over the last decade and woven into the fabric of my soul, is the idea that we were created for deeply joyful, loving fellowship with our Creator—now and throughout all eternity. Pastor John Piper, who has had an extraordinary impact on my outlook on God and the Christian life, has made it his life's passion "to magnify the supremacy of God for the joy of all peoples through Jesus Christ." It is his firm belief that "God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him." What that means is, your most important duty and highest goal in life is to pursue your joy in God.

But I have to confess, I am not very good at this. Pursuing my joy in God means, first and foremost, beholding God (Psalm 27:4!), as I recently preached. And, as Dr. Piper tweeted this morning, "Beholding... begs for lingering." It requires sustained focus. Focus on what? On God's revelation of Himself—primarily through His Word (Scripture/the Bible), but also His creation. In order to rightly comprehend that revelation, our minds must be moved upon by the Holy Spirit, who speaks not amidst mighty whirlwinds and the hectic pace of many of our lives, but in a still, small voice (1 Kings 19:11-12). We must (to quote the rest of Piper's tweet) "beware of hurry."

But this is countercultural for people everywhere. It's extremely difficult. In the "developed" (modern) world, the tendency is to hurry about everything—to squeeze the most we possibly can out every moment of life, prioritizing, of course, certain types of goals and objectives (e.g., financial, vocational) over others (e.g., relational, spiritual, emotional, evangelistic). It's difficult in less developed societies ("third world"/"developing") for different reasons: lack of resources and education that would enable them to engage the Word thoroughly (as we Westerners conceive of thoroughness).

And it's difficult in every society, for one glaring reason, which the apostle Paul laments in 1 Cor. 13:12: " For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known" (ESV). God knows us far better than we can possibly know Him, this side of eternity. God enables us to see and experience just enough of Him to eliminate our excuses not to believe, but not enough to erase the possibility of doubt. Mark Galli's CT article, "Mercifully Forsaken," explores the positive side of this reality. But the question remains, To what extent is it possible to experience our joy in God in this life? And how hard must we be on ourselves when evaluating our faithfulness at pursuing this goal?

As a pastor, preacher, teacher or writer, it's easy to hold up the ideal. But what is the relationship of the ideal to reality? What is God's expectation of us? He is no doubt sad when we strive after earthly things to find satisfaction in life, or when we simply resign ourselves to "get along" grudgingly in this life—"gritting and bearing" it. But in what way(s) and to what extent are the "higher," "heavenly things" (Col. 3:1-2) available to us now. And when I say "us," I mean all of us: the congressperson, the businessman, the school teacher, the railroad engineer, the stay-at-home mom, the unemployed masses of Zimbabwe, the addict, and the trafficked girls of the East (and even the West).

This is a question I will probably wrestle with for the rest of my life, as I myself strive and urge others to experience the eternal life available to us in Christ Jesus, our Lord.

God Is an Aesthetic

2011-06-29T13:07:00.008-06:00

Do you believe that?

Sometimes it seems as if aesthetics is relegated to the realm of the expendable--icing on the cake at best, vain and superficial at worst. But does this reflect the nature and intent of God? A look at His creation should answer that question pretty quickly. God is concerned with both form and function independently. He is a God of beauty and a God of intricate detail. He has created us to recognize and appreciate beauty (though some of us apparently more than others!). "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder," indeed. What is beautiful to one person may do nothing for the next person. Yet to deny the pursuit of beauty and visual harmony is "a crime against humanity"--and against God.

In the contemporary, Western church there is a tendency toward utilitarianism. This is most evident in our places of worship, although it surfaces in our programming priorities as well. The pendulum has swung from extravagant cathedrals to bleak, barren, characterless warehouses. I'm no Romantic. There is a beauty in minimalism when it's done right. But even minimalism does not deem aesthetic concerns superfluous. It takes into account shape, color, shade, texture, lighting, balance, (along with utility) and so forth. Unfortunately, there are many architects who are not artists.

If you have a strong aesthetic bent and you are suffering silently in bleak worship spaces week after week, I would encourage you to step up, say something, and then do something about it. Volunteer to head up a Creative Team. If you're unlearned in the specifics of good design, do some research and put together some plans to enhance your church's worship space.
Space matters. Beauty matters. Everything communicates. Let's make sure what we are communicating is what we want to communicate--and even more importantly, what God wants us to communicate.

RECOMMENDED:
This article does a much better job of addressing the nuts and bolts of this issue than I have. Check it out!

This study shows what type of church architecture speaks most deeply to the American public at large, including the unchurched (with an important note from Ed Stetzer that it takes a lot more than architecture to build a true church!).

This church's accomplishment is truly inspiring!

A Rebuttal: Tim Keller's Succession Strategy

2011-06-28T10:56:00.001-06:00

So, I was a little hard on multi-site churches yesterday. (But maybe not.) Taken to the extreme, I have huge problems with the model. But the closer to "home base" you stay, the more comfortable I am with it. Here's an example of multi-site at its best.

Watching this video of D. A. Carson, John Piper and Tim Keller discussing the issue of leadership succession, Keller offers what sounds like a great model for someone in his shoes. You have the mega-church pastor and his church asking, what will we do post-Tim? His answer: divide the congregation into 4 (or possibly 8) smaller congregations and appoint and equip associate pastors, along with teams of elders, for each. He will come alongside of them and share the teaching load while also building into them as a group and as individuals. The elders will function as a large group and as "elder teams" responsive to the needs of each church.

To me, this is equipping and strategy and wisdom at their best. Would that more influential pastors approached the issue of succession with greater seriousness.

When Does Multi-Site Church Go Too Far?

2011-06-27T16:25:00.003-06:00

I've always been a bit skeptical of the whole multi-site church phenomenon, even though I was a member of one for nearly 3 years. My family and I grew there. We found community and some amazing friends there. We received pastoral care there. Every week we sat under some of the best preaching in America and worshiped in our own cultural vernacular. It was overall a very positive experience in so far as what was experienced.

But I remained plagued by some questions about the broader impact of the video-feed sermon model of local church ministry. An article I read today, "Multi-Site Churches Go Interstate," raises some of these, but ups the ante. The article highlights a growing trend to expand the multi-site network to the utmost limits and raises the question, How far is too far? How far away can the preaching-and-teaching pastor be and still fulfill his duty as a shepherd/overseer of a congregation? Are generic, "biblical" messages enough or should they take into consideration the needs of a particular community (even congregation)? To what extent does a distant, video image of a pastor exercise authority and influence over a congregation? How much trust does he gain? How much trust does he deserve?

Here's a theological question: What does the incarnation of Jesus Christ have to say about our models of pastoral ministry? Jesus did not stand at a distance from us, but came close and got Himself dirty in our mess. (This article has an interesting take, and then some.)

Do our methods match our message?

There are also practical issues such as, How will future generations of teaching-and-preaching pastors be raised up if they have to compete with video images of celebrity pastors? Or, as Portland pastor Bob Hyatt pointed out in the article, how will existing churches continue to exist if Wal-Church (McChurch? Starchurch? Barnes & Bible?) comes in offering a more attractive package? Of course, the allure wears off after a while. A model either works or it doesn't--produces growing disciples on mission or doesn't. But do we risk squandering valuable time and Kingdom resources on an experiment (let alone one that is theologically suspect)?

The solution to fewer qualified pastors is not to clone pastors via video broadcast, but for pastors to mentor younger, up-and-coming leaders and send them out to gather and shepherd their own flocks. The solution is equipping. Equipping is not very efficient. But then again, I don't shop Wal-Mart for high quality goods or dine at McDonald's for steak.

Has the Church Assimilated Too Much of the Culture at-Large?

2011-06-25T09:43:00.005-06:00

As I finished clearing my inbox this morning, a headline from yesterday's Christianity Today Direct digest grabbed my attention: "Contemporary Music: The Cultural Medium and the Christian Message." As a worship pastor, my interest was obvious. CT ran a whole issue a couple months ago dedicated to the topic of church (corporate/gathered) worship and, due to the overwhelming response, has continued publishing articles on this subject. It is clear that the "worship wars" are far from over. Yet I see the same arguments surfacing again and again.

In this morning's article, author D. H. Williams begins with an all too common story: highly educated, traditional (if not liturgical) church guy enters megachurch and is stunned by the degree to which it feels like a "show" and how devoid it is of Christian symbolism and traditional (even essential) language and practices. Unfortunately, as is usually the case, the author simply offers another reaction to another straw man. Not all megachurches are created equal. Visit Willow Creek and Harvest Bible Chapel (where my wife and I were members for 3 years), close neighbors in Chicago's northwest suburbs, and you will notice a vast difference. Even a visit to their websites will reveal a good deal of their differing philosophies of ministry. Yet certain principles would no doubt be held in common. However, instead of exploring those values which megachurches hold in common, writers continue to critique mostly the excesses of the most secularized variety.

That said, Williams raises a good point that we would do well to consider:

[too much of] the [contemporary] church caters to short attention spans and relies heavily on stimulating emotional highs during the service. Instead of facilitating an encounter with the living God, the methods themselves become the overwhelming focus.

I have long recognized this tendency in churches. But it is far from new! The Reformation sought to redirect our focus on the Word and on the Lord which that Word revealed, where He had formerly been shrouded in pomp and ceremony. In the Great Awakenings much attention was given to methods of preaching, altar calls, music and the like (think Charles Finney). In every tradition, at every age, and even in your church today, there is a constant temptation to idolize the methods or means of communication--in other words, to give them more weight than they deserve.

Whether it's excessive scrutiny (there is a place for scrutiny, but I've commented on that elsewhere) or undue faith in the power of a particular approach, we run the risk of idolizing methods. But since no method is value-neutral, we do have to think hard about methods, making the most of the biblical wisdom available to us concerning them. For instance, Williams is concerned about short attention spans and emotional titillation. Biblically, we can assess whether or not those are problematic. Scripture passages that refer to "meditating on the word", which implies sustained focus, and "remaining sober" and "self-controlled," which implies a balance of mind and emotion, lend credibility to his critique. The key, as always, is balance. All mind and no emotion results in a stale, cognitive exercise. All feeling with little to no intellectual engagement amounts to emotional masturbation.

We have to find ways to challenge and stretch both the lazy and the diligent, and not merely "give people what they want." Because what they want and what they need... (you complete the sentence).

Why the iCloud is not revolutionary

2011-06-07T21:17:00.001-06:00

The hubbub about Apple's new iCloud service is exaggerated. I have been longing for some time for a way to sync all my data, all my files, across all my devices—instantly, constantly, automatically. Dropbox solved the files dilemma, minus enormous libraries such as my iTunes music. Dropbox also obviously does not manage and play my music. So in spite of the fact that for me it's been the best thing since sliced cake, I need a solution for my huge and ever-expanding music library. Could the iCloud be this solution?

Not likely, at least in the near future. Here is why iCloud will only be revolutionary in concept, but not in reality:

In typical Apple fashion, iCloud only works with Apple devices. So it's more or less simply another way for them to get you to buy into the Apple enterprise (which my family has already done. We've been all Apple for a few years now). If you're not on board with that, tough luck!
The iCloud will only sync music you have purchased from the Apple iTunes store—further attempts to keep you shopping with and only with them. Oh, for only $25 per song per year, you can sync the rest of your music! I'll get right on that.
In order to install iCloud, you have to upgrade (i.e., spend more of your hard-earned money... sensing a theme?) to Snow Leopard (if you don't have it already) and Lion. On a related note, I am disgruntled by the fact that they are discontinuing MobileMe. For those of us who don't want to purchase Snow Leopard and then Lion, but still need a practical, automated solution to syncing all our contacts, calendars, bookmarks, etc. between devices, we will now be left out to dry. I don't like having my hand forced.

Needless to say, I am not the least bit excited about iCloud—at least not yet. Once Apple demonstrates an effort to actually serve the consumer rather than creating more ways to monopolize the market (or should I say, markets?), I may buy in. But until then, I will continue to use Dropbox and my old method of Copy & Paste.

New Reading

2011-06-07T00:03:00.001-06:00

Since the confluence of our A/C unit breaking down and the temperatures soaring into the 90s has rendered me unable to sleep, I decided it was a gift of God of a few more hours of productivity and prayer. Tonight I started reading The Trellis and the Vine by Colin Marshall and Tony Payne. The book has been recommended to me by church-planting friends and most recently by my senior pastor. Sixty pages into it (through chapter four), it's pretty good. Essentially, it's a manual on why and how churches should make the shift from ministry that is program-centered to ministry that is Spirit-empowered, gospel-proclamation-oriented and people-mobilizing. So far, the biggest challenge for me personally is the emphasis on one-on-one, "speaking the truth in love" kind of ministry and on prioritizing people growth over tasks. The tasks of ministry (e.g., planning, coordinating & executing Sunday worship services; preparing sermons; problem solving; administration; recruiting, scheduling & training volunteers) overwhelm us to the point that we neglect to actually pastor our individual leaders and volunteer staff.

I invite you to get your own copy and read along with me. Please stop in (to this blog or even in person!) and share your insights, whether you're reading the book for the first time, read it previously, or simply have a reaction to my blog post.

New Amazon Associates Account

2011-05-31T21:01:00.000-06:00

This evening, I became an Amazon Associate. It's no secret that Amazon.com is rapidly becoming the shopping destination of choice for just about every mass-marketed product under the sun. It also happens to be the site I link to most often when reviewing or recommend products (usually books and music). So when I learned that I could earn money by posting these links through an Associate account, naturally I was pretty pleased. :-)

So from now on, when you see a product linked on my blog, it most likely will be linked to Amazon through my Associate account. If you are remotely interested in buying a book, album, etc. about which I've blogged, please click the link from my page. In return, I promise never to "push" things simply for the sake of cash. When I recommend or link to something, it's because I've found it valuable personally or have had it recommended to me by sources I trust and respect.

Blessings!

Charles Wesley Hymn Tribute Album

2011-05-24T12:38:00.004-06:00

Check out this new album of classic Wesley hymns updated and expanded by top modern worship song writers.

May God continue to lead His people to a posture of humility that celebrates His work through past saints and embraces diversity within the present Body of Christ.

Choosing Songs for Worship

2011-05-10T14:45:00.004-06:00

One of the first priorities of a worship director or worship leader in preparing for congregational worship is good song selection. It is also one of the most difficult and, in some ways, complicated. At the basic level, good song selection will facilitate worship that is both robustly congregational (corporate, participatory, edifying) and intensely God-glorifying (God-exalting & -revealing; human-humbling & -minimizing).

The challenges of good song selection increase as the number of your worship leaders and teams increase. So the bigger your ministry, the more intentional you must be. While we shouldn't necessarily expect homogeneity amongst our worship leaders/teams, there are a number of qualities that must be consistent.

The following are a number of helpful resources I came across recently when researching worship song selection methodology. While I wouldn't agree with every detail of each person's approach, there is much in each to commend itself.

This worship leader's list of criteria which his church uses is a great starting point.

This collection of insights from reputed worship leaders is also excellent (especially Matt Redman's thoughts on the "journey of worship").

This list of considerations is helpful as well (especially concerning the edification factor).

