Different Cloth

What is "Compromise?"

2012-01-07T10:46:00.011-05:00

Dictionary dot com defines the word first as "a settlement of differences by mutual concessions; an agreement reached by adjustment of conflicting or opposing claims, principles, etc., by reciprocal modification of demands." It is not until the 4th definition that there is a negative connotation.

I’m reading about a category that David Kinnaman refers to as “Exiles” in the book You Lost Me (Barna Books 2011). Exiles are those who connect with the Institutional Church minimally, but want to find a way to follow Jesus that connects with the world they live in. They like the term “missional.”

The understanding mother of a budding movie producer has to contend with believing friends who question how her son can justify his occupation with making films that have language and other content that appear to be contrary to “Christian upbringing.”

She states: “I wish the church-at-large would understand that our children are called to mission fields that aren’t located on a globe but may be more culturally impacting than mission fields we currently recognize.” And may I editorially add: “…and conveniently write checks for.”

Her son observes: “ ‘A film isn’t Christian just because it has inserted the gospel message in there somehow. A film can point to Christ when it honestly portrays our human condition and invites us to experience something about redemption that each of us needs.’ ”

DK interviewed a musician who attended a meeting convened by Charlie Peacock at the Art House in Nashville.

He shares: “…One of them told me that she had been pressured by people in her church not to license her music to a secular television show because ‘the message would get lost.’ She said, ‘That just seems backwards. I mean, isn’t the message more likely to get “found” if people actually have a chance to hear it?’ “

DK also had many of them tell him that they don’t call themselves a “Christian band” as they desire to be heard as artists with a very important message to all who will consider what they have to share. (I have my own hang-up with companies that market “Christian clothing.”)

Are these the potential new “Billy Grahams” who have no hesitation of incorporating slang and mannerisms characteristic with the current culture? How far does the Mars Hill principle stretch? We often hear and have used the term “compromise.” Is compromise wrong? I’ve usually heard it used despairingly.

Doesn't Peter wrestle with what he thinks is a "compromise" prior to meeting with Cornelius in Acts 10? Doesn't Paul sense cultural tension in his distress prior to meeting with antagonistic philosophers at the Aeropagus in Acts 17? Does not the church owe its existence to these risky compromises?

My questions linger: "Why is it different today? Why are we still expecting the culture to come to where we gather?" It seems like a "cake and eat it" situation. We do benefit from gathering - no doubt. But we maintain an expectation that the culture is only successfully reached when they are present at our special place on the special day at the special time.

In Such a Way....

2012-01-02T14:14:00.007-05:00

Matthew 6 contains Jesus' teaching about righteousness and how to personify it. He provides yet another mystic turn-about.

Verse 1 sets the tone: "Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven."

I have been critical of Tim Tebow because of how he publicly displays his spirituality. And I have been chastised by many (and there are *many*) who feel that he represents a positive image of one who follows Christ.

We are informed that we are the "light of the world" and we are commanded to let our light shine. But Jesus qualifies it in the same sermon before he conveys this secretive demeanor in chapter 6.

In Matthew 5 we hear/read these words (vv 14-16): "You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven."

The original language suggests that the shining of light has a purpose. By what we do, we actually deflect the source of the light from us to the one who initiates all light and life. Others are enlightened by our service and obedience and look straight to God and give honor and glory.

I believe that Tim Tebow is truly a Follower of Christ. I also believe that my good friend, Ssengooba Samuel Mugabi is also a genuine Follower of Christ. Samuel (Americans call him) is a pastor in Uganda who cares for children, in his country, who have lost their parents due to AIDS and civil unrest. You probably have not ever heard of him, which I think is very valid.

His ministry is called "Children Saved By Jesus Ministry."

I see Ssengooba Samuel Mugabi's good works and I glorify God in heaven. He enlightens me with his humility and obedience to Christ. His service provides perspective and encouragement to me when I am challenged with the so called rigor of ministry in America.

Although I may be unfair to my other brother, I can't say that I do the same watching an iron-pumped athlete genuflecting in front of Betacams and 70,000 Orange and Blue-clad worshippers. Please forgive me if this is troubling to you.

Footnote: Pastor Samuel does not have a website, but you can find him on Facebook by searching his full name of the name of his ministry.

Rain and Rust

2011-11-26T08:42:00.004-05:00

The emergence of such books results from the persistence of the platform/pew; performance/passivity paradigm.

Dorothy: "I think he said 'Oil can.' "

Scarecrow: "Oil can? Oil can what?"

Dorothy: "How did you get this way?"

Tin Man: "Well, one day.... and I've been this way ever since."

This link pretty well presents the need to stop the monologue.

http://tinyurl.com/cdg6n55

The General Confession

2011-09-02T07:57:00.002-04:00

This is from the 1928 Book of Common Prayer (Episcopal Church) in the "Order for The Administration of the Lord's Supper or Holy Communion" section.

I grew up hearing and saying this (most) every week. Although the language use is older, I still resonate with it today.

ALMIGHTY God, Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,

Maker of all things, Judge of all men; We acknowledge

and bewail our manifold sins and wickedness, Which we,

from time to time, most grievously have committed, By

thought, word, and deed, Against thy Divine Majesty,

Provoking most justly thy wrath and indignation against us.

We do earnestly repent, And are heartily sorry for these

our misdoings; The remembrance of them is grievous unto

us; The burden of them is intolerable. Have mercy upon us,

Have mercy upon us, most merciful Father; For thy Son

our Lord Jesus Christ's sake, Forgive us all that is past;

And grant that we may ever hereafter Serve and please

thee In newness of life, To the honour and glory of thy

Name; Through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

To Kor For,

Jeff

The Gift of Tongues

2011-08-14T11:32:00.005-04:00

Rereading 1 Cor 14, I now think Paul was using sarcasm and irony to uplift the resourcefulness of "prophecy" (both foretelling and "forth-telling") above tongues. I believe he is actually belittling the use of tongues - or at least the dependency on it to be used to personally edify.

Read it and try to hear a harsh, yet instructive tone. I think it makes sense and creates order - rather than the chaos that has been experienced historically trying to continually recreate an Acts 2 scenario.

Just sayin.

Like the Old Man on Top of the Mountain

2011-08-14T09:06:00.007-04:00

God is very hard to hear. This creates a dilemma in my faith - or does it? Wait. It is faith.

I don't hear often what I sense is the Creator's voice and appropriate directive(s). I often sense the directive and proceed. Sometimes I look back and realize that it was not what I thought it was going to be. Most of the time it seems right.

But every once in a long while, I hear God speaking directly to me. I realize the Jim Jones, David Koresh, Warren Jeffs problem. But when I hear, it is through the voice of others - through community - through friends.

Yesterday provided one of these rare and phenomenal occurrences. I simply thought/whispered (don't know how to describe it, otherwise) something only I knew about (within that room). I asked that if this were something I needed to have addressed, that it would have to come through someone else. Within minutes, someone spoke to me in a direct and in an encouraging way. The challenge within their encouragement was not detailed, but personal and specific enough. And it wasn't like a newspaper horoscope, that was a universal dilemma that everyone thinks is only addressed to them.

This could only be explained (which I don't always attempt to do), by a personal, creative entity - goes by the name of YHWH. I cannot successfully convey the magnitude of what happened with words typed out with a keyboard.

My faith is fortified. My fear (the right kind) is heightened. My commitment is deepened.

"To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit..." ~1 Corinthians 12:8

Your Basic Jesus

2011-07-28T11:58:00.007-04:00

During a recent dialogue (some called it a “debate”) on Facebook, we were discussing what it means to be a Follower of Jesus. As we were doing a little digging into what the teaching of scriptures meant for our lives and purpose on earth, one person got a bit testy with the conversation.

In some ways, I understand this resistance as we need to be cautious about our “knowledge” and being “right” about what we hold. This is the quick path the legalism and modern Pharisaism.

This person said: “…sometimes you "theologians"... think WAY too much and forget about the simplicity of Christianity. I accepted Jesus as my Lord and Savior, therefore I am a Christian! That's it! I don't have to buy into anyone else's theory... Keep it simple!!!!”

I resonate with the sentiment, but only in part. My response to this was *simple.* “I wish it was.”

Over nearly 40 years of being a committed disciple, I learned that following Christ is basic, but it is far from simple. These two words are not synonymous. It is essential to follow Christ. Paul clearly states that when he says to the Corinthian believers: “I resolved to know nothing except Jesus the Messiah, and him crucified.” “Jesus the Messiah” is the rudimentary truth. But the latter part of Paul’s statement carries a perplexity for all who don the flesh.

Our instinct is to survive, not die. But Christ, as well as the New Testament writers, teaches us that we must not cling to surviving. That we must indeed die to self and all that nurtures our wants and inward desires. The transformation process is rigorous and has a daily increment.

I find the first disciples’ transformation inspiring. Matthew, chapter 16 a microcosm sample. The person of Peter is easy to resonate with. He is the transformation poster boy. How often do we see his “V8 Moments” throughout the New Testament? They run right up to his canonized letters.

Jerry Tankersley, after an address to the National Prayer Breakfast, wrote an article titled: “Following Jesus is Not Easy!” In the article, he stated:

“Jesus’ followers did not understand this. The meanings of his words were hidden from them. They could not perceive the truth of Jesus’ way because they had other plans for Jesus and themselves. They were spiritually blinded.

Now this remains as a central obstacle for all the followers of Jesus. Often, we do not understand what it means to follow Jesus in his rhythm of death and resurrection. We do not understand how the way of Jesus disrupts and often contradicts our world views, ideologies, and agendas.”