Here is a helpful discussion of maintaining a "worship song repertoire." The going consensus is that you should have no more than 150 (sometimes much fewer) songs in your regular rotation, not accounting for holiday music.

Finally, Brenton Brown offers these pointers from his time spent with the senior pastor and one of the worship leaders at my former church, regarding worship flow. Very helpful as a general framework.

Naturally, there are going to be differences of opinion. There is no one right way, or it would have been prescribed in Scripture! What is absolute is the need to be rigorous and discerning in what will facilitate genuine worship in a particular congregation. This means worship that follows the biblical pattern of "R & R", revelation and response. To be faithful to Revelation, it must accurately and vividly communicate who God is. There must be theological thoroughness, revealing the rich variety of God's attributes and salvific actions rather than dwelling on a few. To be faithful to Response, it must help the congregation to engage their hearts, minds, souls and bodies in worship and praise. These criteria will be more cultural and subjective in nature, but they are no less essential. Use discernment and the art of listening to your people to guide you on these.

But don't be afraid to press the envelope a bit, to stretch people beyond their comfort zones a bit. True worship will always involve some degree of sacrifice on the part of the worshiper. A "relaxed, comfortable" environment is never the goal. Rather, in keeping with Psalm 2:11, we must lead people to "rejoice with trembling." Yet all things must be done in order to edify the Body, the worshiping congregation (Rom. 15:1-6; 1 Cor. 10:23, 24, 31, 33; 14:26).

If you know of other resources helpful on the subjects of song selection and maintaining a worship song repertoire, please share!

An Open Letter to Jay Sekulow and the ACLJ

2011-04-26T11:17:00.005-06:00

In response to the recent hubbub regarding the removal of the words "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance, I attempted to send the following email to Jay Sekulow, President of the American Center for Law and Justice, to no avail. Perhaps this blog post will come to his attention at some point. If not, hopefully it will cause other readers to question the legitimacy of efforts to maintain a generic "civil religion." (Read Robert Bellah's overview and critique here.)

--------------------------------

How vital is it really that we maintain a generic acknowledgement of “God”? In reality, how much consensus is there in this nation (among public officials, the judiciary, even the public at large) that we are submitted to the authority of the God of the Bible revealed in Jesus Christ? That authority has been wholly undermined and disregarded by the overwhelming majority of this nation’s citizenry and leadership. A generic, deistic relation of God to government is disingenuous at best. It leaves open the question, What God? Yahweh? Jesus Christ? Allah? The Cosmic Energy that permeates the universe? The Divine Spark within us? In my reckoning, there is theocracy and there is the pseudo-religious posturing of so-called “civil religion.” Unless and until the majority of the public is persuaded that the Bible in its entirety is the infallible, inerrant Word of God, any attempts to masquerade as “one nation under God” will remain farcical and unproductive.

Bonhoeffer on Listening

2010-10-27T15:41:00.001-06:00

"The first service one owes to others in community involves listening to them. Just as our love for God begins with listening to God's Word, the beginning of love for other Christians is learning to listen to them …. Christians who can no longer listen to one another will soon no longer be listening to God either; they will always be talking even in the presence of God. The death of the spiritual life starts here, and in the end there is nothing left but empty spiritual chatter and clerical condescension which chokes on pious words." (Life Together)

Hymns, Psalms and Spiritual Songs: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly

2010-09-22T18:56:00.012-06:00

I think American evangelical church culture is beginning to solve the so-called "worship wars" between older (though by no means ancient) "hymns" and more recently composed "praise-and-worship songs." But we still have a long way to go.

On the one hand, a growing number of longstanding (historically "traditional") congregations are incorporating contemporary songs in their corporate worship. Some opt for multiple services offering multiple styles or genres of music (and perhaps differing dress codes). Many have attempted (some successfully, others not so much) some variety of blending between old and new forms of worship.

I myself have seen effective and ineffective attempts at everything from traditional (in a variety of traditions) to full-blown contemporary, and everything in between. And one thing I have noticed, in particular, is that effectively leading congregational worship requires more than deciphering and employing a particular stylistic formula or template. Rather, it requires tremendous pastoral wisdom and leadership, a dedication to excellence in all aspects of congregational worship, and the skill to carry them out. Many churches, unfortunately, lack one or more of these critical areas, and therefore are struggling to make their times of corporate worship genuinely worshipful.

Let me speak for a moment on one particular issue that has not, in my opinion, received enough attention from modern, evangelical American pastors and worship leaders: song writing and song selection. This crucial issue is often the source of much disagreement (and much poor judgment) within churches. Mark Moring, editor for Christianity Today's Entertainment section, expresses a sentiment common among critics of "contemporary worship" when he refers to "the power of hymns vs. the relative mediocrity of most of today's modern worship and praise choruses." He states this in such a way as to suggest that the genre of hymn is inherently superior to the genre of "worship and praise choruses" (which, of course, is a misnomer, since very few modern praise-and-worship songs consist solely of choruses!). But the apostle Paul validates a variety of genres when he exhorts the first-century Ephesian (5:19) and Colossian (3:16) believers to sing to one another and to God "psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs"—in other words, all sorts of songs that are intended to exalt God and edify the Church. The issue is not genre, but effect.

Suppose that Moring was not suggesting that hymns are intrinsically superior to other types of "spiritual songs," but that the storehouse of hymns handed down for generations are in reality superior to most of the songs that have been written over the past two or three decades. He may very well be right about that. And if he is right, then we need to address the issue head-on.

Even as a "modern" person in my late 20s, I share Moring's lament of the state of contemporary worship song writing and his gratitude for good hymnody. The Church has been blessed by many wonderful songs written in recent years. But we have also been cursed by a greater proliferation of mediocre-to-downright-lousy modern songs. I suspect that the commercialization of "worship music" plays a significant role in this. I suspect also that theological drift, widespread biblical illiteracy, and a general decline in "churchmanship" among the young have made substantial contributions. But I am encouraged by the work of folks like Keith & Kristen Getty, Stuart Townend, and Sovereign Grace Ministries—writers of "contemporary hymns"—as well as artists who are reclaiming and updating historic hymns (this album is exemplary, in my opinion). Modern praise-and-worship song writers have much to learn from these modern hymnodists as well as the great ones of old.

What have they to learn? In short: patience, thorough acquaintance with Scripture, theological thought, deep prayer, historical awareness, and artistry. Good songs, whatever genre, are not formed in the studio through slick production, but are crafted with care by diligent, biblically saturated, God entranced, spiritually sensitive, artistically gifted saints of God.

A number of factors make a great worship song or hymn. First, it must be biblically sound and theologically rich. It must teach biblical truth as well as voice our response to that truth. Many modern worship songs lean way too far in the response direction. Second, it must be well-written lyrically. It must be thoughtful, creative, and original while testifying to eternal truth. Far too many modern worship songs are simply strings of cliches and add nothing to our repository of church songs. Third, it must be singable by a congregation, not simply by a solo artist. I find that many songs that I find very worshipful personally or in a conference (read: concert) setting do not work well in a multigenerational congregation, and so I try to reserve them for my personal worship times or specific, "niche-focused" events. There are probably more elements to a good worship song that I've omitted, but if we work on these three we will make substantial headway in the quality of modern worship songwriting.

We need to get past the debate between hymns and modern praise-and-worship songs (and please stop calling the latter "choruses"!) and start working hard to improve the composition of all the songs of the church. "Sing to the Lord a new song" the psalmist tells us (Pss 33:3; 96:1; 98:1)! We must continue to write church music, not only for our generation, but for generations to come—songs of enduring quality, in the footsteps of the great hymn-writers of the past. In order to do this, we've got to overcome our infatuation with newness for newness sake and reacquaint ourselves with the best that the saints of the past have to offer. We have to place God, rather than our feelings, back at the center of our songwriting process. We have to work hard to write well, and not aspire to church song writing unless we are committed to mastering the craft. And as church leaders of various roles, we must ensure that we are using the best available songs from all eras of Christian history, up to the present.

BIG NEWS

2010-09-17T17:32:00.004-06:00

So here it is... the moment for which we've been searching and praying and waiting and trusting God since December... Monday night, the elders of Bethel Church in North Platte, NE decided unanimously to call me as their next Associate Pastor. And Melissa and I agreed with them that this was indeed God's doing!

Lord willing, we'll be moving October 4th and I'll be starting October 11th. We can't wait to see all that God is going to do in, through, in spite of, and around us! All glory, honor and praise be to our Sovereign Creator, King and Savior!

Logos 4 Mac Ship Day Giveaway!

2010-08-20T12:01:00.003-06:00

Hey everyone,

Logos Bible Software just pre-released the full Mac version of its software. Get big savings by pre-ordering now. I'm delighted with the current Beta version and can't wait for the full version release in October!

On top of that, enter the "Logos 4 Mac Ship Day Giveaway" today for a chance to win an iMac, Macbook Pro, iPad, iPod, Apple gift card, Logos gift card or any number of other great prizes!

God bless!

Matt

Legislating Communities of Kindness: a Lesson for the Church

2010-07-26T08:02:00.007-06:00

A NYTimes article I read this morning gave me a good lift onto a soapbox of special concern to me. The article addresses the issue of reducing the prevalence of bullying in schools, evaluating in particular the recent anti-bullying legislation passed in Massachusetts. But bullying is not my soapbox. Consider this quote:

"To the extent that it underlines the importance of the problem and demands that schools figure out how to address it, it is a move in the right direction. But legislation alone can’t create kinder communities or teach children how to get along. That will take a much deeper rethinking of what schools should do for their students."

The principle here is that "legislation alone cannot __________." It is, as they said, always "a move in the right direction." It may produce some measurable results, but it will never solve the problem in substantial measure. Legislation has its place. But the lesson for us is that it is never sufficient, and in some cases, it may even impede progress.

But what about my soapbox?

Far too many churches, including many (most?) of the largest and most influential, have the mindset that a particular program or ministry (the church's version of legislation) is going to produce substantial results in the area targeted. One of the easiest to pick on is the "discipleship program/ministry." Discipleship is what the church, the whole church, every aspect of the church, is called to produce. Simply legislating a ministry by that name has the unintended consequence of giving the impression that discipleship is what happens "over there." Perhaps simply a name change is in order. I suspect that churches who designate significant funds to a "discipleship program" really do take discipleship seriously at a certain level. They've put their money where their mouth is. But they betray an ignorance of what discipleship truly entails, and what produces it, when they do this. Because discipleship is a whole-community activity.

And so is everything else! It will take more than a "worship ministry" to facilitate seven-day-a-week worshipers. More than an "evangelism ministry" to produce evangelists and effective evangelism. More than an "apologetics ministry" to produce good apologists. More than a "mercy ministry" to embody the kind of compassion Jesus displays and desires. More than a small groups ministry to facilitate the kind of "body life" that one would expect of a church that embraces the Bible as its rule of faith and practice.

All of these "legislations" are "moves in the right direction." I don't (necessarily) suggest eliminating them—unless they prove to be an obstacle to a holistic embrace of _________ for your particular church. My charge to us: let us not stop at legislation and think we've done our job. And let us not give ourselves and others the impression that this or that aspect of ministry is what happens "over there" in the one by that title. True, biblical church, incarnated in 21st century [you name the place], "will take a much deeper rethinking" of what church is and how we can be more holistically faithful to our mission.

You Are What You Eat

2010-07-22T08:38:00.007-06:00

A few weeks ago I preached a sermon entitled, "Eat the Word." The premise of the message was that God's Word is food for our souls—it is the necessary nourishment without which we will starve and wither. Not because it contains our "marching orders," but because it displays our Lord, Savior, and God. It sets before us a banquet that is infinitely beyond the most lavish feast set before a king in all the history of the world.

This morning I read from Jeremiah 6, where God is lamenting Israel and Judah's persistent apostasy—whoredom He calls it. Although God had acted as an exemplary husband toward them in every manner, they had chased the gods of the nations around them instead, indulging themselves in all manner of lewdness. As I meditated on this, realizing soberly how prone I myself am to wander after the false gods of this world, another Scripture passage came to mind: Psalm 115:4-8. In v. 4 the psalmist says, "Their idols are silver and gold, the work of human hands." Then in v. 8 he says, "Those who make them become like them; so do all who trust in them." In other words, we become what we worship.

John Piper (following Jonathan Edwards and C. S. Lewis) has expended no little amount of paper and ink to the thesis that the climax of the worship of God is the satisfaction of our souls in Him. If he is right, and I believe he is, then the inverse is also true: feasting on things other than God equals idol worship, and we become what we eat. That leaves us with the question, On what am I feasting? From where do I derive delight? If I cannot delight in God through x, y, or z, then I must cease partaking of them. If any created thing be not a mirror that shows me a reflection of the Divine, then it is to be abhorred and utterly forsaken. "Abhor what is evil; hold fast to what is good," the apostle Paul says in Romans 12:9.

May we indulge our souls on God alone, for He alone is the infinite source of pure delight. In so doing, we shall be conformed ever more into His likeness—to the praise of His infinite glory.

Has the Quest for the "Historical Jesus" Run Its Course?

2010-04-09T15:41:00.005-06:00

Scot McKnight believes so. N. T. Wright, Craig Keener, and Darrell Bock disagree.

My two cents: McKnight makes some very good points (especially debunking the "first wave" of historical Jesus scholarship), which are not lost on the follow-up commentators. But they soundly criticize his pronouncement of "the end" of historical Jesus scholarship.

All articles are well worth the read, for the vital importance of the topic and the quality of dialogue on it.
-------------------------------
On historical Jesus study, I personally recommend The Historical Reliability of the Gospels by Craig L. Blomberg.

Is Inhumanity Necessary for War?

2010-04-08T09:07:00.015-06:00

I am, above all, a Christian—one who has been made one with Christ, a member of His family by grace through faith, and subsequently and consequently a devout follower of Christ. The Bible says that my citizenship is in heaven. But as long as I'm on earth, I'm also a citizen here. This dual citizenship poses many dilemmas for the Christian, not least of which is whether and to what extent Christians may be involved in war.

This is not the time or place for an all out discussion of the legitimacy of war, generally speaking, from a Christian perspective. Let's assume for the sake of argument that, at face value, it is a legitimate tool of justice and order, and hence the good of mankind as a whole, in a fallen world. If so, there must be a way to engage in the killing of human beings while also remaining obedient to the Way of Jesus expressed in such commands as "love one another" and "love your enemies."

Something I read this morning caused me to question whether or not this is possible in so-called "modern civilization." No doubt most of you have heard of, if not viewed, the video of a U. S. Army helicopter gunning down innocent civilians as well as American reporters in Baghdad in 2007. This New York Times article highlights a deeply troubling angle on modern warfare.

Consider these quotes from the article:

"The soldiers joked, chuckled and jeered as they shot people in the street"
"'Look at those dead bastards,' one said. 'Nice,' another responded."
"fighters cannot do their jobs without creating psychological distance from the enemy"
"You don’t want combat soldiers to be foolish or to jump the gun, but their job is to destroy the enemy, and one way they’re able to do that is to see it as a game, so that the people don’t seem real"
"Military training is fundamentally an exercise in overcoming a fear of killing another human"

In other words, according to psychologists and the military trainers who employ their insights, desensitizing soldiers to the humanity of "the other" is a vital part of training for war. This should give us, at the very least, pause—especially Christians. How is this compatible with Christian ethics? Answer: It isn't. If we are going to conduct war ethically (if that's even possible), then we'd better figure out a way to do it in a way that honors those we are killing as beings created in God's image and loved by Him. War is a horrible thing. Soldiers mustn't be calloused to the gravity of what is taking place. Maybe instead of desensitizing them and dehumanizing "the other," we should rethink what is indeed humane. May God raise up Christians in the military who will refuse to comply with inhumanity and will reform combat training accordingly.

Lessons from Piper Sabbatical

2010-03-30T14:57:00.011-06:00

Collin Hansen's excellent article, "The Toll of Our Toiling," is a must read for every pastor, if not every Christian. He reflects on pastor John Piper's recent announcement that he will take an eight-month sabbatical beginning this May. In short, Dr. Piper and those he loves are suffering the fallout of overwork. Hansen compares Dr. Piper's situation to that of evangelical giants Billy Graham and Carl Henry, but for most in pastoral ministry, identification with this phenomenon is not difficult. If not guilty of overwork, they are constantly subject to the temptation. (Of course, there are those whose apathy manifests itself in laziness, but that's the opposite crest of the pendulum.)

Hansen is wise to point out that "local church ministry is hardly the only vocation prone to overwork. Teachers, farmers, doctors, lawyers, small business owners, and middle managers [and might I add execs?] alike feel the strains of labor that threaten family and spiritual life." At the very least, there is a dual strain caused by overwork: damage to self and damage to family. Such a pattern reveals who our true lord is—those whose demands usurp God's gift of rest.

Overwork proves one's true theology. Do we really believe that God's accomplishment of His purposes is dependent on our hyper-exertion? As Hansen comments, "To be sure, we're called to toil for Christ, 'struggling with all his energy that he powerfully works' within us (Col. 1:29)." But at the same time we must ask, "Does our work truly point others to the power of Christ? If not, it may draw attention to the one who plants and waters, not the God who gives the growth (1 Cor 3:7)."

Another line in the article is ironic: "Who has time to read the Bible, pray, listen to our friends, and care for our children when there's kingdom work to be done?" And all of the above would not qualify as kingdom work? I have contended before that people have a God-given hierarchy of priorities. For all husbands, #1 is their wife. For all husbands who are fathers, #2 is their children. Everyone and everything else falls somewhere behind or beneath those. Ministry to others that causes one to neglect prior callings/responsibilities is disobedience. In the words of Charles Spurgeon, "It is ill to offer God one duty stained with the blood of another."

As I prepare to enter full-time vocational ministry, I am especially sensitive to this issue. Will I submit to a workload that forces me to abdicate my obligations to my wife and kids and severs me from the Vine from whom alone I draw life? Pray that I will not and I pray that you will not, and that if you have been, you will repent.

Do I covet the influence of men like Billy Graham? Not if such influence came at the expense he and men like him have paid. I will not forsake my calling to love my wife and children even for the salvation of the whole world. Yet if I do love them as I am called to, my ministry to others will be all the more fruitful and ultimately God-glorifying.

What Does a "Biblical Family" Look Like?

2010-03-23T12:51:00.012-06:00

Scot McKnight has posted a provocative piece (actually, reposted some thoughts from Scottish theologian Stephen Holmes) regarding the possibility (impossibility?) of defining what constitutes a "biblical" family.

I left something resembling the following response to his post in the comment section, but felt like reposting it here, because it is such an important topic. I have edited and expanded it so that it can stand on its own as a post. I'm interested in your thoughts on the subject.
-----------------------

In spite of the complexities Holmes cites, defining what constitutes a "biblical" family is not as difficult as it seems. It simply requires two tasks: (1) an understanding of the relevant scriptures themselves and (2) contextualization for any given time, place, and culture. The problem comes when we try to establish one model as normative of the actual structure of "the family." As Holmes points out, throughout Scripture, and in numerous societies throughout history, family has taken many different, legitimate forms, ranging from the contemporary, Western nuclear family model (i.e., father, mother, and children) to the extended family model, where grandparents, parents, children, other relatives, and in some cases, servants/hired hands, all live together under the same roof.

Holmes (and McKnight, it seems) is less than critical of certain filial arrangements, such as polygamy and slavery, toward which he sees Scripture as maintaining an accommodating or (at best) ambivalent stance. However, if one understands the ways in which biblical narrative teaches ethics, it is evident that Scripture consistently portrays polygamy and slavery (as we understand it) as immoral. These issues aside, Scripture offers much latitude as to the forms of family that may legitimately be considered "biblical."

To have a "biblical family" simply means to live out family life that is faithful to the principles and priorities of Scripture. The challenges and opportunities of every time and place will vary, and so must the shape of the family change accordingly. In any given time, place, and culture, our legitimate options are limited by a myriad of economic realities, in addition to the obvious biological ones (childbearing and nursing).

One thing that is certain is that it is immoral to pursue family life in a way that is destructive, or even neglectful, to children, and there is a preponderance of evidence for the types of environments in which children thrive and suffer. At the very least, they need personal nurture, not TV babysitting or (in most cases) daycare. They need lots of personal attention, especially in their earliest years, precisely when most parents are most strapped for time. Whether it's parents, grandparents, or close friends, what matters is that they receive holistic, personal nurture (spiritual, physical, emotional, developmental). The community of faith needs to step up and embrace their calling to nurture children collectively when the family cannot do it on their own, whether by exchanging childcare responsibilities with one another or by living in a mutually supportive way more generally.

One of the biggest problems I see in contemporary, Western models of family life is the trading of economic, vocational, and even recreational priorities for the priority of the nurture of children. We have exchanged economic suffering for even greater forms of suffering, the majority of which are spiritual, psychological, and social.

One of the values that makes the predominant contemporary, Western, (sub)urban model of family (i.e., nuclear family with both parents pursuing careers and attaining the material and opportunistic demands of Western society) possible is the value of the free and autonomous individual. But such autonomy is at odds with all biblical conceptions of family. The ideal of the family where each person pursues his or her own interests and goals while still maintaining proper commitment to the family is a myth. From every family member there has to be sacrifice, an acceptance of less than total fulfillment of one's vocational and economic potential.

So how does one determine what, in a given time, place, and culture, are biblically legitimate forms of family?

Understand the universal, transcultural principles of Scripture which are applicable to family life.
Take inventory of the social, cultural, and economic realities of one's own society (including society at large as well as one's own socio-economic situation), and the challenges and opportunities they present.
Outline the various possible forms that family might take in such a society, weighing each in light of the above principles.
Choose what form is best for your family, neglecting none of the above principles.
Be willing to modify your family arrangements when situations change, while remaining consistent with the above principles.
Finally, do not neglect prayer or seeking advise from wise counselors, especially your pastors. But test their advice by the truth of God's Word.

If we follow these guidelines, we will remain faithful to God's intentions for family, whatever the societal context.

As per the nature of blogging (over against peer-reviewed, published writing), the above thoughts are pretty sloppy. How might you correct, add to, or nuance what I've written here?

What Is the Gospel?

2010-02-05T22:31:00.003-06:00

James MacDonald and Andreas Köstenberger discuss the irreducible essence of the gospel on their blogs.

Can a Follower of Jesus Be a Devout Muslim?

2010-02-05T20:06:00.008-06:00

Following Jesus from The Global Conversation on Vimeo.

Good book on this subject: Timothy George, Is the Father of Jesus the God of Muhammed? (P. S. Whoever it was I lent this to a couple years ago, if you're out there somewhere, reading this post, I look forward to having it back!) :-)

2010 Evangelical Missiology Conference Is Just Weeks Away!

2010-02-05T10:55:00.002-06:00

The 2010 Missiology Conference sponsored by the Evangelical Missiology Society will be held at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School on February 27, 2010.

Conference presenters will include: Scott Moreau, Robert Priest, Harold Netland, James Plueddemann, Peter Cha, and many other fine scholars. A Spanish-speaking track will be offered alongside the English sessions.

View the conference page at EMS or TEDS, and the schedule here.

It's right around the corner, so register soon if you haven't already.

Clarke Forsythe on Overturning Roe v. Wade

2010-01-22T11:30:00.005-06:00

This is some of the most thoughtful discussion on Roe v. Wade that I've ever read: Justin Taylor's interview of Clarke Forsythe, author of Politics for the Greatest Good: The Case for Prudence in the Public Square (IVP, 2009). I highly commend the interview and intend on buying the book.

WARNING: No emotionalized spin here. If nuance and rigor of study are what you're after, you'll be pleased.

Fellow Pro-Lifers: Add Some Bite to Your Bark

2010-01-20T22:59:00.002-06:00

Save babies: support Heartbeat International and similar organizations to get Pregnancy Care Centers where they are most needed.

Driscoll and MacDonald Return from Haiti Trip—Shocked and Ready to Fight

2010-01-20T22:36:00.005-06:00

...for the rebuilding of Haitian churches.

But how will they respond to the horrific injustices they witnessed first-hand there? Kids murdered for sport and sold into sex slavery, right before their eyes.

USAToday journalist Cathy Lynn Grossman has the story here.

ChurchesHelpingChurches: Who will help the church in Haiti? We must.

But I pray that Rev. Mark and Pastor James use their enormous platforms to do more in the days, weeks, months, and years to come. To whom much is given, much is required.

The American Church needs to be aware of what's happening in Haiti, especially given America's responsibility for much of the Haitian plight before the quake. May these two influential pastors lead their congregations, their listeners and their fans to greater civil responsibility as Micah 6:8 people.

Personal and Family Devotional Resources

2010-01-20T22:27:00.003-06:00

James Grant has compiled an excellent list of resources for personal and family devotions, with a brief description of each. I highly recommend printing this out!

He is also offering six of these to the winner of a drawing among all those who sign his email list. (Please don't sign up or it will decrease my odds!)

iPhone iNsights from Andy Naselli

2010-01-20T21:55:00.005-06:00

I don't have an iPhone yet, but I'll be getting one as soon as I can afford a data plan (i.e., once I become employed!). Thanks to Andy Naselli for his tips to new and prospective iPhone users like myself.

[OK, so why am I posting this? Mostly for selfish reasons... so the link's readily accessible when I need it! But if it benefits any of you—great!]

Help the Church in Haiti

2010-01-17T14:35:00.020-06:00

[UPDATED]

James MacDonald and Mark Driscoll are teaming up on an initiative to help the Church in Haiti. They fly out tomorrow to see the plight of the Church there firsthand, to take video footage to bring back to the States in order to mobilize the Church here to help.

They are also coordinating an effort to meet the material needs of Haitian churches through the faithful giving of those like us who have been blessed precisely so that we can be a blessing in times like these.

Will you help the church in Haiti?

Visit ChurchesHelpingChurches.com now.

Go there. Give. Make a difference.

[UPDATE: Read the story on the Mars Hill blog. Also contains a list of specific prayer requests as Mark and James make the trip.]

James MacDonald: The Great Tribulation is Very Near

2010-01-17T14:07:00.006-06:00

The first word that comes to mind when I think about our pastor, James MacDonald's preaching is BOLD. But his sermon this weekend is the boldest I've heard in my three years at Harvest. The tone was the same as usual. It's the content that was so bold. While he's always unapologetic about the truth and authority of the Word, this takes things to a whole 'nother level. In short, he said he believes that we are now living in the 7-year period that immediately precedes the return of Christ. Because he takes a mid-tribulation view, he doesn't think we're in the midst of the "Great Tribulation," but rather the roughly 3-and-a-half-year period of "great sorrows." What that means is, in his heart he believes Christ is coming back less than 7 years from now.

To be frank, I was completely stunned when I heard this, and I'm still a bit weak in the knees about it. James is sticking his neck out big time on this one. I seriously do not think it has anything to do with what he had for lunch Thursday.

Do I think he's right? I don't know. He may be right. And what if he is? How would it affect your life if you knew Christ was coming back in less than 7 years? The truth is, He could come at any moment. Are you ready?

Listen to his sermon here, while it lasts. It will be up through the end of this week.

On Biblical Literacy

2010-01-17T00:29:00.003-06:00

Outstanding piece by David Nienhuis on the issue of biblical (il)literacy in contemporary America. It's not what you'd expect, but it's something you ought to read. Justin Taylor has posted some key excerpts here.

No, I mean it, this is a must read.

But you don't have to take my word for it...

Letter from an Agnostic

2010-01-16T23:49:00.003-06:00

iMonk has posted a letter from an agnostic which is worth reading, chewing on, and if possible, digesting. People like this are the reason God called me to seminary. I'm still not sure I how I would help him out of the conundrum, at least coming at it from a detached, mind-on-mind level. But even on the friend-to-friend level, I've had a friend who was a skeptical believer... then slipped into full-blown agnosticism. Couldn't "save" him.

Does this speak to the indispensable place of the Christian community in ministering to souls like these? Perhaps one solo witness isn't enough? Perhaps Christ reveals Himself uniquely in the Body?

Man, if they could only get to the place where they know Jesus is their only hope... and then pray to Him as if He really is!

My heart breaks for these people, because I've been there... more often that I'd like to admit.

Bob Kauflin on the Origination of Sovereign Grace Songs

2010-01-15T14:41:00.006-06:00

As a worship leader who has struggled with songwriting (any more of you out there who are willing to admit it?), I am thankful to Bob Kauflin for the overview of the Sovereign Grace songwriting process that he posted today on his blog. Obviously, the fewer than 800 words he uses to describe this process comes nowhere close to reflecting the amount of experience, thought, (prayer?,) and effort expended in developing their methodology. There are so many weighty chunks of wisdom packed in there that they're worth bearing out. Some of the elements that stood out to me include:

Teamwork. These are not individual, rock star lead worshipers with big record deals to live up to (which, IMO, has often made the quality of songs suffer over time), but a group of gifted individuals who know they can do better together than by themselves.
Humility. Any artist of any type knows how personal one's artwork is, be it a song, poem, painting, sculpture, or dance routine. But every artist worth her weight in salt values the critiques of others, especially others who excel in the same field.
Excellence. To some (no doubt justified in certain cases), excellence is a by-word for slick, over-produced professionalism that strips the art of its authenticity and originality, and hence its value (as art). But putting one's best into something—or collaborating when one knows his best could be better with the help of others—is something to be admired. Excellence includes thoughtfulness, care, time, energy, skill, and perseverance. Is individual achievement to be celebrated? Absolutely. But at the expense of what could be produced collaboratively with a better result? Probably not.
Intentionality. These folks aren't out to come up with songs and albums that are going to go main stream and make big bucks. They aren't going to have posters of themselves hanging on the insides of teenage lockers. Rather, they are concerned with all the things that make a quality worship song: theological substance, literary mastery, singability, experiential appropriateness, longevity. And they are concerned with these qualities because they have a profound effect on those who will be listening to and singing along with them—effects on discipleship, effects on creativity, perhaps even effects on the generational composition and integration of congregations (how many more "tion" words can I possibly string together?).