Within our Facebook discussion, someone asked:

“Why isn't being just a ‘Christian’ enough? Why does it have to get all complicated? I don't remember anything in the Bible telling me that I had to do anything more than accept Jesus Christ in order to be a Christian. Jesus may have taught challenging and difficult things, but, he also simplified it so that everyone could get the message…I'll just keep up the faith the way I've been doing, I don't have to prove anything to anyone, I'll answer on my judgement (sic) day....

“Anything more…” I could not let this go (the person even told me that, in an accusing tone, after I responded).

Again, I understand the sentiment, but I’ve also discovered that the road of transformation has no earthly culmination. I think Peter learned this again and again. I think we all learn this until we get to the point of having “fought the good fight.”

Following Christ is basic, but it is far from being simple. Each day, many of his words echo in my ear and my flesh resists. Death to self is painful and agonizing. But resurrected life is refreshing and fruitful. Not a simple matter.

Civic Disobedience

2011-07-05T12:50:00.003-04:00

To call the police or not to – that is the question.

What is it about my transformation that now has me hesitating to bust 2 obvious “Junkies” when I encounter them?

On a recent Sunday, just after our Community Gathering around Noon, a young woman came into the coffee shop as a “customer.” She informed me she had not been in here before. I customarily informed her that we are non-profit and handed her one of our brochures on the front counter.

She looked at the menu and was rather fidgety. I offered her a few suggestions and she affirmed all of them. When I asked which one she wanted, she went back to not knowing. “Her behavior is very odd,” I thought to myself. I finally gave a resounding endorsement of one I assured her she would enjoy. She agreed to it and I started to prepare it.

As I went about my task of pulling a couple of espresso shots and mixing her vanilla iced latte, she looked at the brochure until she became engaged on her cell phone with a friend. She was informing her friend of her whereabouts. I couldn't help but notice that her speech was a bit hurried and jumbled, but not slurred. I began to wonder if her demeanor was the result of an uncontrolled substance.

I delivered her beverage and rang the total up on the register. The total was $3.75 and she handed me 2 one-dollar bills. I politely repeated the total and she began to rapidly finger through an over sized wallet. I observed the contents, which were mostly small note papers, credit cards and coins. More than once, I saw her thumb passed a thick fold of green backs, thinking she would draw from them. But this was not coffee money. She finally handed me a credit/debit card.

I swiped the card and the merchant program declined it. I then manually entered the data, and again it was declined. When I told her this, she did not look surprised but was able to come up with $1.75 in quarters. She was even digging for the coins as I was running the card.

Just as I completed the transaction, an older model compact car pulled into the sparse Sunday morning parking lot. A young female in flip flops, brown shorts and black tank top (only) quickly exited the car and headed toward our front door. As she opened the door, she came in to greet her friend. I greeted her and asked her if she wanted anything. She returned the greeting and said she didn’t need anything.

Her demeanor was even more animated than the first woman. She could not stand still and she kept running her hands over her hair (like smoothing it out), putting her hands on her hips, shifting her weight back and forth. For some reason she decided to exit the front door, go out to her car and then quickly return. I watched her and surmised that her quick trip was fruitless as she didn’t retrieve anything. It looked like the movement only served to keep her active, or she forgot why she went out.

I asked both of their names, in an introductory manner, and shook their hands. There was small talk about the 4^th of July, weather and such. As we talked, the first woman was smiling as she continued to put light coins into the donation jar by the register. She informed me that her iced latte was delicious as they both headed toward the door and left.

As they headed to their respective vehicles, I wondered if they would pose a hazardous threat to others on the street. The traffic was extremely light, being a Sunday before Independence Day. Still, they were obviously under the influence of something.

I prayed fast and intently regarding my response and reaction to this situation. Conventional wisdom dictates a prescribed civic responsibility. I knew what it was as I had it filed in an impermeable compartment of my mind. I could almost hear it speaking to me: “Jeff. Call the police. They are doing something illegal and need to be intercepted.” For some mystical reason, and despite the risk, I disobeyed the standard imperative. I was amazed at how quickly I was processing the matter seeking a divine influence to give me rapid insight.

I just sighed and in a strange kind of peace, prayed for and loved them. I mentioned their names. I imagined the One who created them also sighing their names. I may never see them again. But I do wonder if they may cross a subsequent path that will lead them away from darkness into a redemptive and loving light. I have strong conviction that that can happen.

This experience has resulted in a conflict that causes me to ponder. The opponents are all the conventional lectures that I imagine and may literally hear from those who may be skeptical about my decision, versus the “renewing of my mind” based on what I believe is my own spiritual transformation.

As I was praying in those short moments, all the cultural outcasts in biblical narratives popped into my mind. I was able to see a vast company of brokenness. I was able to see myself among them. I was able to see myself in journey with 2 fellow human beings I had never met. All of this transmitting in seconds.

Just what is “the renewing of our minds?” What does it involve? Is it continually the pattern created by God in the Old Testament and by Jesus in the gospels – where our fixed notions are challenged and dispelled? Does his real purpose and desire really escape us in the blind fashion that causes Peter to inappropriately thrash a heavy blade cutting off an ear of one perceived in violation?

I don’t think that there is a disjointed jump in thought, in Romans 12, when Paul implores us not to think of ourselves more highly than we ought, but rather think of ourselves with “sober judgment.” The Greek concept for sober is a “corrected mind.”

If we consider our own condition and our continual desperate need of mercy, the result will be a spiritual metamorphosis of our not conforming to the pattern of the world, as our mind-set changes.

I’m discovering that the “pattern of the world” is not always the caricature of extreme malfeasance we imagine. It can even be a “conventional wisdom.” Haven’t we seen Jesus criticized for disregarding perceived “injunctive norms?” Haven’t we learned that the principles of God’s Kingdom are a reversal of our own “Top Ten” lists?

As I reflect on this encounter, I must say that I was surprised at how it affected me. I didn’t see what I customarily see in this situation. It still amazes me how there was this “divine appointment” aura to the whole scenario. Instead of the standard eye roll and condescending “There but for the grace of God, go I” verbiage uttered, I rapidly connected with 2 fellow human beings created in the image of and dearly loved by God.

My sincere prayer is that I may see them again and have a chance to get to know them and experience Godly community with them.

This Eternity Thing is Never Ending

2011-04-20T07:20:00.003-04:00

"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover."
~Mark Twain

Is there something more ahead. Lord?

Train Like a Dentist; Get Paid Like a Janitor

2011-03-22T09:15:00.004-04:00

Dang! A few years and a butt-load of bucks from 1981-85... still the most challenging and yet the most fulfilling ministry we've ever been involved with, presently.

This article "Is It Time to Write the Eulogy?: The Future of Seminary Education" is a resonator of my long-held sentiments represented in the title of this blog.

They Say The Neon Lights Are Bright...

2011-03-07T17:47:00.041-05:00

On Facebook recently, Scot McKnight posted a link from the late Michael Spencer's blog "I-Monk." The blog is being maintained and now has "Chaplain Mike" as the primary writer.

The blog's entry was entitled: "A Rant from a Loser in the Worship Wars." As I read the post and the comments that followed, I couldn't help but notice a continual mind-set that strongly suggested consumerist preferences.

At one point, the blog read:

I’ve got to believe with all our emphasis on “creativity” and “innovation” today, we could easily imagine ways to include the older folks and the ones who appreciate more traditional forms in our worship services and in other important ministries where their gifts could be honored and used.

I like the challenge in this, but I still see a perpetuating dilemma where the form remains an obstacle. There remains the dependency on a small number of events at one location for a limit span of time in addition to getting people to come. Along with that is the hierarchy created by the professional/laity distinction. Today's institutional church is still an ecclesiastical theater district. Having been on the platform, performing, as well as in the pew, passively taking in, I've seen the rotation and shuffle that takes place from the front door to the back door. Every church building has both.

When I was in high school, I was involved in drama and theater. During my junior year, 3 of the high schools in our area took a combined trip to Washington, D.C. and New York City. Included in the package were three large-scale theatrical productions. The first was a dramatic play "An Enemy of the People" by Henrik Ibsen. It was at one of the many theaters situated on 45th street.

I recall how I was amazed at the number of theaters on the street, as well as the throng of people all dressed up entering the various buildings. As our group walked into our theater, we were given a few curious and cantankerous stares. Despite the educational objective through our attendance, we were undoubtedly out of place.

The following night, we returned to the Imperial Theater, in the same area, to see the musical "Two by Two." This was a highlight as I vividly recall seeing Danny Kaye in the starring role as Moses. He had broken his leg, at some point during production, and was in a cast on crutches. Again, there were people bustling about to get to the theater of their choice to enjoy their evening.

The final production that our high schools chose for our educational pleasure, was supposed to be the apex of our learning. Some brilliant person secured tickets for the Italian opera "Don Giovanni" performed at the Lincoln Center for the Performing Arts. Our seats were scattered throughout the theater, so we weren't able to sit together. Add to this, the fact that we had just finished a 10-hour bus tour of the city, the sedative music of Amadeus Mozart, an Italian script, soft velvet reclining chairs. All I remember was the fine-dressed man next to me nudging me from my slumber with his elbow, and his Margaret Drysdale-looking wife gawking at me condescendingly. My friends around me, and I, decided to hit the subway at intermission and head back to the hotel. To our astonishment, we saw half the high school student group on the train doing the same thing.

What's the point of this story? I believe the ecclesiastical vista resembles a theater district of preferential choices. Standards of measurement are dominated by consumerist mind-sets. What's good for the goose is not necessarily good for the gander and vice versa . It is a fact that there is a competitive spirit in a large majority of isolated parishes, despite platitudinous denial. Everybody really wants the same thing – to get people to come to their place. It is the drive behind every conversational comment that begins with "we do...." I know, because I have uttered it as well as heard it in certain ecumenical settings. This reality is apparent by two very simple words in the title to the blog: "Loser" and "wars."