Anyhow, if you are a pastor, worship leader, or someone else involved in the corporate worship ministry/committee of your church, this piece is definitely worth bookmarking or printing out for future reference. Attending a Sovereign Grace worship workshop might not be a bad idea either. Let's hope their commitments and methodology spread to an increasing number of congregations.

Thoughts on Christianity and Liberalism from 9Marks

2010-01-14T21:05:00.005-06:00

Some provocative (and in some cases, good) reads over at 9Marks e-journal, all devoted to the topic of so-called liberal Christianity. Thanks to Justin Taylor for the tip off. Honestly, I've never read 9Marks, but I am a big fan of Mark Dever's book, The Deliberate Church.

What do you think of this article, "How to Become a Liberal Without Attending Harvard Divinity School"? Naturally, those who wear the L-term as a badge of honor will just laugh. But those who share J. Gresham Machen's assessment that classical Protestant liberalism is an entirely different religion than the Christianity of Jesus, the apostles, and all those throughout history who have accepted the New Testament (along with the Old) as divine Scripture will be less comfortable as they see glimpses of themselves in his reflections.

This one by Carl Trueman hits very close to home for me. It holds both an admonition and some encouragement. He has reminded me that my calling to provide intellectually faithful biblical teaching and leadership in the local church is more strategic (and realistic) than devoting my life to earning enough respect from non-Christian scholars of religion that I might be salt, light, and a voice of informed reason in a secular university setting some day in the distant future.

Graduation, and Waiting on the Lord

2010-01-11T00:07:00.006-06:00

That's right, I graduated with my Master of Divinity from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School on December 18th. Finally, I have earned the privilege of exhausting the limits of the knowledge of God! HA!!!

It's been an incredible, yet exhausting, journey. And though my wife once confessed to regretting the decision to enter into it because of the unprecedented strain it put on our family at times, the last three years have also been a time of tremendous maturing as a family and in our respective roles within it. We just have to figure out how to have fun together again, and we'll be on our way to the American Dream. (OK, not quite, but you get the idea!)

At the graduation reception, one of the finest profs (IMO) at Trinity (of course, most all of them are outstanding) asked where and to what I was headed next—a predictable question that I answer almost daily. "Still waiting for the Lord to show me," I answered. "You know," he said, "you'd be surprised how common that response is. I hear it all the time. It was my experience, and the Lord had a special purpose for it. I know He does for you as well."

It's encouraging to know that your situation is not unique, that nothing's wrong with you, and to be reminded that God's timing is always right. The sermon preached by our "Assistant Senior Pastor" (I just think that's such a funny title) this morning provided a much-needed reminder that God's mode of answering our prayers is exactly right. He knows exactly what we need, and always provides it when we persist in asking. Sometimes He provides it instantly; other times, it takes a while. What admonished, and then encouraged, me was the insight that God has very specific purposes for these waiting periods. Perhaps we've been asking with wrong motives and He's waiting until we've had an attitude adjustment before He gives it to us. Perhaps there are other matters that need taken care of before we're ready to receive it. The Lord knows, and He's waiting for exactly the right moment to meet the need. In that sense, He uses our prayers as opportunities to meet multiple needs!

Is that just like God, or what? So far from the myth of the stingy, killjoy God, which Jesus verily refutes. Should I be surprised at this? Is it not written all over the pages of Scripture? Luke 11? Matthew 6? We are free to not worry, and that is no small blessing! In the midst of a recession like the present one, I ought to be worried about the fact that I have a wife, daughter, and newborn son to feed, clothe, and shelter, yet am unemployed. But I'm not. Oh, I'm concerned in that I'm taking responsibility to pursue opportunities for employment to the best of my ability. But in the midst of waiting for God to fling open the door to the path He wants us to take next, I have the joy of knowing and serving the God of the universe, who knows our needs and has already made provision in His supreme foreknowledge for them. That, and that alone, brings comfort today and hope for tomorrow.

Logos Premium Bible Giveaway—Don't Miss Out!

2009-11-21T01:04:00.005-06:00

Logos, producers of the premiere Bible software (which, by the way just came out with a new and substantially improved version), are in the midst of a massive promotion in which they will be giving away 72 "ultra premium" and rare Bibles worth a total $11,500 over the next six months. All you have to do is spread the word! You can enter up to five times per month. Don't miss this wonderful opportunity!

Here's their promo blurb:

Logos Bible Software is celebrating the launch of their new online Bible by giving away 72 ultra-premium print Bibles at a rate of 12 per month for six months. The Bible giveaway is being held at Bible.Logos.com and you can get up to five different entries each month! After you enter, be sure to check out Logos and see how it can revolutionize your Bible study.

U. S. Protestants and Catholics Unite on Ethical Policy

2009-11-20T13:15:00.005-06:00

The NY Times has covered an encouraging development in the sphere of religion and politics. They write,

"145 evangelical, Roman Catholic and Orthodox Christian leaders have signed a declaration saying they will not cooperate with laws that they say could be used to compel their institutions to participate in abortions, or to bless or in any way recognize same-sex couples."

The pledge entitled, "Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience" (October 20, 2009, reads,

"We pledge to each other, and to our fellow believers, that no power on earth, be it cultural or political, will intimidate us into silence or acquiescence."

Chuck Colson's comments regarding the "big three" issues—abortion, stem-cell research, and gay marriage—are critical to the discussion:

"We argue that there is a hierarchy of issues. A lot of the younger evangelicals say they're all alike. We're hoping to educate them that these are the three most important issues."

I have been arguing this for years, but rarely is it articulated in discussions among Christians of differing opinions on the issues at hand. (For a defense of this, see my "Procedure for Ethical Political Decision-Making").

Will the University of Nebraska Place Human Dignity above Knowledge?

2009-11-20T12:41:00.006-06:00

The University of Nebraska is debating whether to ban experimentation on human embryos, a move that is earning them fierce criticism on the part of some, and high praises from others.

This piece of news is no less than historic.

An American institution of higher education is considering that human dignity may just be the one thing more important than the otherwise unbridled pursuit of knowledge. In secular academia today, this pursuit is the only "self evident truth" and is the absolute, unyielding criteria for an educational institution to be truly "academic." Of course, to be truly academic is not the same as being purely academic. Unfortunately, secular academia has for many decades equated the two, insisting that "ideology" of any sort (including morality and ethics) is at odds with the purposes of higher education.

Let me be clear: ideology is most certainly a retardant to inquiry. It places limits on our methods, especially on legal and ethical grounds. U.S. law does not permit, for example, involuntary experimentation on humans (with the exception of those in their embryonic stage of development, thanks to President Obama). The question is, Are the ideals of pagan academics compatible with the ideals on which civilized society are built, namely, the dignity of the individual person?

This issue is a microcosm of one of the basic tensions intentionally built into the U. S. Rule of Law: the tension of freedom and ethics, one ethic of which is justice. Far too many Americans forget that America is not simply the land of the "free." It is also the land of the just. For one person's freedom is another person's bondage. Freedom has limits, because the unrestrained expression of our whims and impulses is anarchy, resulting in an infinite potentiality of terror. No, America is not the land of unrestrained, limitless freedom. And insofar as institutions of higher learning insist on casting off all restraint on their pursuit of knowledge they are at odds with the spirit—and Constitution—of America.

Bob Hyatt on Honest to God Preaching

2009-11-19T20:30:00.003-06:00

I want to give a firm nod and a hearty "Amen!" to Bob for his Ur article, "Preaching for the Nod." It's scary how pervasive this actually is among preachers, at least in my experience.

Anti-Intellectualism, Anti-Clericalism, and the Irony of Popular Missiologists

2009-11-19T16:44:00.010-06:00

I may be one of the few missional-incarnational, non-Reformed, Baptist(ic) evangelicals who has not continued in the vein of anti-intellectual, anti-clerical, hyper-democratized, low church, revivalist Christianity that has characterized the last century and a half of American church practice. At least that's how it feels most often in popular discussions of church and mission in the Western world today. Unfortunately, the cynicism regarding the need for, even usefulness of, biblically-theologically trained pastors is growing among both "church growth" and "missional" leaders, for a number of reasons.

One of the more popular mantras heard through the latest missional church seminars, blogs, and books is this idea that effective ministry does not require "experts," only people with a basic understanding of the gospel and a willingness to live out what they understand of it. In the recent words of one prominent church consultant, this is the critical move from "Superman to every man." Speakers and authors go on ad nauseam about how crucial it is to wean ourselves from the "experts" so that "the church" will take responsibility for ministry. In their view, these experts—and/or those who hire them as their pastors—are stumbling blocks to the mission of the church. Too much ministry is consolidated into the "hands" of one person, they say, promoting non-discipleship.

I find this critique both disingenuous and ignorant of the facts of the matter. If "experts" (let's just agree that this is a rhetorically loaded label that I am co-opting for the sake of simplicity) are unnecessary for, not to mention in the way of, missional ministry, what does that say about those so-called authorities on the missional church who busy themselves writing, speaking, and consulting for church leaders on the subject? They obviously fancy their expertise as indispensable to the mission of the church; otherwise there would be nothing to fuss about (and to pay high consultant fees for). Explicitly, they claim that "professional ministers" and "ministry professionals" of various sorts are counterproductive to the mission of the church, but implicitly they deny this claim.

Moreover, their critique has no teeth, because it is a straw man. First of all, the devaluation of exegetically trained church leadership (call them whatever you want) is the majority view in Western, low church Protestantism, so at best they are preaching to the choir. More importantly, however, they make a serious category error when equating an insistence upon exegetical training for pastors with a passive or "spectator" form of congregational ministry.

The apostle Paul teaches that there is one Body, but many parts, none of which is dispensable (1 Cor 12). One of the parts is that of the teaching-preaching elder/pastor/overseer/bishop (Scripture uses these terms synonymously) who is a competent minister of the Word (i.e., able to know what the text says, to understand to a reasonable extent what it means, to discern how it should be fleshed out among the church, and to justify belief in it as the Word of God). Ministry for him looks different than ministry for the other members of the Body. His role is to "equip the saints for the work of ministry" (Eph 4:11-14), including the task just described, and not every believer has the calling, character, and competencies required for this role.

A close friend of mine has often said, "I see pastors as 1 in 10 rather than 1 in 100." While there is nothing wrong with this in principle, in the economy of real life, given the qualifications detailed above, it is simply unrealistic. Is this cause for concern? Not really. It is only problematic when we equate the specific calling of the pastor with the sum total of the ministry of the church, which is the real issue that the best of the missional church movement seeks to address.

A Napkin-Sized Gospel?

2009-11-19T13:57:00.005-06:00

After hearing the hype, and seeking to put some flesh on the bones of my convictions regarding the missional nature of the church, I decided to read Reggie McNeal's Missional Renaissance. Having recently read Neil Cole's Organic Church, I noticed some common assumptions between the two. One that stood out to me was the notion that one of the keys to a rapid multiplication movement (disciples—>small groups—>churches) is having a message that can be communicated in 30 seconds or less or written (presumably in large print) on a napkin. In other words, if the church is to replay the "spontaneous expansion" of the early church in the 21st century, we need to bear a napkin-sized gospel.

In the era of "sticky" mission, vision, and core value statements, this is common sense. But I can't help but believe that it is a capitulation to contemporary Western culture. Something I read today in Herman Ridderbos' Redemptive History and the New Testament Scriptures reminded me of this fact. He comments,

For the communication and transmission of what was seen and heard in the fullness of time, Christ established a formal authority structure to be the source and standard for all future preaching of the gospel. . . . Because [the apostles] not only received revelation but were also the bearers and organs of revelation, their primary and most important task was to function as the foundation of the church. To that revelation Christ binds His church for all time; upon it He founds and builds His church. (13)

Ask yourself this question: Did Jesus, the apostles, and the leaders of the early church preach a napkin-sized gospel? Is this indeed how the Christian faith spread in those early glory years? Was the dissemination of a minimalistic theology the modus operandi of Christ and the apostles in their mission to the world? Should it be ours? What are the implications?

Logos 4 Is Here!

2009-11-17T01:51:00.005-06:00

Info on Logos Bible Software, version 4 here.

Before you get too excited, if you're a Mac user, it's not really here (see Mac version disclaimer). I bought the Alpha version, and after leaving my computer on for 30-some-odd consecutive hours I have discovered that it's virtually useless thus far in its development. The only function available right now, as far as I can tell, is reading your Libronix books.

Some features I'm looking forward to as a Mac user:

Automatic updating - No further need for synchronizing, hunting down updates, and manually downloading them. Your entire database is automatically managed online, among all your computers.
A more user-friendly interface (which is yet to be seen)
Hebrew text in the Exegetical Guide (the most powerful tool for the Bible expositor, IMO)
All the functions (e.g., Power Tools, Smart Tags, Markup, Notes) that PC users enjoyed but Mac users did not
List of 100 New Features

Some features I'm already enjoying:

Updated and expanded commentary sets, especially the New American Commentary and New International Greek Testament Commentary series
Well, that's about it!

My advice: Save your hard earned dollars (it cost me $135 to upgrade from Scholar's Gold 3 to SG4) until they come out with a fully functional version. They're supposed to be updating the program every two weeks, so we'll see how things move along.

New Section Added: My Writings

2009-11-16T23:41:00.007-06:00

Those of you who have the patience and interest to read my longer blog posts will probably appreciate my latest addition to the blog, which you can find in the right sidebar: my "Writings." These include some of the best products (IMO) of my work while at seminary/divinity school. Take a few minutes to browse, and then pass the word on to others you think might benefit from them.

While I'm on the subject, if you appreciate the insights I offer on the intersection of Christianity, culture, and life, please consider promoting my blog among your own social network—be it through Facebook, linking me on your website, and/or word of mouth.

Also, if you have recommendations for improving this blog, I'd welcome them... along with how-to's you're aware of. (There are numerous improvements I'd like to make, but just don't have the time right now for a complete rework. In due time...)

Blogging for the Kingdom,

Matt

Insights on Leadership and Restraint from Michael Hyatt

2009-11-15T00:14:00.002-06:00

I really appreciated two of Thomas Nelson CEO Michael Hyatt's recent blog posts, both of which convicted me.

The first is a call to greater patience and discernment (put those together and you get "restraint" or "self-control") in e-communication scenarios that light our fuse, with some helpful tips.

In the second, he shares some wisdom on distinguishing between "friends, critics, and trolls" and dealing with each group responsibly and respectably.

These posts both encouraged and admonished me. I was encouraged by the fact that he fights some of the same struggles as I do. They appear to be typical of those who are by nature leaders and, as with many character traits, contain both potential assets and liabilities. The rebuke came in the reminders of times I've blown it big time, and not without consequences.

One thing I'd like to know is how others perceive me with regard to the issues addressed in his post. Concerning the second, if you've had debate-like interactions with me online, how would you rate me: friend, critic, or troll? Be honest.