Look in ye olde Yellow Pages (all 5 versions from your driveway) under "Churches." You'll see hooks like "You're Invited!", "Something New", "Experience the Difference" and "Grace Filled Community." Google "Churches" and type in the nearest significantly sized metropolitan area. I'll go out on a limb and wager that the number of theaters pales in comparison. I'll even bet that pizza joints are outnumbered. Have you ever heard anyone say that they were "church shopping?" It so easily flows off of the tongue.

All for what? ...the purpose to get people in the what? The building.

It is now my belief that the call for a return to authentic gift-exercising community is valid, where buildings and paid staff are not a distracting priority. I think we may be headed that way anyway like a reverse diaspora - given the economy and a more globalized culture. In a recent Wall Street Journal article, it was reported that many church-nouns are undergoing the threat of losing their structures. The author states:

Just as homeowners borrowed too much or built too big during boom times, many churches did the same and now are struggling as their congregations shrink and collections fall owing to rising unemployment and a weak economy.

Sacramento Vineyard Pastor, Johnny Zapara utters something indicative and profound, in the article, when he concludes:

"A building does not make a church. We will find a way to continue,"

“A way to continue…” I think I have learned of one.

I am aware of the continual caveat of portraying an elitist bias with the way I shed light on a consumerist mind-set. The danger is always to proclaim that everyone's problem is to look for "something better" and subtly act as if I know something no one else can discern.

I only speak as one who has been in the midst of the platform/pew paradigm and one who has been able to step outside of it. My own transformation has not been without challenging my notions and habits. A critical self-analysis revealed that the source of my apprehension was based on subjective things like job security, and modus operandi. Once I got into the water, it wasn't nearly as cold as I anticipated. It keeps getting warmer like a sulfur-heated mountain spring.

In his 2005 book, Revolution, George Barna reveals that a growing number of people are seeking spiritual growth outside the institutional version of the church. Some mistakenly assume that Barna is calling for a mass exodus, when he is merely observing what is taking place on an increasing level.

Our economy and culture is continually changing, just as it was when the Church-verb was in its infancy. God often works most effectively through such climates.

There are many Followers of Christ who see the yeast in the dough value of a more comprehensive gift-exercising gathering. Exploration and divine discovery are taking place by significant, yet intangible growth rates. I've seen this first-hand like I have not seen in many years of prior ministry. People who never even considered a walk with Christ and alongside others who follow, are finding themselves immersed in death-to-self-raised-in-Christ transformation.

There are no marketing or public relation requirements, just a simple call to authenticity and intentional engagement with our present-day culture on a daily basis. The parabolic fields are white for harvest.

Espresso Shot #2

2011-02-28T08:05:00.002-05:00

It's been awhile. I hope I can do this more often, because I really enjoy sharing insights I have learned.

Dream Off - Hope On

2011-02-07T10:54:00.033-05:00

One of the most challenging principles among all of Jesus' teachings is the call that one must "deny themselves." Is it hyperbole for emphasizing humility, or is it full-blown denial?

This rigorous mandate is found in all 3 of the synoptic gospels, so the point cannot by shirked. Let's look at the Matthew 16 reference (the other 2 are Mark 8 and Luke 9).

Matthew 16
²¹ From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life.
²² Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. “Never, Lord!” he said. “This shall never happen to you!”
²³ Jesus turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.”
²⁴ Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. ²⁵ For whoever wants to save their lifewill lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it. ²⁶ What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul? ²⁷ For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done.

In the Matthew and Mark accounts, there is the event of Peter contradicting Jesus, followed by his rebuke using the term "satan." Many imagine the presence of a fallen angel in the room, as Jesus is chastising. Based on the context of the pronouns used, I believe that the Messiah is speaking directly to Peter when he uses the term "satan."

The Greek word "satanas" is a noun of designation, more than it is a proper name. It means "adversary - one who opposes another in purpose or act." That's precisely what Peter is doing as Jesus illuminates by his response: "You... do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns."

What did Peter do to warrant such a harsh retort? It seems that his heart demonstrates allegiance to his teacher. Who would want someone they love and respect to go through such opposition which would result in demise?

Perhaps the notion of death is what provokes Jesus' rebuke. Is it not unsafe to assume that Peter only hears the darker aspects that precede the victorious outcome in Jesus resurrection? Notice how Peter seeks private audience with Jesus in his attempt to give him needed guidance. Perhaps Peter had hoped and envisioned something more triumphant and fulfilling. Maybe Jesus was dashing a "dream."

I imagine Jesus turning to the others from the isolation of Peter's embarrassing effort, and using the moment to address the rest. My 2011 ears here these words: "Listen up. If you really want to follow me, you've got to put everything you desire aside. I mean everything - even if you have to die. Do you want to follow your dreams in this life? Go ahead. You'll lose your life trying. But if you are really willing to lay everything aside, you will find the satisfying life that God has designed."

One common advertising tag line, goes something like "__________ will help you fulfill your dreams." The strategy is to tap into the person's longing for something. It may be a "dream house," a "dream vacation," a dream career," a "dream _________." Whatever it is, the "dream" is, without a doubt, subjective. It clearly involves self, there is no disputing that.

So what's wrong with that? Every body dreams, right? The answer is "yes" - and Jesus knows that.

Jesus came to teach the world about the Kingdom of God and what type of character exemplifies his reign. It is God's desire that "none should perish" and Christ reveals the very seeds of what lead to disengagement with the Divine. We see this explicitly in the Sermon on the Mount. What Jesus espouses here contradicts rampant subjective desire. Our dreams are wrapped up on human senses. If we pursue them, we're really not pursuing him.

Jesus emphasizes this truth with a question of irony that carries a Yiddish tone with it: "What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul?"

One may misinterpret Jesus' intention by viewing him as a spoilsport. But he is no wet blanket. He is YHWH's Anointed One and he teaches truth that we may benefit from it for a duration that has no end. That is implied in his question that makes a clear distinction between the "world" and the "soul."

When reviewing the New Testament writers, there is precious that substantiates personal dreams. But there is plenty written in regards to hope.

Is there a difference between dream and hope? If you break them down, there seems to be a difference. Dreaming is subjective and tends to be exclusive. Hope is objective and much more inclusive. Dreams are individualized and fragmented. Hope can become a banner and unifying.

Paul teaches about the powerful unifying influence of hope in addressing the believers in Rome.

Romans 5
Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, ² through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we boast in the hope of the glory of God. ³ Not only so, but we also glory in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; ⁴ perseverance, character; and character, hope. ⁵ And hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us.

Hope is much bigger and more significant than the total sum of human dreams. Trace the history of dreams and they all have a shelf life.

Denial of self realizes this reality and results from a deep humility that puts immediate and even short-range ambitions aside. Hope sees the benefits or potential benefits through posthumous legacies.

Jesus' brutal encounter with Peter demonstrates this. Peter's aspirations are evident in much of the New Testament. His gaffes, recorded throughout the gospels, indicate his self-absorbed perspective of what he alone deems as noble. (What on earth is he thinking at the Transfiguration?) Immediately following the arrest of Jesus and prior to his execution, Peter's dreams become kindling for the fire he warms himself with. He doesn't fathom what Christ meant by denial of self. There's only one particular form of denial he abides by, and that is made evident when a few people recognize him as a companion of Jesus.

His dreams die and the seeds of hope are planted. They take root during a duration that begins with a rooster's crow, and continues with an early morning meal on a beach a few days later. "Do you love me? Do you love me? Do you love me?

Peter is transformed from dreaming to hop. He offers a very deep insight in one of his own letters written toward the end of his earthly life.

1 Peter 1
³ Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, ⁴ and into an inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade.

Salvation Now

2011-01-03T18:49:00.001-05:00

All of my grandparents have passed on from this life. But I do remember being fascinated, talking with them about all they had seen change in their lifetimes, especially in regards to time-saving devices and distance covering mechanisms. They were born during the early development of the automobile and before the invention of the airplane.

I try to imagine what they did for entertainment, since most of what we do is highly dependant on technology. I also cringe at the thought of not having electricity and indoor plumbing. Their world was so much different than mine but not much different than how people lived as far back as 800 years. Our world today is full of speed and instant gratification and I’m afraid it has influenced our idea of sowing the seeds of God’s Kingdom in the world.

Somehow, I believe this has tainted our idea of the biblical idea of salvation. In our zeal to “win others,” we have forgotten the cultivating nature of biblical transformation. The Church has detrimentally gotten in the face of culture and demanded instantaneous evidence (“fruit”) that people who consider following Christ, do so with public demonstration and immediate spiritual character conformity. This helps with demand of tally placed on “growth.” Somehow, the cultivating nature of always carrying around in our body “the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be revealed…” (2 Cor 4) has been wrapped in a shroud of corporate accounting where we presume to be able to detect sheep and goats, wheat and tares, before our very eyes. The biblical emphasis on transformation has become lost. It’s like we’re now standing in front of the microwave impatiently waiting for our oatmeal to heat up.

Transformation is incremental. And it is my strong conviction that salvation is embedded in the transformation process. Many passages that focus on salvation and transformation are easily woven to present a distinct picture of the organic nature of following Christ. One passage comes from what Jesus teaches in John 5:24: “Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life.”

Notice how Jesus depicts what takes place. One “crosses over from death to life.” The verb used in the original language is “metabainō,” and it denotes a characteristic of a journey kind of movement. There is a departure and there is an arrival, but there is also a territory between the two.

Many biblical characters illustrate a developmental maturing as they learn to die to themselves and be raised to new life reflecting God’s universal truth. Think of Jacob, Moses, David, Elijah, Peter, Paul, Lydia…etc.