Ed Stetzer's 10 Reasons to Partner in Church Planting

2009-11-14T19:38:00.001-06:00

Summary here. Full article (not much longer) here. Get on the band wagon, but not 'cause Ed told you so. It's an implication of the Great Commission!

John Piper's 9 Ways to Know the Gospel of Christ Is True

2009-11-14T19:35:00.001-06:00

These are definitely worth the quick read. Thanks, John!

Christians, or Christ-Followers?

2009-11-12T08:07:00.017-06:00

Kudos to Jason Byassee for his recent Our of Ur article, "Not a Christian, But a Christ-Follower?" He confronts an issue that's bothered me ever since I first encountered the phenomenon: an increasing shame at being called "Christian," favoring instead the label, "Christ-follower." Close friends of mine have gone this route, despite my feeble attempts to persuade them otherwise. This post is another, more vigorous attempt at that objective.

A few questions are key to this discussion:

What's in a name?
What does the name "Christian" entail?
What, if anything, is lost by going by the label "Christ-follower"?

Let's take these in turn. First, What's in a name? How much does it matter, really, what we call ourselves? A lot, as a matter of fact. Our language both reflects ("externalizes") and shapes ("internalizes") our self conception and the behaviors that follow from this. Famed sociologist of religion Peter Berger established this in his important book, The Sacred Canopy, and his thesis is corroborated throughout sociology and communication theory. As has been shown by Speech Act Theory, words are intended to "do something" and in fact do.

Second, What does the name "Christian" entail, and what does it do? There are two issues involved in this question: (1) the meaning(s) the name has acquired over the nearly 2,000 years of church history, and (2) the potential meaning(s) for the name. Those who have abandoned the name point to the many associations that it has obtained that are irrelevant or often antithetical to the essence of Christianity. Whether it be ethnocentric expressions of the faith or perversions of the faith, people have understandably sought to distance themselves from these negative associations.

However, Byassee makes an important corrective when he observes that this impulse is rooted in pride and results in disunity among the Body of Christ. He notes,

Christianity joins us to a body of other believers. . . . This is especially important to reassert when we are tempted to say we're with the head, but not the other parts of the body. We are tempted to pick and choose our fellows, buffet-style.

Dan Kimball chronicles this phenomenon in his book, They Like Jesus but Not the Church (Zondervan, 2007). The problem with discarding the name "Christian" is that this has been the self-designation of those who comprise the Church of Jesus Christ for virtually the entire duration of its existence, and to abandon the term is to sever ourselves (at least consciously) from them. Listen to his rebuke. The seemingly noble desire to bypass the as-yet-imperfect Bride of Christ in order to establish a direct link to Jesus and the first disciples is arrogant, naive, and counterproductive for the cause of Christ. (I welcome debate on this point, but I hope you consider it humbly and prayerfully.)

Another problem I have with discarding the name "Christian" is that along with the negative connotations it carries to some people, we discard the many theologically rich connotations it has maintained throughout church history. It's the proverbial throwing the baby out with the bath water.

This brings me to the third question: What, if anything, is lost by going by the label "Christ-follower"? Again I would argue, a lot. While the concept of following Christ is infinitely superior to the concept of Christianity as a merely nominal, cultural identity (akin to, say, family heritage, ethnicity, nationality, membership in a social club), it is only half of what it means to be a child of God, a member of the Body of Christ, a Christian. It is the "doing" half. But we are first "something" before we are "doers." We need a self-designation that entails both being and doing aspects of our calling, that is, our identity and our mandate. We are first called into union with Christ, and through Him into union with the universal Body of Christ, the people of God, a "spiritual house," a "holy priesthood" (1 Peter 2:5). Only after that and because of that are we followers of "the Way."

The impulse to disconnect identity from mandate is likely evidence of some other troubling trends, which I believe are related. One of these is an increasing tunnel vision among evangelicals (?) in which they emphasize the Gospels, and particularly the words of Jesus, above virtually all other Scripture. These so-called "Red Letter Christians," which have historically been called "Marcionites" and more recently, "liberal Christians," are embarrassed by certain parts of the Judeo-Christian tradition taught in Scripture, or at least the historic/orthodox understandings of them. The relation of this movement to the "Christ-follower" trend is their common desire to avoid criticism from the world at virtually all costs. This trend is also related to a phenomenon common to Revivalist Protestant Christianity (see Collin Hansen and John Woodbridge's forthcoming book), which emphasizes "experiential" knowledge over "cognitive" knowledge, and hence downplays (biblical) theology.

By now the connections should be coming clear. Our theological identity, and in the process the content of our faith, is being severed from our missional calling. If this trend continues it will have devastating effects on the cause of the Kingdom that all true followers of Jesus seek to devote their lives to. For if we lose the content of the Faith (Jude 3), or somehow imply that knowing it and rooting our identity in it are dispensable to our God-given mission, then we fail the mission.

This is obviously no small rebuke, so please do not take it lightly. It is amazing how laden with implication our words are. But Paul asserts as much in his bold but true statement, "faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ" (that is, the word about Christ and redemption through His blood) (Romans 10:17; cf. vv. 9-16). In short, our words are of utmost importance, and the words by which we identify ourselves are no less. Despite the numerous incidences of faithlessness among those who throughout history, and up to the present day, have called themselves "Christian," the term nonetheless is a historically meaningful and important designation for the sum total of whose we are, by whose blood we were purchased for God, and whose words and example we are to follow.

On Bi-vocational Ministry

2009-11-11T23:52:00.005-06:00

I want to comment again on Dave Fitch's post, "Bi-vocational—or—go on staff at a large church: Suddenly bi-vocational ministry doesn't look so bad?"

Back and forth I go: To plant a church or not to plant a church? That is the question that I've been wrestling with for the last five years.

I answered it four years ago when my wife and I joined Ryan and Christina Wiksell in founding the missional community, The Core, in center city Springfield, Missouri. Then God called us away to Trinity in August of 2006, and we relocated to Chicago the following January. Since then I've been studying my tail off, and all along I've been asking, "What's next, Lord?" Church planting has rarely left my mind, though I've had doubts about the timeliness of it for us right out of seminary.

Now the time has come for the rubber to meet the road. I'm finishing seminary (all but one class) in just over a month, and am making some tough decisions: where to go, what to do, how to make ends meet when I get there. As an idealist (I'm certain I've made this concession to you here before), i.e., a leader, I am motivated by possibilities and demotivated by what I perceive as excessive constraints. I need structures within which to work, but I need workable and flexible structures. Apart from church planting and some of the recent missional movements, such environments are extremely rare in local churches.

Now, Dave asserts that "tent-making" is an increasingly vital component of pastoral leadership in our postmodern, post-Christendom era, and I'm beginning to agree. In his post, he lists three major benefits, to which I will add a fourth: being bi-vocational, if done right, frees the pastor-leader from dependence upon, and thus subjection to, the limits of a particular congregation or ministry context.

Financial dependence has a way of clouding our vision and restraining what we consider as possible. I know this, for my "ministry job search" has kept shoving this fact in my face, again and again. When I think about developing a "trade" by which I could support myself and my family, suddenly ministry in contexts where church cash flow is likely to be limited becomes very feasible. And in a day in which churches are consolidating more and more into mega-churches, tent-making makes smaller, neighborhood-based churches a viable option. Instead of funneling all their resources to staffing and facilities, churches can invest more in community outreach, development, and church planting.

What does this mean for the 21st century pastor who wants to lead his congregation into mission? It means that, in addition to biblical-theological-pastoral training, an integral part of preparation for ministry is going to be learning a trade that will meet the basic requirements of a "job" that is conducive to bi-vocational ministry. Dave argues that this is no more time consuming than climbing the ministry ladder from poor-wage positions, and dragging one's family back and forth across the country, before finally getting into a position that will be a good all-around fit and provide for one's needs—a scenario all too common for beginning pastors. Furthermore, it allows a pastor to locate and put down roots in an area where he believes he will be optimally effective in the mission God has given him, which has numerous obvious benefits.

Now, there are still plenty of good full-time salaried ministry opportunities out there for those whom God is calling in that direction. The church needs them, and the church should remain committed to funding the unique work to which God has called them. But there is other territory that will not be broken into by the gospel without bi-vocational pastor-leaders. Whether I am one of these remains to be known, but this is the direction I'm headed at the moment.

What a ride! I can't wait to see where God takes us.

Vocational Plan B

2009-11-07T19:34:00.005-06:00

Plan A: To go on staff at a church in the U. S. in some pastoral capacity, likely student or young adult ministry. [Status: Nothing going.]

Plan B: To discover the right vocational match for my expertise, temperament, and work style (see Vocational Info, top-right sidebar), and secure an opportunity to be gainfully employed doing this, preferably in Chicagoland or Missouri (St. Louis, Columbia, Springfield, Kansas City). Some [non-pastoral] occupations I am interested in pursuing (in order of interest):

I am currently considering hourly, salaried, or base salaried positions primarily, but am willing to be trained. I need to secure a full-time position by January. If any of you, after looking over my relevant Vocational Info (top-right sidebar), have any leads in Chicago, metro Missouri, or the vicinity, please pass them my way. I'm on BrightFuse, LinkedIn, ChurchStaffing, and CareerBuilder,

Thanks!

Matt

My Boy

2009-11-05T14:52:00.004-06:00

Born November 2nd, 2009. 6 lbs. 9 oz. 20" long. More pics and details on Facebook.

My Solution to the U. S. Health Care Problem

2009-11-05T12:23:00.004-06:00

Nicholas Kristof's article in today's NYTimes, which I thought was fair and informed, provoked in me an insight that I believe could and should revolutionize the current health care debate. In short, the problem with the current debate is that it is taking place in the wrong sector of society. Politics are not the place!

My proposal:

Table the whole notion of a "health care bill" and appoint (and fund!) a commission of qualified professionals to conduct a thorough study of the current U. S. health care system and the top health care systems around the world.
Publish this proposal in detailed form as well as a general-public-friendly format, so that both the voting public and the elected officials are informed of the results.
Form a bipartisan congressional commission to analyze the results of the study in terms of public policy and submit a proposal to the American people and to Congress.
Do this over a period of time sufficient for the nature of the study.

Now, I am not a politician or a public policy analyst or a medical researcher. But I do know that modern-day American politics, controlled as they are by money and media spin, are not the place for such an enormous matter as this one. Both sides of the debate need to recognize this and to get on the same side of a solution to a problem of which all of us are painfully aware.

McKnight on Missional Church

2009-11-02T15:12:00.002-06:00

A regular contributor to the missional church conversation, Scot McKnight has offered a brief, but solid primer on the movement. He clarifies that missional is more than the latest buzzword being adopted by the pragmatic church movement, and explains why.

TSK: The Church Will Replay 1930s

2009-11-02T15:00:00.002-06:00

Andrew Jones offers some prophetic (?) insight into the shape of church life and mission in the next decade, which is worth the (quick) read.

Baby's Comin'!

2009-11-02T14:54:00.002-06:00

My wife's being induced today, so baby should be here soon! Pray for a quick, safe, and healthy delivery for both.

Russell Moore's "Word to Young Preachers"

2009-11-01T19:36:00.004-06:00

As a young preacher myself, I am both humbled and encouraged by Dr. Russell Moore's "Word to Young Preachers."

He says that truly great preachers are very bad preachers who have matured over the years through receiving honest criticism from others. The preachers destined for a lifetime of mediocrity in their preaching ministry are those with above average natural ability who are so constantly affirmed and rarely critiqued that they never grow (and in the process become puffed up with pride).

Of course, growing as a preacher (not merely in delivery, but also in expositional integrity and quality) requires a lot more than accepting criticism. It requires the hard labor necessary for improving upon one's shortcomings.

Being nearly finished with seminary/divinity school, I've acquired the basic tools and knowledge vital to an effective preaching ministry (appropriate to the educational level of most of our society). Yet I'm still pretty rough around the edges in some key areas. Are their churches gracious enough to allow young preachers to develop through both critique and affirmation? The Bible states merely that ministers of the Word must be "able to teach" (the Word) and warns of the pitfalls of rhetorical mastery. However, the truly great preachers are those who are able to proclaim, illustrate, contextualize, and apply the Word with conciseness, conviction, and clarity (as opposed to the grandiloquence of the Joel Osteens and Robert Schullers of the world).

Is Freedom Always Worth the Cost?

2009-11-01T07:36:00.004-06:00

When I read articles like this recent one by Maureen Dowd and today's story by Damien Cave, I'm saddened by what seems to be a lose-lose situation regarding the pursuit of "freedom." Licentiousness, or the total lack of constraint, is a synonym for anarchy, or lawlessness. One of my mantras from my youth has been, "Boundaries bring freedom." In a country and a society that laud "freedom" as the ultimate virtue, it is inevitable that this value will be tested to its limits.

Today, and each new day that dawns in this epic age, we in the "free world" are confronted with this perennial question: What is freedom? Is it always desirable, or is my axiom true?

How we define liberty holds the key to this question's answer.

Consider these words on the nature of true freedom:

Jesus said, "If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free" (John 8:31-32).

The apostle Peter said, "For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God" (1 Peter 2:15-16).

Three points of note here:

Freedom that is not rooted in truth is really slavery.
Freedom that does not find its expression in that which is good (i.e., in accordance with God's good created order) is really slavery.
True freedom is bondage to the will of God.

What do these truths (or rather, three facets of a single truth) have to do with the above articles? Think about it, and post your thoughts.

Shalom,

Matt

New Abortion Site: The Case for Life

2009-10-25T17:58:00.003-06:00

New link added to "Plugs": The Case for Life is a great new website based on Scott Klusendorf's latest book by the same title. It contains tons of excellent information relevant to the abortion debate, and an overall well-reasoned case for the full humanhood of unborn children, presented with a sharply designed site.

Go check it out, tell your friends, buy the book.

Bottom line: be informed, be involved. Do your part in making our nation a place in which the lives of our unborn children are honored and protected.

More on this subject here. Read about my (only) hope for coming to a cross-party consensus, with a good discussion of the #1 issue in the debate.

Latest Scrawl: A Celebration of the Sexes

2009-10-23T10:42:00.004-06:00

Check out the latest Trinity Graduate Scrawl (Vol 5, Is 4, Oct 23, 2009), subtitled "Male and Female He Created Them."

This issue is dedicated to male-female relationships on campus and in church life. Excellent articles from both faculty and students, including my submission, "Shalom in Gender Interaction: a Response" (p. 2). You can read them online, and I encourage you to do so!

Shalom,

Matt

RE:direction

2009-10-21T15:46:00.009-06:00

SEEKING INPUT FROM YOU

Question: Should I become a youth minister? Why or why not?

As I've been processing what exactly God would have me to do after seminary (beginning this January), I've been focusing primarily on pastoral positions in the college-to-young adult age range, as well as church planting focused on that age range, and have pretty well excluded everything else from serious consideration. But I'm beginning to wonder if I'm being too exclusive.

My wife has consistently encouraged me to consider youth ministry, because (a) I have lots of experience doing it and relatively little experience doing any other kind of ministry, (b) I am still very young as far as pastors go, and (c) she says I relate well to youth (and so do they).

So what's been holding me back? A few things...

I'm relatively introverted and generally hate large group parties, because I'm a lousy small-talker.
The impression I get is that a lot of churches conceive of the ultimate youth pastor as a high-energy, fun, charismatic person who can electrify a group of students with minimal effort. I, on the other hand, believe the church's primary responsibility to teens is to make disciples of them, and that ministries that are primarily evangelistic (i.e., numbers driven) severely undercut this objective. (This topic warrants a lengthy post of its own, but will have to wait.)
Youth ministry tends to involve a lot of long, large group trips. And while I love trips and teenagers, the thought of me being responsible for keeping track of a large group of them and bringing them home to their parents in one piece is rather intimidating.
I have strong convictions about issues that concern the congregation at large, issues that have a profound impact on teens, and therefore youth ministry. My belief has been that my impact could be greater as a lead pastor by shepherding the entire congregation, especially parents, to provide the kind of overall "nurture" that makes for solid, Christians teens.

After a good conversation this afternoon with my wife (where would I be without her?), she has talked me out of my cynicism regarding these issues. In short, they may not be problems at all. Here's the reality as I see it, in contrast to concerns 1-4, above:

Youth ministry does not have to function like a party. (This is a common misperception. See this post.) What students want (and, ahem, need) more than anything is someone who will build them up in the faith.
Not all churches conceive of youth ministers like this (especially once they've given up the myth of youth ministry as party). Plus, I relate very well with teens one-on-one, in small groups, and communicating biblical truth to them in large groups. None of these require me being the life of the party. (Praise God!)
That's why they have chaperones!
If I served under a lead pastor who did a good job at shepherding the congregation as described above, the problem disappears. Furthermore, if I'm under equipped to be the lead pastor of a church at this point in my life, it makes no difference how strong my convictions are about issues concerning the larger congregation. I'd be more effective serving where I was best equipped to serve, and trusting the Lord to supply leadership elsewhere.

After thinking more clearly about this issue, I've decided I'm more than willing to put youth ministry back on the table as a viable post-seminary vocational option. Given my passion for seeing young people become lifelong followers of Jesus, my ability to connect with teenagers, and my extensive youth ministry experience, this may be the most viable option for me at the moment.

So, those of you who know me, what do you think? Have I assessed the situation and myself accurately?

Looking forward to your feedback.

Matthew Stephens - Background on BrightFuse - A Talent Community

2009-10-18T05:58:00.001-06:00

Matthew Stephens - Background on BrightFuse - A Talent Community

Shared via AddThis

Vocational Info Added to Blog

2009-10-17T11:58:00.006-06:00

Dear friends,

God is good and sovereign over all things, including our lives. His ways and thoughts are infinitely higher than ours, and His timetable is rarely coterminous with ours. My family and I are currently in a time of waiting on Him until He shows us the next step in our journey following Him. The biggest unanswered question for us is my vocational plans starting in January, when I'll be finished with all but one course of my Master of Divinity at TEDS. All we know right now are three things:

I have to take my final course (only 1 hr.) next semester, as well as complete my internship (15 hrs for two semesters / 30 hrs for one).
I have to secure employment that will cover all our expenses and leave time for my remaining seminary work (above) and my family (including a new baby boy due Nov. 7th!).
Our daughter would really benefit from finishing her pre-school year out here (yes, it's that good!).

As we wait on the Lord to show us whether and how we will work these three objectives out, we know that He uses human relationships and processes to accomplish His ends. Therefore, I have added a "Vocational Info" section to my blog with links to important files of the sort that churches examine to assess one's fitness for ministry positions. My hope is that this will help facilitate a connection with a church or other employer that would be a solid vocational fit for me.

There are several ways you could partner with us as we follow the Lord, if He so leads you:

Serve as prayer partners!
Pass along my info to anyone you think may be of help, whether it be for prayer or vocational opportunities.
Pass potential employment ideas or leads our way.

We are eager to discover how God intends to use us in accomplishing His kingdom work in the immediate future and know that He is using this time of waiting to shape us and guide our steps for His glory. Many thanks in advance for your partnership in this endeavor.

His Kingdom come,

Matt

The Rest of the Story (on the Latest Abortion Study)

2009-10-15T15:59:00.004-06:00

U. of Alabama political science professor Michael J. New criticizes The Media for spinning the latest Guttmacher (AGI) report on abortion laws and abortion rates to reflect their predetermined point of view. Specifically, he calls out AP, USA Today, and BBC for flagrantly jumping to conclusions that "protective legislation does little to protect unborn children."

On the contrary, New points out, no causal link was shown in this study between strictness of abortion laws and incidence of abortions. Furthermore, other AGI studies have shown a strong correlation between abortion restrictions and lower abortion rates, as well as between public funding of abortions and higher abortion rates.

Her.meneutics blog has more on the latest media coverage of abortion.

RJS on Missional Campus Ministry, or My Passion

2009-10-14T22:29:00.009-06:00

Excellent article by RJS at Jesus Creed in her "Missional Campus Ministry" series. She addresses an issue very close to my heart: engaging university students on a rigorous intellectual level outside the classroom setting.

To put it quite simply, this is my passion.

She raises the question of what churches and ministries must do in order to engage these students.

Here's my submission:

We need to facilitate an atmosphere of intellectual, dialogical engagement with Scripture and the whole of the created order, from history to science to reason to ethics to politics—everything.
We need solidly evangelical churches founded on the inerrant, infallible Word of God but open to and conversant with the questions intellectuals (Christian and non) are asking about Christian faith and reality, especially issues of epistemology, biblical criticism, and pluralism.
We need churches who model Christian love and shalom in their interactions with one another and their "neighbors," who are a strong, positive presence in their communities.
In short, we need churches who link love of God of the mind, heart, soul, and body into a community of robust Christian discipleship and mission.

We need churches with all these characteristics, near every university campus, if we are going to make a significant, lasting impact among university students, who are the future of our society.

The Generation M Manifesto

2009-10-14T22:15:00.002-06:00

This is worth quoting full-text, but link over to the original article to give props to the author, OK?

Thanks to Scot McKnight for posting this.

The Generation M Manifesto

by Umair Hague, Harvard Business Review

8:01 AM Wednesday July 8, 2009

Dear Old People Who Run the World,

My generation would like to break up with you.

Everyday, I see a widening gap in how you and we understand the world — and what we want from it. I think we have irreconcilable differences.

You wanted big, fat, lazy "business." We want small, responsive, micro-scale commerce.

You turned politics into a dirty word. We want authentic, deep democracy — everywhere.

You wanted financial fundamentalism. We want an economics that makes sense for people — not just banks.

You wanted shareholder value — built by tough-guy CEOs. We want real value, built by people with character, dignity, and courage.

You wanted an invisible hand — it became a digital hand. Today's markets are those where the majority of trades are done literally robotically. We want a visible handshake: to trust and to be trusted.

You wanted growth — faster. We want to slow down — so we can become better.

You didn't care which communities were capsized, or which lives were sunk. We want a rising tide that lifts all boats.

You wanted to biggie size life: McMansions, Hummers, and McFood. We want to humanize life.

You wanted exurbs, sprawl, and gated anti-communities. We want a society built on authentic community.

You wanted more money, credit and leverage — to consume ravenously. We want to be great at doing stuff that matters.

You sacrificed the meaningful for the material: you sold out the very things that made us great for trivial gewgaws, trinkets, and gadgets. We're not for sale: we're learning to once again do what is meaningful.

There's a tectonic shift rocking the social, political, and economic landscape. The last two points above are what express it most concisely. I hate labels, but I'm going to employ a flawed, imperfect one: Generation "M."

What do the "M"s in Generation M stand for? The first is for a movement. It's a little bit about age — but mostly about a growing number of people who are acting very differently. They are doing meaningful stuff that matters the most. Those are the second, third, and fourth "M"s.

Gen M is about passion, responsibility, authenticity, and challenging yesterday's way of everything. Everywhere I look, I see an explosion of Gen M businesses, NGOs, open-source communities, local initiatives, government. Who's Gen M?Obama, kind of. Larry and Sergey. The Threadless, Etsy, and Flickr guys. Ev, Biz and the Twitter crew. Tehran 2.0. The folks at Kiva, Talking Points Memo, and FindtheFarmer. Shigeru Miyamoto, Steve Jobs, Muhammad Yunus, and Jeff Sachs are like the grandpas of Gen M. There are tons where these innovators came from.

Gen M isn't just kind of awesome — it's vitally necessary. If you think the "M"s sound idealistic, think again.

The great crisis isn't going away, changing, or "morphing ." It's the same old crisis — and it's growing.

You've failed to recognize it for what it really is. It is, as I've repeatedly pointed out, in our institutions: the rules by which our economy is organized.

But they're your institutions, not ours. You made them — and they're broken. Here's what I mean:

"... For example, the auto industry has cut back production so far that inventories have begun to shrink — even in the face of historically weak demand for motor vehicles. As the economy stabilizes, just slowing the pace of this inventory shrinkage will boost gross domestic product, or GDP, which is the nation's total output of goods and services."

Clearing the backlog of SUVs built on 30-year-old technology is going to pump up GDP? So what? There couldn't be a clearer example of why GDP is a totally flawed concept, an obsolete institution. We don't need more land yachts clogging our roads: we need a 21st Century auto industry.

I was (kind of) kidding about seceding before. Here's what it looks like to me: every generation has a challenge, and this, I think, is ours: to foot the bill for yesterday's profligacy — and to create, instead, an authentically, sustainably shared prosperity.

Anyone — young or old — can answer it. Generation M is more about what you do and who you are than when you were born. So the question is this: do you still belong to the 20th century - or the 21st?

Love,

Umair and the Edge Economy Community

PS - Fire away in the comments with thoughts, questions, or — because I've left a ton of awesomeness out of this post — more examples of Gen M people and organizations.

-----------------------

I would probably quibble with his identifying President Obama with this "generation," but other than that, count me in!

Christian and Common Sense on Wealth and Economics

2009-10-14T21:57:00.003-06:00

Michael Kruse has written a provocative and immensely insightful post over at Jesus Creed that every American should read. He talks about wealth, value, and the realities of economics in our 21st century, global marketplace, offering a few challenges and leaving the issues open for discussion. As one relatively unsophisticated in my understanding of contemporary economics, I found his insights astoundingly profound... and critical to issues confronting our nation at this tumultuous time in history. Go read it!

How Pro-Life Are You?

2009-10-14T15:20:00.003-06:00

Commenting on pro-life protesters, Ginger Kolbaba wonders whether there is more to being pro-life than holding a sign. Here's a quote from her brief but poignant blog entry at Kyria on October 6th:

“I wonder,” I mentioned after we drove past, “how many of those folks volunteer at pregnancy centers? How many have adopted unwanted children after abortion was stopped? How many help educate and train the women who didn’t have abortions on how to love and care for their babies? How many are involved in caring for foster care children?”

“In short,” my husband said, “how many are actually doing something pro-life?”

------------

Amen and amen!

Of course, one should also do their best to educate themselves and others about the issues involved, as well as exercise their responsibilities as voting citizens in a democratic republic. Furthermore, we need more (genuine) Christians to run for public office, to become competent lawyers, physicians, biologists, etc. In short, it's going to take more than shouting from the sidelines and voting at the polls to achieve the just society we envision in which all human life, from conception to grave, is valued and protected.

Emerging Adulthood and Christian Faith

2009-10-13T18:13:00.006-06:00

Fascinating interview with sociologist Christian Smith on young, or "emerging," adults and Christianity in CT today. Smith has authored Souls in Transition: the Religious & Spiritual Lives of Emerging Adults, a follow up to the teen-focused book he coauthored with Melinda Lundquist Denton, Soul Searching: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of American Teenagers (April 2009).

I thought there were several observations worth chewing on. The opening quote by Alexis de Tocqueville was premier among them:

"When there is no authority in religion or in politics, men are soon frightened by the limitless independence with which they are faced. They are worried and worn out by the constant restlessness of everything."

Smith describes emerging adults as "[enjoying] more options for work, marriage, and location than perhaps any previous generation" and "one of the most self-focused, confused, and anxious age groups, led into an 'adultolescence' that prevents a majority from committing to people and institutions."

[That certainly resonates with my experience, even as a devout Christian, husband of six years, and father of two!]

He then discusses several societal trends over the past few decades that contribute to these characteristics.

"The most important factor" in nurturing "a high faith commitment" into emerging adulthood, he says, is parents. He also cites robust personal devotional lives (esp. consistent prayer and Bible reading/study) as a strong protective factor (to use a sociological term) for robust emerging adult faith (and the absence of such, a strong risk factor).

He highlights the importance of intellectual and relational engagement by churches and campus ministries during emerging adults' college and post-college years, and of the priority of weaving them into the social fabric of the church.

He cites "emerging" forms of church as connecting with this group, while acknowledging the relative lack of overall impact (numerically) of emerging churches among emerging adults. I would add that megachurches appear to be a sizable draw, though I wonder about assimilation and continuity.

Responses to the article or to my thoughts?

Noteworthy #1

2009-10-08T12:28:00.002-06:00

Because of seminary and the impending birth of our son (Nov. 7th, woo-hoo!) I've got very limited time to invest in reading and writing blog material. And yet, staying in touch with some of my favorite ministry-oriented blogs is an important way I stay connected to the outside world as it pertains to ministry, while immersed in academia. Here are a couple blog conversations I have been engaged in that I want to point you to:

Dave Fitch discusses bivocational ministry as the frontier of the vocation of the missional pastor, and links to his full article in Leadership Journal. (You faithful Incarnate readers know I've been chewing on this for some months now.)

Scot McKnight discusses the pastoral responsibility of forming "the love of God of the mind" (i.e., biblical-theological literacy, Christian worldview) and pleads for a robust "educational" methodology that goes above and beyond the primary congregational worship gathering. (The comments there are chock full of outstanding questions and insights, so I commend them to you.) He recommends Maryellen Weimer's book, Learner-Centered Teaching: Five Key Changes to Practice, as a guide that will revolutionize pastors' view of educational ministry in the church.

Blessings to all,

Matt

The McDonaldization of the Louvre

2009-10-06T18:02:00.002-06:00

This is the worst case of modernovirus—or is it postmodernovirus?—I've seen in a long time.

Questioning Current Models of Youth Ministry

2009-10-06T07:42:00.003-06:00

Read a Leadership article this morning that corroborates a lot of my thinking over the past few years regarding youth ministry in the church. In short, a new study reveals that age segregation, to the degree that it is currently practiced in most local churches, is counterproductive to forming adolescents into disciples of Jesus. The study cites stats on the high rates of youth dropping out of church involvement in their young adult years (70% after high school, 80% by age 30).

A few noteworthy observations:

1. Relationships with adults are key.

"There is a strong link between kids staying in church and their involvement in intergenerational relationships and worship."
"the future of youth ministry is intergenerational youth ministry. . . one thing churches can do that really makes a difference is getting kids actively involved in the life of the church before they graduate."
"being intentionally intergenerational means that churches need to be aware of and flexible about things that can be alienating to kids."
Relationships are more important than worship styles.
"Kids are far more interested in talking to caring, trustworthy adults than we think they are."