Nicodemus is a primary example. We see him in John, chapter 3, coming to Jesus at night to ask him questions about God’s truth. It is in the conversation where Jesus tells Nicodemus that he must “be born again.” The irony of this story is the way people have used the concept, “born again” to demand instant verification of Kingdom citizenship. What is rarely noted is that there is no resolution with Nicodemus through this one encounter and conversation. Jesus does not invite him to utter a “sinner’s prayer.” But that is not the end of Nicodemus. Lo and behold, he appears again in Johns’ account – in chapters 7 and 19. Does anyone doubt the authenticity of his being a follower of Christ?

We see the same open-endedness with the woman Jesus met at the well (John 4). We cannot detect where she has moved from death to life, but we can see the infant stages of her own metamorphosis – where a new mind-set is starting to develop with her by her question: “Could this be the Messiah?”

In our day to day ministry at Java Journey, we have seen and are seeing this happen in people’s lives. The opportunities at Java Journey are unlike any I’ve had since we began concentrating our lives on service and obedience to Christ. The day to day spontaneous engagement has so much more continuity than the week to week planned event format of the past. The “go” and the “send” emphasis in Jesus’ mandates seem to have more application with the former, rather than the latter.

Without naming names, I have seen folks who were more into Buddhism and Islam, have their mind-set change from considering Jesus as Messiah, to full-fledged commitment to Him and his teachings. There was never an urging or an event or point in time that we could mark as the moment each became whole-hearted followers, but they are indeed. I have also heard from the mouths of those living lives that run contrary to biblical standards (like the woman at the well or the tax collector praying in the temple), emphasizing their need and dependence on the mercy of God through Jesus Christ.

This has become a major lesson to us in how we go about ministry and “Kingdom opportunities” at Java Journey. It causes us to never write anyone off based on a belief or lifestyle that runs contrary to the teachings and principles of God’s truth. The woman at the well benefited from such an approach. , A man named Dionysius and woman named Damaris, both took interest in Paul’s convictions and became followers at Mar’s Hill (Acts 17). This lesson also causes us to look at every conversation as a potential opportunity toward service and obedience in Christ. Being in the day-to-day world (as opposed to being cooped up in an office/study or building preparing for a handful of events), the potential increases dramatically with every encounter.

Relinquishing the Platform/Pew; Performance/Passivity Paradigm

2010-11-03T22:19:00.000-04:00

I'm very appreciative and affirmed by each additional voice that creates a sense in me that we are not insane. I don't think it is happenstance that a "holy dissatisfaction" keeps echoing in variable tones through the canyon of status quo methods of perceived biblical obedience.

For me, David Platt is a new voice. I'm reading his 2010 NY Times best seller "Radical" It was given to me by my good friend, Eddie Broussard. He's leading a men's group at Java Journey on Thursday mornings who are going through this book.

As is typical for me in this blog, I'm copying an excerpt that resonates with me.

This particular portion pretty much symbolizes our sentiments and paradigm challenges over the last 6 years. It comes from chapter 3 of the book: "Beginning at the End of Ourselves"

Exalting Out Inability

In direct contradiction to the American dream, God actually delights in exalting our inability. He intentionally puts his people in situations where they come face to face with their need for him. In the process he powerfully demonstrates his ability to provide everything his people need in ways they could never have mustered up or imagined. And in the end, he makes much of his own name.

Consider the story of Joshua outside Jericho, a strong city with massive walls surrounding it. Certainly Joshua was anxious about leading the people of God in his first battle as commander. I can only imagine the sense of inadequacy he felt as he contemplated the task before him.

That's why, at the end of Joshua 5, we see him alone, wondering about the combat that lies ahead. But suddenly, God appears. In that moment God promises Joshua that his side will win the battle, and he gives Joshua the plans.

You can almost picture Joshua as he listens, thinking, What will it be? A frontal assault? A trick of some kind? Or just lay a siege and starve them out?

Put yourself in Joshua's shoes as you hear thse battle plans:

March around the city once with all the armed men. Do this for six days. Have seven priests carry trumpets of ram's horns in front of the ark. On the seventh day, march around the city seven times, with the priests blowing the trumpets. When you hear them sound a long blast on the trumpets, have all the people give a loud shout; then the wall of the city will collapse and the people will go up, every man straight in.

Let's be honest. That's weird. If you're Joshua, you're wanting a second opinion at this point.

Why did God design this battle plan for taking the first city in the Promised Land? Don't miss what God was doing. He was divinely orchestrating the events of his people so that in the end only he could get the glory for what would happen. Read the rest of Joshua 6, and you will see them tak the city of Jericho just as God hod outlined. But notice carefully what you don't see. You don't see all the Israelites going up to the trumpet players and tellin them what an incredible job they did that day. I can almost hear them now: "Abishai, I've never heard you play that well." "Nimrod, when you hit the high C, that was beautiful, man." No. Instead you see the people of Israel realizing that only God could have done this.

This is how God works. He puts his people in positions where they are desperate for his power, and then he shows his provision in ways that display his greatness.

Dependent on Ourselves or Desperate for His Spirit?

This is where I am most convicted as a pastor of a church in the United States of America. I am part of a system that has created a whole host of means and methods, plans and strategies for doing church that require little if any power from God. And it's not just pastors who are involved in this charade. I am concerned that all of us -- pastors and church members in our culture -- have blindly embraced as American dream mentality that emphasizes our abilities and exalts our names in the ways we do church.

Consider what it takes for successful businessmen and businesswomen, effective entrepreneurs and hardworking associates, shrewd retirees and idelistic stdents to combine forces with a creative pastor to grow a "successful church" today. Clearly, it doesn't require the power of God to draw a crowd in our culture. A few key elements that we can manufacture will suffice.

First, we need a good performance. In an entertainment-driven culture, we need someone who can captivate the crowds. If we don't have a charismatic communicator, we are doomed. So even if we have to show him on a video screen, we must have a good preacher. It's even better if he has an accomplished worship leader with a strong band at his side.

Next, we need a place to hold the crowds that will come, so we gather all our resources to build a multimillion-dollar facility to house the performance. We must make sure that all facets of the building are excellent an attractive. After all, that's what our culture expects. Honestly, that's what we expect.

Finally, once the crowds get there, we need to have some thing to keep them coming back. So we need to start programs -- first-class, top-of-the-line programs -- for kids, for youth, for families, for every age and stage. In order to have these programs, we need professionals to run them. That way, for example, parents can simply drop off their kids at the door, and professionals can handle ministry for them. We don't want people trying this at home.

I know this may sound oversimplified and exaggerated, but are these not the elements we think of when we consider growing, dynamic, successful churches in our day? I get fliers on my desk every day advertising entire conferences built around creative communication, first-rate facilities, innovative programs, and entrepreneurial leadership in the church. We Christians are living out the American dream in the context of our communities of faith. We have convinced ourselves that if we can position our resources and organize our strategies, then in church as in every other sphere of life, we can accomplish anything we set our minds to.

But what is strangely lacking in the picture of performances, personalities, programs, and professionals is desperation for the power of God. God's power is at best an add-on to our strategies. I am frightened by the reality that the church I lead can carry on most of our activities smoothly, efficiently, even successfully, never realizing that the Holy Spirit of God is virtually absent from the picture. We can so easily deceive ourselves, mistaking the presence of physical bodies in a crowd for the existence of spiritual life in a community.

Bill Hybels made a repentant statement a few years ago at one of his sponsored "Summits." He stated:

"Some of the stuff that we have put millions of dollars into thinking it would really help our people grow and develop spiritually, when the data actually came back, it wasn't helping people that much. Other things that we didn't put that much money into and didn't put much staff against is stuff our people are crying out for."

It is the "stuff...people are crying out for" that suggests the desperation of God's Spirit David Platt speaks about.

In the past 3 years, we have gone through such painful and challenging desperation. We have discovered a God who really catches those who operate by uncalculating faith. We have had to let go of notions we once thought of as unshakable principles. Little did we know that most of them were based on the rudiments of the misleading "American Dream." We have discovered God's ability to provide everything we need in ways we could never have mustered up or imagined. And in the end, he indeed makes much of his own name.

God, Have Mercy!

2010-10-14T08:11:00.000-04:00

Many don’t understand why I understand the Frank Viola blog link shared. Please click on it below and read it before proceeding.

A couple of nights ago, 2 “regulars” came into the coffee shop about an hour before closing. It has been reported to me by more than one that they are friends beyond casual friendship. The conversation quickly turned to “God-talk” – by them. It gladdened my heart to hear one of them proclaim the supremacy of Christ and his grace- especially from what he accomplished on the cross. In the conversation, the person courageously stated to me: “I am a weak man. I don’t know what I would do without grace. I’m a very weak man.”

After they left, a traditional couple came in. Both are Christ Followers who attend a very orthodox type of church. With my heart still alight from the previous conversation, I shared with them the richness of our dialogue. I told them about the struggle they shared and the mutual dependency we all affirmed of our need for Christ’s mercy. After I specified a certain area of struggle, the female asked: “Well, what is their salvation status?” It was like a knitting needle in a balloon. I offered my answer with proper candor: “I don’t know that.”

My mind quickly envisioned: “Two men went up to the Temple to pray…” and I wanted to repeat the challenging question Jesus asked. But I determined that it would not be understood. Sad. :-(

http://frankviola.wordpress.com/2010/10/13/rethinking-evangelism/#comment-6994

I Share Some Classic Sentiments

2010-10-12T10:20:00.001-04:00

"Antilegomena" is a category from early Christianity related to the canonization of scripture. Since all books underwent scrutiny, determining whether they were divinely inspired, some fell into ambiguous territory. Some early ecclesiastical researchers would actually speak against inclusion of some books - thus the term "Anti" (against) "Legomena" (I speak). The book of Revelation was among a handful of books that barely made the cut. Other books were James, Jude, 2 Peter, 2 & 3 John, Acts and Hebrews.

The book of Revelation seems to have the highest degree of dispute. Martin Luther had little use for the book, although he later changed his view. John Calvin believed the book to be canonical, yet it was the only New Testament book on which he chose to not write a commentary.It also remains the only book of the New Testament that is not read within the worship liturgy of the Eastern Orthodox Church.

As a devoted student of the bible, it pains me to admit that this is the one book I find myself detouring around. It fascinates me along with frustrating me.

I have only recenetly realized that it is not so much the book that creates the sum total of my frustration, it is what many so-called expositors have done with it. I am grateful for the insight of a new Java Journey friend for given me a fresh perspective. What David Trapero has done, in his study and concise summation, has served as a means of articulating what I've always discerned about the overall character of this unique book. I have often found myself diviating from the conventional interpretation of Revelation and straining toward teaching a "broader brush" perspective of the book. David has now provided me with a very valuable framework to utilize.

I have often likened eschatological revelations to the famous 1980s puzzle called the "Rubik's Cube" (see the "Rapture" post). The book of Revelation is a multi-sided mass of every color imaginable to humanity. This perspective provided so brilliantly by David gives me the peace and assurance that all the colors do not need to be shuffled about so that all distinctions are matching on one plane.

THE MATRIX OF REVELATION
Revised 10-10-10 by David Trapero

Symbolism - The book of Revelation is unusual in that it is composed almost entirely of symbols, dramatic visual imagery and is dripping in rich metaphors. Approximately 90% of the book fits into this category. The other 10% is straight forward yet also shows familiarity with the rest of the book’s symbolism. In addition, over 80% of the symbolism, concepts and imagery are drawn from the Old Testament, perhaps 15% comes from New Testament concepts and themes with the final 5% unique to Revelation itself along with a dash of extra-biblical Jewish apocalyptic writings of the time.

Audience – The book contains seven brief letters in its opening chapters (2,3) and addresses itself and its entire contents to these seven churches which are named geographically and in the order a circuit prophet or apostle might “make the rounds” among them. Each of the seven churches is most certainly a collection of Jewish Christian congregations scattered around large metropolitan areas like Ephesus. The Jewish nature of the content and symbolism of the book of Revelation and its relevance to its intended audience indicate a stage in the expansion of Jewish Christianity that had by this time spread both far and wide of Palestine. For the inner circle of Jesus’ apostles and Jesus’ brother James, their mission field increasingly became the Jews of the diaspora (dispersion) which simply means Jews of Greek birth, culture and citizenship yet faithful to the laws and customs of Judaism. Stephen, the first Christian martyr was one of these Greek born and cultured Jews living in Judea during the inception of Christianity. We must expect the unexpected because relatively little is known of Jewish Christianity outside the early chapters of Acts. The Jewish Christian books of the New Testament probably include Hebrews, James, I, II Peter, I, II, III John, Jude, Revelation and the gospel of John (influenced heavily by Diaspora Jews who had lived in Judea).

Perspective – After the opening chapter and the letters to the seven churches we the readers find ourselves transported with John into heaven itself. There is a moving and visually arresting “throne room” scene in chapters 4 & 5 and until the end of the book we never entirely leave this heavenly sphere. In a sense everything that transpires on earth is in direct and indirect relation to heaven’s activities. Worship is one of the strongest and most powerful themes of Revelation. In heaven worship is constant and marvelous and praise and honor are offered in all circumstances taking place on earth below. In times of victory and redemption as well as in times of intense trials and persecution. It is a kind of unfolding of Paul’s “all things work together for good to them that love God”. God is depicted as the all-knowing One, who was, who is and who is to come. His response to evil, even on a grand scale is one of enormous patience and forbearance, merciful and longsuffering. However, Revelation depicts the limits of God’s mercy and describes God in the most dramatic and colorful terms as administering justice for his persecuted and oppressed people by bringing down the enormous and intertwined evil institutions that once again seek to enslave not only his people but the entire human race. The enslavement is described as subtle and extremely deceptive and effective in eliciting peoples’ trust and “worship”(13,14,17,18). It is this overpowering deception, conflict, climax and resolution that brings earth’s history as we presently know it to an end, culminating in what appears to be the “second coming” of Christ(ch.19). But according to the book of Revelation this is not the end. Chapters 20 – 22 describe the eventual transformation of the earth, “a new heaven and a new earth.” On this transformed earth God’s presence is the center of all human life and activity. God’s temple is humanity itself and all human inflicted forms of pain and suffering have ceased to exist. More about this in section 8, The Process.

Focus – Even though the book of Revelation unfolds (beginning with chapters 4,5) from a heavenly perspective, God seated on his throne ruling the universe is also the object or focus of the book. The ongoing worship of heaven is liturgical, educational and transformational in that it helps us correct distorted views of reality, self and God. Heavenly worship in essence says that no matter what views there may be to the contrary the beliefs and values of heaven are the only ones that are real. We are invited to join or rather recognize and fully embrace our place in the heavenly worship that transcends time and space, matter and energy.

Orientation – The orientation of Revelation is that of a kaleidoscope, ever changing its patterns, colors and shapes. Yet the patterns repeat, the colors mingle and the shapes shift and transform into new entities. Revelation has no single “correct” interpretation. It has multiple valid interpretations that come and go throughout history. It is a mirror in which everyone sees himself in his current historical context and each new generation sees something different. The many current “end-time” scenarios currently in vogue ignore one simple fact: prophecies (Messianic prophecies a case in point) are only discerned, fully appreciated and promulgated after the fact. This will certainly be the case with Revelation. That being said, there is a thematic arc that spans the book of Revelation and has something important to say about the ultimate designs and purposes of God.

How the Story Ends – Revelation is crystal clear about the goal, the end point of all God’s activities in salvation history. History, His-story is leading humanity to what is referred to as a “New Heaven and a New Earth”. The new heaven and earth are described as co-existing with God and the Lamb’s throne at the center of human civilization where humans have intimate face to face communion with God and the Lamb and where all the evils and ills that have plagued humanity for millennia have ceased to exist. Heaven is on earth, which is where God and the Lamb reside. Humans no longer live in fear (symbolized by the gates of the New Jerusalem always being open). Old prejudices, stereotypes and biases no longer function as all the nations freely enter the Holy City and bring their precious gifts to God. All the old animosities and circular conflicts have long since faded away. Finally, Jesus’ prayer, will be fulfilled.

     “Thy kingdom come,
      Thy will be done,
      One earth just as it is in heaven.”
                           Revelation announces the imminent fulfillment of this prayer in Rev.10:6,7,
The time of waiting is over.
When the seventh angel sounds his trumpet
the mystery of God will be fulfilled
just as he announced in the gospel to his servants the prophets.
                                “The mystery of God” is the transformation of this broken world into God’s kingdom.

How we get there – The main theme and kaleidoscopic narrative of Revelation is found in chapters 4 - 22:7. What is going on here? It can easily be experienced as a “bad acid trip”. And perhaps that is one of the most important points. From God’s and the heavenly worshipers’ perspective sin, suffering, evil and destruction is indeed like a bad acid trip. It is a horrific distortion of the will, plans and purposes of God. Human history is a long and frequently repetitive pattern of suffering, evil and injustice. God does not stand off at a distance but is intimately and intricately involved engaging the destructive powers of history towards his ultimate purpose: God with us.

The Transformation Process – When Jesus planted seeds in the earth with his blood a process has begun whereby the gospel of the kingdom has grown, interacted with, interpenetrated, mingled and transformed people, activities, systems and institutions. Ironically, at the same time the activity of the Accuser has intensified in response to Jesus’ multiple incursions into enemy territory. Revelation shows that this back and forth conflict, intermingling and triumphs and losses will continue. As Jesus said, “The wheat and the weeds grow together until the harvest.” We are living in the best of times and the worst of times. We are better able to see the depths of sin and suffering precisely because the gospel has opened our hearts and minds and made us more sin-sensitive.

The kingdom slowly (historically) leavens human civilization.

The kingdoms of the earth resist even as they unwittingly embrace kingdom principles and practices.

The consequences of not fully embracing God’s kingdom result (naturally) in chaos, confusion and multiple practical problems: economic, political, social, familial, environmental, etc.

Earthly kingdoms attempt to control the growing chaos of our world which is like throwing gasoline on a fire or struggling while sinking deeper into quicksand. Rather than surrender to Christ (repentance) the power structures work harder to control what cannot be controlled except by God, only to make things far worse.

This in turn creates greater chaos and leads to crisis, panic and desperation on the part of those in positions of power and the entire world.

Draconian measures are taken to try and bring things under control. Instead the “solution(s)” become part of the problem and exacerbate the situation further.

Scapegoating (persecution) once again is turned to as an attempt to “let off steam” and bring stability to a runaway system out of control. Those who have no cooperated with the anit-Christian control methods are targeted and persecuted.

As the scapegoating continues the world polarizes into two increasingly different groups: those who practice the principles of Christ even in the face of severe persecution and death and those who look to the powerful forces and institutions offering an illusory security at the cost of conscience.

A battle for the hearts and minds of the whole world ensues as the polarization process matures. This process may be likened to the process that Christ went through during his last supper, Gethsemane, Betrayal, Denial, Jewish and Roman trials, condemnation, crucifixion, death, burial and resurrection. The choice that humanity as a whole is faced with is “Jesus or Barabbas”, the way of ever escalating endless violence (i.e. self-destruction) or the way that makes for peace. The choice and the contrast between these two extremes will never be as pronounced as at this time. “The time of trial that is coming upon the whole world, to put the people of earth to the test.” Rev.3:10

At earth’s darkest hour “Christ comes” victorious (a kind of global resurrection) and “takes captive” the primary power structures that have enslaved humanity with force and fear. The forces of evil are destroyed. Christ’s faithful followers rule with him (the ascension) for a 1000 years, judging and entering into deep fellowship and participation in God’s ways.