2. Church size affects adult-adolescent relationships.

"one of the real advantages of being a smaller church is that there is a lot more potential for intergenerational relationships and longer lasting faith. It's a general rule that the bigger the church the more segmented the age groups and generations are from each other."
Serving together is a key to significant intergenerational interaction in larger churches.

3. We should be setting high expectations for youth.

"Teenagers are up to the challenge. In our college transition project, we asked high school seniors what they want more of in youth group. Time for deep conversation ranked highest. Games ranked last. That's one example of how we're currently undershooting. Tenth graders study Shakespeare. What are we offering them at church? Nothing comparable to Shakespeare."

4. Change should be incremental, pastor initiated, and lay driven.

"The pastor is crucial. . . . the reality is that the behavior and attitudes of the pastor ultimately set the course for the church."
"the change process often starts small. Look for a subgroup of parents and kids who will embrace this and can help you bring changes into your youth ministry. . . . people support what they create. So get people involved from the very beginning."

Natural Theology 101

2009-09-16T15:59:00.004-06:00

Came across this quote in my reading today. Love it when Christians take God at His word.

Commenting on Romans 1:18-32, Thomas Schreiner observes,

"Paul affirms in both Romans 1:19 and Romans 1:21 that all people have knowledge of God. . . . Paul is not suggesting that philosophical arguments for the existence of God are needed. On the contrary, he maintains that all people know that God exists and that he is powerful. The truth of God's existence and power may be suppressed (Rom 1:18), and yet it is still present in all human beings. Nor does the text intimate that people come to believe in God's existence and power through a long chain of reasoning. Paul reflects on the experience of all human beings, not on the ability of a few gifted philosophers" (Paul, Apostle of God's Glory in Christ, 104).

You may argue with Paul on this point (though you'd be arguing with God!), but Schreiner surely nails what Paul is teaching here.

Columbus Church Plant

2009-09-06T16:32:00.003-06:00

Shout out to all you loyal Incarnate followers who subscribe to my feed. I thought I'd emerge from my seminary cave for a few moments to shed some light on our recent and forthcoming goings and doings in ministry.

For those of you who aren't aware, I'm finishing my MDiv coursework in December and hoping to start serving God in full-time vocational ministry at the start of 2010. As most of you know, my heart has been drawn toward church planting for probably the last five years, though I've considered serving the church in other capacities. My heart is really to see the Spirit of God breathe life into the places in the U. S. where the light of Christ has become dim. Sadly, during the white flight of the 70s, many (if not most) of the churches followed suit, leaving a gaping hole in the evangelical witness in the urban centers of America. Recently, there has been a resurgence of conviction to bring the light of Christ back into these areas, to establish vital, missional, Christ-centered churches.

Several weeks ago, I got connected with a guy who, along with his wife, is going to be planting an EFCA church in Columbus, Ohio in the next year or so. This weekend we're flying out to meet them and to check out Columbus, to see if God might be leading us to partner in this endeavor. Melissa and I have submitted this to constant prayer, and invite you to pray alongside of us, both for us and for the church plant in general. As the day rapidly approaches when we will need to have vocational plans in place, we pray we would recognize God's leadership clearly and follow Him humbly.

His Kingdom come,

Matt

Questions About Prosperity and Christianity

2009-08-08T13:08:00.004-06:00

I'm wrestling with some questions that I know many people have already settled in their minds.

The basic question is this: Is hoarding material resources compatible with Christianity?

Sounds simple enough, right? Some of you think, "Well obviously, yes. We get what we earn." Others think, "Well obviously, no. How can it be right for some people to live lavishly while billions are dying of starvation and disease? Doesn't this violate the Second Great Commandment of Jesus?"

The answer to the question I posed rests on the answers to a couple of other questions:

1. Are material resources limited or infinite?
2. If they are limited, is it Christian to try to outwork others in order to get a bigger piece of the pie?

This gets at the essence of the “trickle down” theory. The trickle down theory assumes that resources are unlimited. The question is, are they? Or do the rich necessarily get rich at the expense of the poor?

My inkling is that the answer to question #2 is, No. What I am most concerned about is answering question #1. Until that question is definitively answered, I'm not sure we have much ground for grappling with the second.

What do you think?

Is Christianity a Metanarrative?

2009-08-06T21:44:00.009-06:00

Is the Judeo-Christian tradition a metanarrative? Yes and no, but I think it’s closer to No. Put another way, Does the Bible present itself as a metanarrative? Not in the sense of an explicit, systematic metanarrative. Not in the sense of a story as we know story. No, Jews and Christians have formed the Judeo-Christian metanarrative based upon the variety of narratives, poems, prophecies, historical and legal writings, letters, etc. of the Bible. In that sense, our tradition may be a metanarrative… but again, maybe not. It lacks the specificity and comprehensiveness of a metanarrative. We have big chunks of the story, as well as a broad outline of it. But we really do not understand the story in all its nuances... even those who think they do. The story leaves some questions—lots of them—open to our imaginative exploration.

Yet this mystery—anthology of mysteries, really—hauntingly draw the soul back, time and again. The story will not release me, though I have tried to do without it a few times. It is the mysteries, the way the story confounds me to the uttermost, that keeps drawing me back, drawing me closer, drawing me deeper. And yet the closer I get and the deeper I go, the greater the mystery becomes. Who is this God? How does He sovereignly reign over His creation? How do we fit into His plan and His accomplishment of it? Why does evil exist, and what is its relationship to God? These are the questions that have perplexed, indeed haunted, humans—at least those who have dared to ask them—since the beginning of time.

Various people have striven to perceive and formulate answers on their own and in community, most of them claiming some sort of divine inspiration or revelation. Christianity is utterly dependent on the divine speech acts recorded in Scripture, and yet that revelation forever evades us, is beyond us… sometimes barely, it would seem, but other times the disparity feels infinite. And yet the glimpses God has offered to us of Himself are breathtaking and tantalizing. I have never “seen” God’s glory, but oh, I have perceived it quite poignantly. It is more real to me than life itself, than flesh and blood, grass and rock, water and sky. It is life, and compared to it, everything else is death.

Setting the Record Straight on the Meaning of Ecclesia, or What is Church?

2009-07-28T10:30:00.011-06:00

After my fourth book in a row on the missional church, having seen a recurrent sentiment expressed over and over, I feel the need to correct some narrow and not-quite-accurate thinking. Throughout a lot of the missional literature, and even in evangelical pulpits from time to time, I hear this erroneous claim: "The term church (Greek, ekklesia) is more a verb than a noun. It refers to the calling out of a people" (Gibbs, Emerging Churches, 99).

Unfortunately, certain scholars have succumb to the etymological fallacy, which is that the meaning of words is equal to its root word or (in the case of compound words) component parts. Some have observed that ecclesia is a compound of the Greek preposition ek (from, out of) and the verb kaleo (to call), which when combined mean, "calling out," or in the adjectival form (ecclesia), "called out." Hence the common assertion that the church is not a building, nor a place, nor even something Christians do together on each Lord's Day (Sunday), but means "called out ones." The problem is, the consensus of the best linguistic scholarship over the last several decades has proven that usage (i.e., context), not etymology, determines the meaning of words. The standard Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (BDAG) bears this out in its entry for ecclesia. Its definitions are threefold:

1. a regularly summoned legislative body, assembly, as generally understood in the Greco-Roman world (e.g., Acts 19:39).
2. a casual gathering of people, an assemblage, gathering (e.g., Acts 19:32, 40).
3. a people with shared belief; community, congregation:
(a) of OT Israelites (e.g., Dt 31:30; Jdg 20:2);
(b) of Christians in a specific place or area: a. of a specific Christian group assembly, gathering ordinarily involving worship and discussion of matters of concern to the community (e.g., Mt 18:17; 1 Cor 11:18); b. congregation or church as the totality of Christians living and meeting in a particular locality or larger geographical area, but not necessarily limited to one meeting place (e.g., Acts 5:11; 8:3; 1 Cor 4:17; Phil 4:15);
(c) the global community of Christians, (universal) church (e.g., Mt 16:18; Acts 9:31; 1 Cor 6:4; Eph 1:22).

Two important observations need to be emphasized. First, there is not one single definition of ecclesia in the New Testament, so we must not try to force our interpretation of one of them onto all the others. Context (usage) determines the meaning in each case. Second, ecclesia does not mean "called out ones." However, hagioi (pl., holy) used nominatively (saints) does identify the body of believers in Jesus Christ as those "sanctified" (set apart) in Him and for His purposes. While this is different terminology than "called out," it expresses a similar idea, namely, that Christians are called to a unique Kingdom type of life, in the way of Jesus. The difference is, there is no justification for claims that Christians have been called out of and separated from the world. Rather, they are called to be "set apart" from the values and allegiances of the world that are in conflict with those of the Kingdom of God, while being sent into and remaining firmly planted in the world.

I hope these clarifications will help those of us seeking to lead the church into greater faithfulness to its missional calling, in developing a more biblical ecclesiology.

So what is a church? It is a group of believers in Jesus Christ who gather together regularly for worship and equipping for their mission, who dwell with one another in Kingdom community, who participate together in the redemptive mission of God, and who together with all churches everywhere comprise the one Church of God in Jesus Christ.

The record is straight.

Sleeping At Last - Storyboards

2009-07-25T10:21:00.003-06:00

Great new album by one of my favorite bands, Sleeping At Last, called Storyboards. You can get it on pre-release at their website as a download, and they'll send you a free hardcopy when they're done (ETA August).

It's pretty mellow and a bit more folksy than their previous albums, but once again, a musical and lyrical masterpiece. Their new drummer blends seamlessly with their sound, and the string arrangements and performance are stunning.

Another 'score' on the cover art from Geoff Benzing as well.

Get your tickets to their Sept. 19 CD release show in Chicago, if you want to join me.

What's the Big Deal about Culture?

2009-07-23T12:56:00.004-06:00

Every so often I hear pastors express frustration over the seemingly unceasing dialogue about "culture" and the church. "Jesus didn't die to save cultures; He died to save individuals," they say. "Jesus didn't say, 'Go, therefore, and Christianize cultures, baptizing . . . ' He said, 'Make disciples," and so on. And for a while, I couldn't quite pinpoint the error in their logic. But it's clear to me now.

It's true, Jesus commissioned His disciples to make more disciples, until all "nations" have been evangelized. However, He said more than this. More fundamental to Jesus' message was His proclamation that the Kingdom of God had "come." It had been inaugurated, yet awaited consummation at His Second Coming. He taught His disciples, and continues to teach us, to pray, "Thy Kingdom come." He did not call us to usher in the Kingdom or work to bring it about. He said, "It is here. And it is coming."

In the pioneering book, Missional Church: a Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America (pub. 1988, before the term "missional" became faddish and abused), Darrell Guder and others observed that the fundamental calling of the church is "to represent God's reign as its community, its servant, and its messenger" (p. 102ff). Representing the Kingdom of God is the "mission" of the church. Evangelicals often get the messenger part right, and fairly often the servant part. Many of them are attempting to embody Kingdom community through small groups, but anyone who has been a member of a small group knows that they are a poor substitute for genuine community. Community, rather, is "dwelling together in unity." It is coexistence and interdependence. And if it is missional, it involves the other two components of the mission: service and proclamation.

As missional communities "show and tell" the gospel—first to one another (allelon), then to the world—they begin to embody a particular sort of culture, a uniquely gospel-shaped culture that reflects Kingdom values. These values stand in stark contrast to the values of the "elements, powers, and principalities" of this world.

Now let us return to the original question: What's the big deal about culture? Must pastors be faithful exegetes of culture in order to be faithful to their calling as shepherds of the flock of God? The answer is yes, on two levels. First, he must be an exegete of his own congregation's culture. Is the culture of the church truly a Kingdom culture, or does it reflect the values of the world, values which are in direct opposition to the Kingdom of God? Second, he must be an exegete of the world's culture (or more accurately, cultures) in order to know the difference! He must be skilled at identifying the principles and idolatries incarnate in the worldly culture in which the church is embedded in order to prophetically call the church back into faithful witness to the Kingdom of God. Furthermore, the culture of the community at large is a good barometer of the effectiveness of the church at incarnating (representing) the Kingdom within that community. Jesus said we would be "salt and light" and that implies more than simply difference or spectacle. It implies redemptive influence.

This flips the conversation about church growth and effectiveness on its head. Rather than asking the question, How much have our membership, programs, and budget grown over the past X years? the missional question is, What kind of redemptive impact are we having in our community? Societal redemption follows ecclesial redemption which follows individual redemption. People produce culture. Redeemed people produce redemptive culture. So ask yourself, Are we doing that? That, I believe, is the question for the church in our day.

Rethinking Church Programs, Part 2

2009-07-22T20:27:00.002-06:00

Insightful article by Bob Hyatt that ties really well into Brandon's article on church programs. If you ask me, this is true missional thinking: empowering and releasing people for ministry when and where God has scattered them in the world.

Thinking Biblically About Church Programs

2009-07-22T20:00:00.002-06:00

Pointed and poignant thoughts from Brandon O'Brien at Out of Ur: "Putting Programs in Their Place."

Follow-up question to the article: Most churches would argue that their programs have been formed on the basis of needs, as advocated by O'Brien. What I wonder is, do churches form programs on the basis of perceived needs projected onto them by public leaders (writers, bloggers, conference speakers, etc.), but are not real needs in their local context?

Dan Kimball on Being Missional Rather Than Talking about It

2009-07-22T17:40:00.002-06:00

Good and timely word for me as I venture back into the blogosphere. While the title is certainly a false dichotomy, there is some truth to the point he's making. Every time we face a decision about how to use our time—whether it be social networking, writing, or some sort of recreation—we choose not to spend it on other things. Obviously, the answer is balance and discernment. Let's all commit to regularly evaluating the way we spend our time in light of biblical priorities and personal responsibilities, under the guidance of the Spirit.

N.T. Wright Speaks Out on Episcopal Church Gay Marriage Decision

2009-07-22T17:24:00.003-06:00

The full UK Times article here is worth the read. Much respect for Bishop Wright sticking his neck out on this volatile issue.

Hello again!

2009-07-22T12:21:00.007-06:00

Wow... it's been a while! An apology is in order: Sorry for not officially letting you know that I was taking a blogattical for a few months, and why. Here are a couple reasons for the break:

1. My heart, mind, and soul were a mangled mess. The last six months have been pretty intense for my family and me, as we have had a lot on our plates while simultaneously wrestling with God and man over where He's taking us after seminary.

2. Blogging well requires commitment, and my priorities of family, school, ministry, and overall health (emotional, spiritual, relational, physical) consumed virtually all of my time. Not only have I not written any blogs lately, I have not been reading them. That has enabled me to get through a few thousand pages of summer school reading and work.

In light of these factors, I am very blessed to have had the break. While I still have a lot to accomplish in a relatively short period of time this summer, and next semester promises to be my heaviest to date, I'm feeling the need to subtly reengage the blogosphere. A lot of this impetus is due to my thinking and praying through where God would have us to minister post-seminary. This has been prominent in our thoughts, prayers, and conversation the last couple of months, and necessarily so. We need to be on the ground running by January, and still have few leads. Here's a quick update as to where we are in this process:

1. We've spoken with a few churches about potential staff positions, one of them very seriously, none of which ended up being the right fit.