At the end of the 1000 years a final end is brought to Satan, death and the grave. The New Jerusalem symbolizes a wholly transformed human civilization in which God and the Lamb are at the center and humans have free, unlimited access to God’s presence. The tree of Life is in the city which represents a full circle back to Eden. The city of the New Jerusalem represents that humans are no longer in the garden. Humans have experienced paradise, the fall, salvation history, the conquering kingdom and final transformation and consummation of humanity’s divine destiny. We have not returned to Eden, we have experienced and become something even more wonderful in the whole incredible process (Rev.21,22).

I hope you have benefited by this as much as many or he has shared this with. My personal thanks to David.

Keen Foresight

2010-09-14T09:58:00.001-04:00

I'm nearing the end of reading Leonard Sweet's 1999 book "SoulTsunami." Besides my being a slow reader, I like to fully grasp the insight of LS. He is a contemplative genius gifted with ability to provoke needed ecclesiastical application of essential biblical mandates. His word-smithing is very creative and often times entertaining.

In his chapter "Get Deidolized," he lays out his ideas about future paradigms in the area of "human resources." I immediately resonated with his challenge, as I have struggled with the corporate mind-set applied to the "organic" Body of Christ. "Pastoral Search Committees" and staff "Job Descriptions" have long-been life-suckers for me, personally, as rigid compartmentalism stagnates the Kingdom yeast-like character of undetectable expansion. I don't know how many times I became discouraged when I was going about a task of ministry with flowing giftedness and a high degree of motivation, and informed that "This is not your job - This is your job."

His description of what needs to take place (from his perspective 11 years ago) is actually a pretty accurate delineation of the current DNA of Java Journey. It is such a contrast with life-giving essence to be part of "web", rather than being a "staff member." That's why I highly value his distinction between "structure" and "system."

Fit Together ~ Ministry needs to be contextually determined. It is no longer enough to offer programs that people can "fit in." People want to fit together. "Fit in" was the mantra of the command-and-control structures of the Industrial Age. "Fit Together" is the mantra of the decentralized, out-of-control systems of the postmodern era. The pigeonholing of people is at an end. Part of soccer's surge of popularity among the Net-Gens is precisely this: Everybody is trained in all positions, and everybody is playing almost all the time.

Postmodern systems staff the process, not the position. That's why "job descriptions" need to be blurred or replaced by "spirit descriptions." Job descriptions fit you into someone else's categorical cubbyhole, then post "No Trespassing" signs all around the hole warning you to stay in and others to stay out."

In indigenous ministries to postmoderns, "spirit descriptions" will be so basic to the body of Christ that people will be hired for ministry solely on the basis of their spiritual energies. "I have no idea how we are going to use you, Minister of I-Don't-Know-What?" Come join the Church of God-Knows-What.

There are two mechanisms of "fitting together": teams and webs. Teams are project-oriented, goal-driven, and mostly short-lived. Webs evolve slowly and are based in relationships and connections that have little hierarchy and constantly shifting centers of power. The church must learn how to fit people together into teams and webs. But teaming entails all sorts of new muscles, new spirits, new skills, new thinking. Who has trained us how to "think together"? It's a whole new kind of thinking, this team thinking.

Java Journey has evolved and is evolving with a deliberate pace. There is little hierarchy and leadership does shift. There are many who still cringe at this reality, but it is working. The authenticity and full expression of giftedness creates a powerful untapped and unknown drive most of us have not experienced in previous "ministry" contexts.

So now, - when people ask us what "church" we are part of (and they often do), my new answer will be "The Church of God-Knows-What."

Church for Treehuggers?

2010-09-07T11:31:00.000-04:00

I realize that this theme is being recycled. but I am convinced that it needs to be.

I have a good friend who winces at the term “organic” – especially as it relates to the Church. He can only associate it with marketing gimmickry that targets environmentally conscience consumers. In a way, I understand his hang-up. World Market sells items with an “organic” label. They are usually priced higher, and I wonder how much more nutritional value is really part of the package.

The following is a definition, from World Market, to consumers defining the term for them. Be sure to take note of the qualifying “thought to be good.”

What it means: Items that are “100 percent organic” are certified to have been produced using only methods thought to be good for the earth. “Organic” means the item contains at least 95 percent organic ingredients.

When “Organic” is used in relation to the church, some may become confused into thinking that it is a ploy to draw the same target.

It is my belief and conviction, that “organic” is more appropriate is describing God’s design for those who commit to His Messiah by following the teachings of Jesus Christ and the initial Apostles. Christ used many parables and similes that were organic in nature. Paul, likewise, uses biological metaphors.

The following interview, with 2 current “Organic Church” voices, is helpful in giving some semblance of “shape” to something that is very difficult to shape.

The voices belong to authors/consultants Neil Cole and Frank Viola. Author, Keith Giles, asks some very relevant questions. I am posting this with his permission.

What Is Organic Church?
An Interview with Neil Cole and Frank Viola
Conducted by Keith Giles

KG: As simply as you can, define what "Church" looks like to you in practical terms. (Looking for an example of how an "Organic Church" would function - how a typical meeting might look - in your version of "Organic" church). What is your definition of "Organic Church"?

Neil: Many scholars attempt to describe church with a list of ingredients that they believe are found in the New Testament. Here is a typical list: a group of believers that gather together regularly and believe themselves to be a church. They have qualified elders and practice baptism, communion and church discipline and agree on a doctrinal foundation and have some sort of missional purpose.

I have no problem with these ingredients being a part of church, though not all of them are indeed biblical (no where in the NT does it say that we have to consider ourselves a church to be a church—that is a cultural reaction to calling bible studies or parachurch organizations churches. There are also NT churches that have not had elders appointed yet on the first missionary journey—Acts 14:21-25). I believe that this understanding of church is missing the most essential ingredient: Jesus! If we can define church without Jesus than we can do church without Jesus and that is a tragedy at best and treason at worst.

In CMA (Church Multiplication Associates), we have defined church this way: The presence of Jesus among His people, called out as a spiritual family to pursue His mission on this planet. Church begins and ends with Jesus among us. All the typical ingredients listed to describe church were in the upper room in Acts chapter one but the church really began in Acts chapter two when only one other important ingredient was added: the Spirit of God showed up! God among us is what makes us any different from the Elks Club.

For us church functions like a family, and family is not just for an hour and a half one day a week. We eat together and live together. We do get together, but not only for serious meetings. We meet up during the week for coffee or a meal and hold each other accountable to following Jesus in Life Transformation Groups. My spiritual family often get together to reach out to others, at cafes or with release time outreach at elementary schools and in the marketplace where we all work. We also go to the movies or on hikes together during the week.

Church is not an event, a place or an organization; it is a family on mission together. We must emphasize this shift in understanding. As such we are not defined by a meeting, though we do meet. When we meet we do not have a routine that must always be done. But for the sake of helping people get a feel for the ebb and flow of our lives I will try to describe what our time is usually like when we do get together.

When we do have meetings, we do not presume to have an agenda, but to gather, listen to God and one another. We worship, sometimes with music. About half of the songs we have are original songs written by people in our movement. In our meetings we do not have a set list of songs that are rehearsed, but rather we sing the songs that He puts on people’s hearts as the Spirit leads. We sing until we feel like we have changed our perspective of things from having been in His presence. We may then keep singing if that is what He leads us to do, but often we share next what is going on in our lives.

We have a little poem (not the height of poetry by any means) that is usually said by anyone in the group to start the share time. We do this so that even young kids can lead in the church and when people start a new church they know what can get the interaction started:

Does anyone have praises or prayer requests,

A word from the Lord or a sin to confess?

We all share what God is saying and doing in our lives and we all pray for what is happening. This could be all we do for the entire evening as well.

We usually open the Bible, read a passage and discuss it. Right now we are going chapter-by-chapter through Acts but this is not routine and we often turn to something else at the leading of the Spirit. We do not have any preparation for this time, as we are not the ones in charge, Jesus is. Our time in the word, however, is not simply pooling ignorance because of the following reasons: 1. We are all listening to the Head of the church and He is not ignorant, and 2. Because of Life Transformation Groups, most of us are all reading large volumes of scripture throughout the week repetitively and in context, so our observations in the scriptures are actually quite insightful. The Spirit of the Lord working in each of us is the teacher, and we are all learners.

When a good question arises or even some false teaching, a leader of the group does not usually step forward and decide the issue for everyone. Rather, we pray and ask the Lord to help us out. Then we ask what insight the Spirit may have given to each of us. The body responds, not the pastor. This empowers everyone to react to false teaching or to find solutions to difficult questions, not just then but anytime. We are also quite comfortable with three little words: I don’t know.

We usually pray and sing and eat until it is time to head home. We may also watch the Lakers play a game or go to a movie. Hope that helps some. As you can see we are not set on a routine and do not have a formal agenda, though we do have some consistent but very flexible patterns.

Oh, and we do not have an offering that is passed in my own church. Some of the churches in CMA do, but we do not have that as a set responsibility of church. What we do have is generous people of God who give, not just money but property hospitality and time, to those who are in need.

Frank: I’m of the opinion that the New Testament only knows one kind of church, and it’s organic. The ekklesia is a living organism not an institutional organization.

I’ve been using the word "organic church" or "organic expression of the church" for over 16 years. And I give credit to T. Austin-Sparks for the phrase. For Sparks and I, an organic church is a group of Jesus followers who are discovering how to live by Divine life together and who are expressing that life in a corporate way.

Jesus said "as the living Father has sent me, and I live by the Father, so he who partakes of me shall live by me." Paul echoed these words in Colossians when he said that the mystery of the ages is "Christ in you," and that "Christ is our life" (see also Gal. 2:20; Rom. 8:9-17).

Consequently, when God's people learn how to live by the indwelling life of Christ together, a certain expression of community life naturally emerges. So for me, the word "organic" has to do with life – God's life. The organic expression of the church comes up from the soil; it's not mechanical. While it has organization (or an expression) – as all living organisms do – the organization (or expression) comes about naturally from the life, not through human manipulation, religious ritual, or legalism.

Put another way, organic church life is very ancient. It precedes Jerusalem and Bethlehem. Instead, it finds its headwaters in the fellowship of the Triune God before time. When humans touch that fellowship together, experience it, and make it visible on the earth, you have the life of the ekklesia, i.e., organic church life
(1 John 1:1-3; John 17:20-24).

I left the institutional church 22 years ago and have gathered with numerous organic expressions of the church (completely outside the religious institutional system) ever since. I’ve seen a lot during those years – experimented with a lot, experienced some of the high glories of body life, the difficulties and struggles, and have made lots of mistakes as well. I'm still learning and discovering.

Regarding what an organic expression of the church looks like, here are some of its characteristics:

*The members meet often, not out of guilt or obligation, but because the Spirit draws them together naturally to fellowship, share, and express their Lord (ekklesia literally means an assembly or meeting).

*Jesus Christ is their living, breathing Head. The members make Christ profoundly central, preeminent, and they pursue and explore His fullness together. In short, the church is intoxicated with the Lord Jesus.

*They take care of each other, have open-participatory meetings where every member functions, make decisions together, and follow the Spirit's leading for outreach and inreach, both in their proper season.

*They are learning how to live by Christ and express Him corporately in endless variety and creativity to both the lost and the found.

*The condemnation and guilt is gone. The members experience the liberty and freedom that is in Christ, experience and express His unfailing love, and are free to follow Him out of genuine love rather than guilt, duty, obligation, condemnation, shame and guilt – the typical "tools" that are used to motivate God's people.

*They are missional in the sense that they understand "the mission" to be God’s eternal purpose, which goes beyond human needs to the very reason why God created the universe in the first place. And they give themselves wholly to that mission. (I'll speak more on the eternal purpose later.)

*After the foundation of the church is laid, it is able to meet on its own without a clergy or human headship that controls or directs it. The church can sustain herself by the functioning of every member; it doesn't need a clergy system for direction or ministry.

These features are contained within the spiritual DNA of the ekklesia no matter where or when she is born. For they are the attributes of God Himself, the source and headwaters of body life.

Regarding your question about what an organic church meeting looks like, that’s really impossible to answer. The reason: authentic organic churches have an infinite way of expressing Christ in their gatherings.

Perhaps the best I can do is describe a few meetings that one of the organic churches that my co-workers and I are presently working with have had recently. None of these descriptions will do the gatherings justice, but perhaps they may give some impression of what a good meeting looks like (not all meetings are good by the way – some are unmentionable! :) ).

Last month, the church had a meeting that it prepared for over the course of a month. The church broke up into groups of 3 and began to pursue the Lord Jesus outside of the meetings during the week.

The members all came together at a scheduled day and time to worship, exalt, and reveal Christ. The theme of the meeting was Jesus Christ as the Land of Canaan. The meeting included a full banquet feast, which was really the Lord’s Supper (first-century style). The church feasted and then each group began to share Christ as the Land.

One group shared how the vine and the fruit of the vine were a shadow of Jesus. Another group shared Christ as the olive oil; another shared Christ as the milk and honey. Another shared Him as the wheat. Sprinkled throughout the sharing – which was incredibly rich – were prayers, declarations, songs, all of which were spontaneous.

This meeting went on for over 3 hours. It was a gully-washer. No human being led or facilitated the meeting. There were also elaborate creations and visual displays in the meeting place made by the church that went along with the theme.

I didn't attend this particular meeting, but the reports I heard were amazing. People were profoundly touched. Visitors who came were blown out of the water. They had never seen a group of Christians put Christ on display like that, and without anyone leading, giving cues, or facilitating. The depth of insight, richness, and reality of Christ coming through the believers was without peer. Jesus Christ was revealed, declared, unveiled, glorified, and made visible by the every-member functioning of His body.

On another occasion, each member of the church took a name of the Lord in Scripture. (e.g., Bread of Life, Lion of Judah, Sweet Rose of Sharon, the Great Shepherd, Alpha and Omega, The Branch, etc.). During the week the members sought the Lord concerning the name they selected and came to share Him together in the gathering. The meeting was electric. Christ was revealed in a multitude of different ways. New light was shed on each of His names, all pointing to His glorious Person.

Another meeting was a rather unique way of expressing the Lord through Colossians. The church had immersed herself in the book of Colossians for four months (in some very creative ways). They then planned a meeting where they reconstructed the Colossian church.

Each member acted out a character from the Colossian church. Some created their own names (some names were quite comical). Others played the part of some of the Colossians mentioned in the New Testament (Philemon, Apphia, Archippus, etc.) For weeks the church broke up into pairs to plan and prepare for the gathering. They then had an entire meeting where they reconstructed the situation in Colosse. If you had walked into that meeting, you were seeing the Colossian church dramatized. People even dressed up for their parts.

At the end of the meeting, someone who played Tychicus came into the gathering with a letter from Paul and read the whole letter to the church. Incredible light was shed on the letter, as it addressed all the problems that the Colossian church (through drama) was shown to have had. We all awed at the Lord as Paul presented Christ in this magnificent epistle.

I could multiply many more examples, but I hope you get the drift. Note that the people who are part of these churches aren't spectacular Christians nor are they professionally trained. They are "the timid, the weak, the lame, and the blind" . . . just like I am. Ordinary believers without any special titles, degrees, or formal theological education. In this way, they are much like the early believers we read about in our New Testaments (the exception being that most of us are able to read and write). :)

Some meetings are planned with a theme that the Lord gives the group (as the above examples). Other times the meetings are completely spontaneous without any planning or direction. But spiritual preparation normally takes place, else the meetings will be rather poor. The meetings are the overflow of the spiritual life of the community; hence, all the believers come to give rather than to receive. (In the institutional church system, this order is reversed.)

Again, these meetings have no leaders present directing, facilitating, or coordinating. The Spirit takes that job. I'll add that I've seen unbelievers visit these sorts of meetings where no one said a word about "being saved," and the unbeliever would fall to their knees and profess that "God is here, and I want to know Him!" Strikingly, this comes straight out of the New Testament (see 1 Corinthians 14).

Also, the churches have all sorts of meetings – some for decision-making, some where the men creatively bless the women and vice versa, some for the children, some for specific prayer, some for fun, some to share the gospel with the lost, some for spiritual training and retreats, etc. But everything is "in season." (The seasonal nature of the body of Christ is a special feature of organic church life. All life forms pass through seasons. This element is virtually unknown in organized Christianity.)

Note also that the churches I’m speaking of have been equipped to know the Lord together, to pursue Him together, to express Him with unlimited creativity, and to function in a coordinated way under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Part of this equipping is "detoxification" from a religious and institutional mindset, and being equipped to know Christ in profound depths. (One of the most common remarks that people make when they get involved in this kind of church life is, "I thought I knew the Lord well; but I now realize I didn’t know Him well at all.")

Thus the normative passivity that flows through the bloodstream of the typical pew-sitting Christian has been drained out of them. Instead, they’ve been captured by a vision and an ongoing experience with the Lord Jesus that has dramatically affected them. I’ve been changed by the experience. Yet what impresses me just as much or more than the meetings is the remarkable way the believers take care of one another in organic church life. But that’s another story.

KG: As you understand it, how would you describe one another's definition of this same term? (I'm looking for how you two understand each other's positions here)

Frank: I’m really not sure as Neil and I have never discussed this. But my impression is that the term "organic church" for Neil boils down to rapid multiplication of Christian groups with the goal of trying to win lost people by going to the places where they spend their time. It also includes a method of discipleship in very small groups which includes Bible reading and personal accountability questions. This may or may not be accurate, but it’s my impression.

Neil and I have shared the conference platform on two occasions, and from hearing him speak, it seems to me that the major difference is one of emphasis. I also think he may emphasize the church scattered where I tend to emphasize the church gathered. But in my world, the church gathered is nothing like an institutional church "service." For us, the gathering of the ekklesia is related to God’s highest intention, i.e., His eternal purpose.

God has had an "eternal purpose" that’s been beating in His heart from the beginning of time, long before humans fell. That purpose is what provoked Him to create, and He’s never let go of it. The eternal purpose of God isn’t the salvation of humans or to make the world a better place. (Remember, the Fall hadn’t occurred when He created.) There was something else He had in His heart before He said "let there be."

That purpose has to do with obtaining a bride, a house, a body, and a family, all of which are by Him, through Him, and to Him. The purpose of God is not centered on the needs of humanity, but rather, to meet a desire in God Himself. So God’s end is to have a bride, a house, a body, and a family in every city on the planet. The ekklesia – properly conceived and functioning – indeed benefits humanity and blesses the world that God made; but His goal for her is higher than that.

Having Christ formed in us is an important aspect of God’s purpose (Rom. 8:28-29; Ga. 4:19). But for us, we don’t use any of the typical discipleship methods to accomplish this. Instead, we have learned how to encounter the Lord Jesus in Scripture together, to seek His face, to fellowship with Him, to be in His presence, and to share and express Him to one another.

This typically happens in groups of two and three during the week (sometimes in the early mornings), but also in the corporate gatherings. I call these groups "pursuit teams" – teams that pursue the Lord. The focus is not on us but on Christ. Paul said that we are transformed by "turning to the Lord" and "beholding His glory" – so that’s a large part of our church life experience (2 Cor. 3:16-18). In short, we experience together – in pursuit teams and as a church – perceiving and following the Lord’s indwelling life, allowing God to shape us by it. That, to my mind, is what spiritual formation/transformation is all about.