2. I'm slowly pursuing licensing and ordination with the Evangelical Free Church, but looking to see if there is truly a place there for thoroughly missional work (versus missionally-bathed attractional models).

3. I'm expanding my network base and connecting with missional leaders around the U. S. to see where God is working and how I might partner with them, and they with me, in the Kingdom work to which He has called us.

I've spent a lot of time mulling through the church/ministry staffing websites, in addition to utilizing Trinity's Placement Office services (which are very good), but what I seem to be finding is churches looking for highly experienced professionals who can get behind their vision and mission. Makes sense, given the still predominant program-oriented ecclesiology that prevails in N. American churches. It may be that there is a place for me within those sorts of structures, and certainly many of them are doing Spirit-empowered, fruitful Kingdom ministry.

But I'm beginning to wonder if God has something else in mind for me. Church planting keeps coming back into my mind, yet I continue to run into roadblocks—not enough experience, not evangelistically gifted, family not ready for the risk, no time for fundraising (and no foreseeable sympathetic social network from which to solicit support to begin with).

I've been reading quite a bit of missional church literature and engaging some practicing missional thinkers, and my soul seems to be catching fire. Could it be that God is calling my family and me to a type of ministry that is neither in a traditional, existing church setting nor a standard church planting enterprise? Could He be calling us to make tents and exercise Kingdom leadership on a more life-on-life level? I'm beginning to wonder. What could I do that would be vocationally stimulating and financially sufficient? The Lord knows!

Anyhow, I can't wait for what God has in store for us. We're just praying for strength and perseverance during this last leg of seminary, and trusting God to lead.

His Kingdom come,

Matt

Vision and Direction

2009-05-06T21:51:00.003-06:00

This month is the month of breakthroughs for me. Perhaps if you knew me, you might think that every month is a breakthrough month from the way I talk, but the last month has been pretty intense... in a good way. Here's the story in bullets:

April 15th (afternoon) - Met with EFCA Great Lakes District Church Planting Director, Brett Gleason, to discuss possible church planting opportunities in the near future. Left the meeting energized and eager to talk to my wife, who, of course, would be won over without a word...
That evening - Told Melissa about my exciting plans to get involved with church planting right out of seminary, detailing the potential options Brett and I discussed. She was, shall we say, not won over, despite my brilliant sales pitch. STEEEERIKE!
During the next week, I drew up a ministry resume and fill out a placement questionnaire for the TEDS Placement Office, and met up with the Placement Director to go over them. Got some good feedback and was forced to think a little more carefully about some issues related to ministry vision and calling.
Finished four major projects and a sermon, which I gave two weekends ago (you can listen here). Got some good feedback re: preaching, and ministry gifting and preparedness from a good friend with whom I am currently serving in a second generation Korean Presbyterian Church.
Met with my advisor this afternoon to discuss ministry vision and direction, and came out with some really helpful insights. Came home to discuss this with my wife, and the reception was much better.

So, the insights... In a nutshell, what have culminated over these last three weeks are these:

I am probably a church planter who needs some more significant and consistent ministry experience under his belt before venturing out.
If my wife's not on board, either (1) it's not the Lord's will, or (2) it's not the Lord's timing. The last two big ministry/life decisions we made (launching The Core and leaving for seminary), she was "all in."
Post-seminary (beginning of 2010), I need to plug into a church whose ministry values/philosophy and context are compatible with my values and calling. More than likely this should be at a church which was planted within the last decade or so, and has flourished in a "post-Christendom" context.
The fact that I am an "idealist" (pros and cons to that) limits the kind of ministry setting that I can actually flourish in. It basically requires a setting that values creativity, critical thinking, and innovation (as well as a basic philosophical framework within which I can work).
The feedback I am consistently getting (from adviser, mother, wife, friend) is that I need to be ministering in a secular university community among people + or - 15 years of my age (27).
Denomination matters a lot less than the particular local church setting (except, of course, where there are doctrinal conflicts).
Relationships are critical.

OK, so probably not earth shattering... but very helpful for me in terms of processing my next steps. At this point in time, I am working on finishing my resume and starting to explore connections with potential future ministry partners. In the meantime, if anyone knows of any churches that are (a) thinking missionally about doing church in a post-Christendom setting (2nd or 3rd generation unchurched, e.g. Chicago = 3% churched), (b) currently ministering in a post-Christendom setting, and (c) looking for another pastoral staff member, let me know.

Blessings to all,

Matt

Instant Access vs. The Gospel

2009-05-06T15:05:00.006-06:00

Friends, you and I need to hear this. I've felt it for a long time... and this, coming from a laptop-toting blogger! First, you need to read this very short, little interview of Shane Hipps, author of the new book, Flickering Pixels: How Technology Shapes Your Faith. Second, you need to get the book, read it, and get copies for your friends. This quote says it all:

"This culture is on an extraordinary pace toward needing things to be more efficient. But that is a value that is ultimately antithetical to the gospel."

Now, go read. You'll thank me someday.

Second Half: More on the Western Church Crisis

2009-04-29T21:28:00.006-06:00

I was wrong when I said, in my last post, that I was probably overstating the case when I guessed that 9 out of 10 American churches were failing in their Kingdom calling. The truth is, it's actually 10 out of 10. Every church, including even the earliest faith communities, falls short of God's expectations of complete conformity to His will—but this is not unique to any particular church at any particular time or place. On the other hand, to say that churches are "failing" undoubtedly implies to some that they are utterly failing. That would certainly be a preposterous (not to mention arrogant!) claim to make, and I never intended it. These two points in tension should do two things inside of each Christian, and especially each Christian leader or minister.

First, it should help them to see that those who speak prophetically for change are not renegades. This will help those with a prophetic calling to avoid developing a "Messiah complex" in which they see themselves as rebels with a cause (which leads to a combative spirit). It should also help their churches not to take such rebukes personally. All of God's children receive rebuke as a sign of His love, and He typically uses human servants to do this.

Second, it should kindle a perpetual "holy discontent" that keeps us always examining our hearts and actions in light of the Word and the conviction of the Spirit, and growing in faithfulness to our gloriously high calling.

In these two senses, then, my heart burns for a more faithful Church. I'm not so naive as to think that the "crisis" that the Western Church is facing is unique or unprecedented. As many a wise pastor has said, "Everyone either has experienced trials, is in one now, or is headed into one." The same can be said for the Church in any given time and place. The war that Satan and his legions wage against the Church never ceases, though his strategy changes. Fortunate for us, he has a limited playbook, and we have the ultimate Scouting Report (the Bible) from the ultimate Scout (God) to help us to defend against Satan's offense and break down his defense with our offense. Still, he is a formidable foe, and if we are lackadaisical and undisciplined, we are bound to get whooped. We have to be constantly "in the game," playing both offense and defense, and God gives us coaches (prophetic leaders) to spur us on, to correct us when we are wrong, and to train us for victory. But of course the coaches, in our case, are also members of the team, in need of coaching themselves.

I believe this is a word of critical import to the whole church, for all of us fall into one of these two roles (leader and follower). Both have significant responsibilities, and often we switch roles. None of us is above correction, and none is too "low" to give it. We are to "submit to one another out of reverence for Christ" (Eph 5:21). I pray that this is a word of encouragement, as well as a challenge to you. In the spirit of semper reformanda, may we always press on toward our lofty calling in Christ.

On the Western Church in Crisis

2009-04-28T09:27:00.013-06:00

I recently consulted Trinity's Director of Placement to look over and provide feedback for my ministry resume. One of the sections pertained to my personal call and commitment to ministry. Since my call has been a series of defining moments or events (I've identified five), I constructed my statement of call to ministry according to these five pivotal moments. One of these moments I described as follows:

3. Clarification and Focus. In my mid-to-late college years, I developed a growing burden for the Church as I sensed her emergence into a sort of crisis. Through this, God seemed to be calling me to expand my vision from youth ministry to congregational ministry, with a view toward helping the Church be more faithful and fruitful in ministering in an increasingly postmodern world.

This puzzled him (understandably), and he recommended I clarify it. (I will.)

But it got me thinking... Is the Church in crisis? What Church? The Global Church? The American Church? The Western Church?

Yes, I think at least the Western Church.

While this may be overstating the case (it certainly sounds harsh), I wouldn't be surprised if 9 out of 10 churches were failing at their Great Commission calling (*see update, in my next post). That’s what I mean when I say the American Church is in crisis. (Cf. David Olson’s research that the American Church is not keeping up with population growth, let alone advancing the kingdom in terms of persons reached with the gospel, again measured in terms of percentage of population. Note also that between 80 and 90% of people raised in the American Church jump ship once they leave the nest.) This is a matter of serious concern for me, particularly as regards my calling and commitment to vocational ministry. As far as I can tell, the problem can be explained in one of four ways:

The Anti-Christian View: The current crisis simply shows that church is a failed experiment, built on a faulty foundation. It is truly no more than mere “religion,” a mere fallible, human construct. The implication is that Christianity is false.
The Hyper-Reformed View: God is the Almighty Micromanager of all the minutiae of world events, and He just so happens to presently will that the Western Church be ineffective in its God-given evangelistic and disciple-making objectives. This, however, presupposes that God can simultaneously and in the same sense will two opposite things, which is a contradiction.
The Fideistic View: We don’t know why this is happening. We just simply have to trust that God knows what He’s doing, and just keep preachin’ the Gospel "like we always have"—and doing just about everything else "the way we always have." (Key conviction: nothing needs to change.)
My View: The American/Western church is suffering the consequences of its recent lack of faithfulness to something essential (the gospel, the Great Commission and cultural mandates? probably a combination of these). In essence, then, it is digging itself out of a hole that is growing deeper by the day. God has given us ample guidance in His word to get back on track, and is waiting for us to respond faithfully. He will empower us to be effective as we align our wills with His. In short, I believe there is a definite link between faithfulness and fruitfulness. (See my posts here and here on healthy church growth.)

The implications of this for my commitment to pastoral ministry are considerable. If #1 is true (it's not), I am wasting my time (to say the least). If #2 is true, then I have to seriously rethink my faith. If #3 is true, then I have to abandon all rationality and check my brain at the door—for good. If #4 is true, then I have a real challenge (or several real challenges) ahead of me, but also a real motivation to minister, as well as a sensible framework within which to minister.

While at face value, View #4 may seem overly cynical, it is actually the most optimistic of all the views: God desires something better and has given us the provision to make it better, as well as promised to empower us to do so. But it comes with a price tag: We have a lot of hard work to do in rigorously evaluating everything to do with our articulation, practice, and propagation of the Faith. For some this is daunting. For me it is invigorating. It is what gives me purpose and drive.

This has significant implications for me as I seek the Lord's will for my next steps of ministry. For one, the church in which I minister must acknowledge that the Western Church is coming up short in terms of its faithfulness to God's prescriptions for us in His Word. Secondly, they must agree with my explanation of why this is so (View #4, above), or else offer a more sensible and biblical explanation. One way or another, I assume our convictions on this issue need to align.

I wonder how to go about articulating this to prospective churches? Is it important to be up front about this, or should I simply try to discern informally the extent to which we are on the same page?

Is there a better explanation than either of the four views outlined above? I'm open to hearing them.

Required Viewing for Worship Teams

2009-04-12T19:10:00.005-06:00

Every worship team member everywhere must watch David Crowder Band's latest "documentary" (only 7 minutes long). Well, the worship leader probably doesn't need to watch it... but everyone else does! :-P

The End of Philosophy

2009-04-07T05:33:00.007-06:00

Quite an ambitious title, eh? Well it's the title of an article I read this morning in the Times that I thought was worth sharing. David Brooks writes about the "epochal" evolution of thought on the issue of moral reasoning, reviewing Michael Gazzaniga's book, Human, which argues (apparently with a growing consensus of psychologists) that emotions play a much larger role than has historically been granted... perhaps a larger role than logic itself.

Anyhow, though I disagree with his naturalistic worldview, I think Brooks and Gazzaniga are onto something. The postmodern turn is a turn away from the optimistic appraisal of the human intellect of a bygone era, and that gives us a dose of epistemological humility we desperately need as people of faith... well, as humans.

iPodRip Giveaway

2009-04-05T08:00:00.001-06:00

I get four entries for posting this, so here you have it: iPodRip giveaway.

Big News...and Peace

2009-03-22T21:48:00.006-06:00

OK, so I can't exactly break the news... YET. But as soon as I get the go-ahead, I'll be sure to let you know. :-)

I will let you know the consequences of the news, though, because it affects you... yes you. In short, I will be attempting to push my graduation date forward by a semester—that is, attempting to fit two semesters into one semester and a summer. What this has to do with you (hold your breath): less blogging by me.

This is both unfortunate and providential, both for the same reason. At a time when my mind is swirling with "big-time" thoughts, desperate to make heads of this crazy thing we call life, I am forced to press through the chaos with a bit of tunnel-visioned resolve to finish the course(s) on which my family and I have embarked. My goals are simple: finish sooner and finish stronger—with a stronger faith, stronger family, and stronger toolkit for ministering the gospel to a lost and dying world, for the glory of Jesus Christ.

Anyone who's been through (or attempted) seminary/divinity school (ok, mad props to grad school peeps across the board), or been close enough to someone who has to know what it's like, recognizes the ambition of my first two goals. Nevertheless, goals they are, and I'm both trusting in God's providential grace as well as working my tail off to see them attained. And let's not forget the hard work and sacrifices being made by my two marvelous, warrior women (wife and daughter) who are making this possible.

I want to leave you with the words of a Psalm that have been like salve on the gaping wound that has been inflicted on my soul by the raging storm of globalization and the socio-politico-religio-economic turmoil that increasingly characterizes life on planet Earth. Let God speak these words of His again to you, and may your hope be found in Him alone.

Psalm 131 - A Psalm of Ascents. Of David.

1 O Lord, my heart is not lifted up;my eyes are not raised too high;
I do not occupy myself with thingstoo great and too marvelous for me.
2 But I have calmed and quieted my soul, like a weaned child with its mother; like a weaned child is my soul within me.
3 O Israel, hope in the Lordfrom this time forth and forevermore.

Praise our gracious Lord and King for His eternally good and powerful Word.

Grace and peace,

matt

Obama, Liberals, and "Abortion Reduction"

2009-03-16T14:44:00.003-06:00

CT article, "Reducing Abortion for Real," is well worth reading. It discusses the so-called "bipartisan" "abortion reduction" "effort."

Washington Post journalist Charles Krauthammer has a stinging critique of Obama's human ethics, in light of his recent overturning of the ban on Federal funding for human embryonic stem cell research passed during President Bush's presidency. A well-argued, must read article.

John Wesley on Financial Stewardship

2009-03-11T20:24:00.002-06:00

"The person who makes all they can, without both saving and giving all they can may be a living person, but they are a dead Christian”.

That's worth reading a few times.