Watchman Nee once pointed out that when the Lord called people to His work, their God-given ministries were often prefigured by their secular occupations.

For instance, when the Lord called Peter, he was casting his net and bringing fish onto the shore. What was true in the natural ended up being true in the spiritual. Peter's ministry centered on fishing for men. His emphasis was evangelism, and he brought many lost people to Christ (just think of Pentecost in Acts 2).

When the Lord apprehended Paul, he was building tents. And his future ministry reflected this. Paul was more of a spiritual builder, a "master builder" as he put it in 1 Corinthians 3. His emphasis was to build the church into the fullness of Christ. So Paul spent most of his time grounding and enriching the believing communities to gather under the Headship of Christ, establishing them deeply into Christ, unveiling to them God's eternal purpose – or "the whole counsel of God" as he once put it.

When the Lord apprehended John, he was mending a torn net. We see in John’s later writings (1 John, 2 John, and 3 John) that he is bringing the church back to center . . . back to first things . . . back to "the beginning" of Christ as life, love, and light in a time when these elements had been lost. The tent that Paul built was falling apart during John’s day, so John prophetically began to repair it by restoring God's original thought, bringing His eternal purpose back into view.

So Peter casts the net, Paul builds the tent, and John mends the tent. All three men were Christian workers in the Lord’s vineyard, but each had a different emphasis and disposition.

In my observation, Neil is a lot like Peter. His major focus seems to going out to the sea, casting the net, and bringing the fish on dry land and encouraging God's people to do the same. Some have described my on-the-ground ministry to be more like Paul’s – the building of the tent – the constructive work of building the house of God to fulfill the eternal purpose "from eternity to here." By contrast, my writing ministry in books like Pagan Christianity and Jesus Manifesto are very much along the lines of John’s ministry of repairing the torn net.

Whether that’s accurate or not, here’s my point. The ministries of Peter, Paul, and John are not to compete with one another. Instead, they are to complement one another. The body of Christ needs the ministries of Peter, Paul, and John. And each person needs the other.

That's how the terrain looks from my hill, anyway.

Neil: From my reading, I assume that Frank and I are pretty close to seeing church as a body connected to the Head. Jesus is the main thing for both of us and we both emphasize that in our teaching. If there is a difference I believe that Frank exalts the purpose of the church and I tend to emphasize the purpose of disciple-making. Not that we don’t both teach both, but we do have our own priorities. These could be simply different focus rather than a difference of opinion. How organic church starts and multiplies is probably different in our minds.

KG: Does the model of church really matter? Isn't it more important what fruit is produced or how the people in the church grow spiritually?

Neil: Well, I tend to agree with this statement, but...If reproduction and multiplication is desired, model of church is an important consideration. More complex models will not empower ordinary people nor reproduce easily. Another important consideration is that many models tend to usurp the leading of Jesus with our plans, personalities and programs.

The more scripted the church is the less spontaneity will be possible. We cannot expect Jesus to lead if we are all busy maintaining the script and all our time together is scheduled down to the fraction of every second.

This may step on a lot of toes but a performance with preaching on Sunday mornings (or Saturday for some) is not conducive to a changed life or a responsive body. If the body wants to have a gathering where they praise, preach and pass the plate, fine, but if that is your sole model of church and where you think the most important work is done and than you have a bankrupt model of church. Our society today is reflective of that bankruptcy, and we must make some changes now. It is the forth quarter and we are down by twenty...it is time for a shift. I believe that organic church is not a model but a mindset that can work in any model...but will work better in some models than others.

I also believe that any model that is built upon a hierarchy of leadership is probably less healthy in most aspects. When a few are responsible to hear from God and tell the rest what God is saying the church is separated from God by a middle-man and that is not what Jesus died and rose to birth. We are all priests in His kingdom and we all have direct access to God. None are more spiritual, more connected or more responsible for the advancement of the Kingdom, but all are agents directly connected to the King Himself.

Frank: For me, organic church is a shared-life in Christ; it’s not a model. It’s not about a new structure; it’s about a new relationship with the Lord Jesus. One that is real, intimate, deep, and corporate. A common remark that my co-workers and I hear from people who attend our conferences is, "I came here to learn how to ‘do organic church,’ and instead, I received a revelation of Jesus Christ."

The idea that church is an "event" or an "organization" was foreign to the New Testament believers. For them, the ekklesia was a community of people who lived a shared-life together in Christ and who gathered together regularly to express the fullness of Jesus. Their minds thought in terms of "us" and "we" rather than "I" and "me."

Their identity was tied to their union with Christ and their bond with one another. They pursued their Lord together, expressed Him together in regular meetings, took care of one another, married one another, and buried one another. Think of it as an extended household . . . a new polis (city) that is blind to race, social status, economic standing, etc. They were a new kind of humanity . . . a new civilization . . . the "third race" as the ancient Christians called themselves, where all earthly distinctions, separations, and barriers were not recognized.

The church was a colony from heaven . . . a community of "resident aliens" on this earth . . . the corporate manifestation of the Lord Jesus Christ Himself . . . a microcosm of the kingdom of God . . . the house of the living God where the heavens and the earth intersect and meet . . . the foretaste of the New Jerusalem and the aftertaste of the fellowship of the Godhead that has been going on from before time. In short, a local church that is functioning properly is Jesus Christ on the earth (see 1 Cor. 12:12). And therein do you have yet another definition of organic church.

For those who are burdened for evangelism and being missional to a post-Christian country (as the USA now is), the ekklesia – when she’s functioning the way God intended – is the greatest evangelist on the planet. There’s nothing that bears witness more to the reality of Jesus as the world’s true Lord than a group of believers who share their lives together and demonstrate what the kingdom of God looks like. This point is completely overlooked by those who would argue that the expression (structure) of the church doesn’t matter.

By contrast, today’s Christianity is very individualistic – this is true both in and outside the organized church. But authentic Christianity is intensely corporate and therein was their power and testimony.

A careful reading of the Gospels, Acts, and the Epistles shows no distinction between being a Christian, being saved, being a disciple, and being a functioning member of a local body of believers. (I’ve discussed this point at length in another place where I added a plea to learn our history regarding modern discipleship methods.) Note that when Luke describes how Paul and Barnabas planted the church in Derbe, he says they preached the gospel to the city and "made many disciples" (Acts 14:20-21, NASB & NKJV).

The organic expression of the church in a given place is the true habitat of every child of God. Separating spiritual growth (“discipleship”) from the ekklesia (properly functioning) is like separating child-rearing from the family.

This again touches evangelism. One of the young men in an organic church that I relate to was a leader in a very large para-church organization that’s known for evangelism. About a year ago, he said to me after one of our gatherings, "I just go back from one of our leadership conferences and the more they talked about saving the lost, the more disinterested I was. I come to these meetings here and while nothing is said about evangelism, I’m so excited about my Lord that I want to share Him with others. There’s no guilt or duty in it at all. I’m fired up about Him."

Properly conceived, the ekklesia is the environment in with we live, move, and have our beings. While it will never produce perfect Christians who are beyond making mistakes (we will all make mistakes on this side of the veil), their depth in Christ is unmistakable. So for me at least, it’s not about a different model, but about a different habitat.

Those interested in learning more may want to take a listen to an audio excerpt where seven members of a fairly new organic church answered common questions about organic church life at a recent conference (Threshold 2010). The excerpt contains only one question that they answered (there were 7 questions in all). The question was: How has your relationship with Jesus Christ changed since you’ve been part of organic church life? People can listen to it here (http://www.reimaginingchurch.org/shortqa.mp3).

KG: How do you define - and better yet practice - the idea of leadership in the model of church you promote?

Neil: Leadership is not about a position, an office, or a title, it is influence. Leadership is not functioning as a delegated decision-maker for an absentee King. We are servants that distribute empowerment rather than delegate it. Leadership is all about connecting people to the King and allowing them to listen and follow His word. We do not need more servant leaders; we need more servants...period. Many leaders don’t mind being called a servant; they just don’t like being treated like one. To lead is basically to go first and let others follow your example. Often in the NT the words, "go before" or "stand before" is used to describe our leaders, but unfortunately they get translated as being above or over the others.

There is a form of servant that exemplifies maturity and can point to spiritual children and even grandchildren in their lives. We need more of these servants in the body. Their role is to equip others to function in the likeness of Christ together. These are apostles, prophets, evangelists, shepherds and teachers (Eph 4:11). They do not do the work but equip others to do it. For example: Evangelists are not called simply to reach the lost, but to equip the church to do so. Teachers are not called to teach the saints, but to equip the saints to teach. All are saints, so of course evangelists evangelize, that gives their equipping even more authority and practicality (besides, I can’t imagine an evangelist who wouldn’t). A teacher is good at teaching, but needs to be very good at training others to teach. We need to rediscover this type of leadership if we are going to change ourselves, and then the world.

Frank: In my experience and observation, leadership in an organic expression of the church seems to fall into three categories:

1) It’s expressed through itinerant traveling ministry where Christian workers lay the foundation for a new church, equip the believers to know the Lord deeply, to function together, to build community, and to have open-participatory meetings where Christ is made the visible, functioning Head. Their leadership is strong in the beginning, but then it literally leaves and moves to the periodic. You find this sort of leadership all over the New Testament in the ministries of Paul, Peter, Timothy, etc.

2) It’s expressed by consensual decision-making where the believing community plans how they will pursue and reveal Christ week by week, how they will handle problems, and how they will take care of one another and serve the lost in their city.

3) It’s expressed by the different giftings that will organically emerge in the community in time. Eventually shepherds will emerge who will care for those with needs, overseers will emerge who provide oversight, teachers will emerge who will bless the church with the ability to unveil Christ from the Scriptures, exhorters will emerge and function according to their giftings, etc. In other words, each person will lead according to their unique gifting. In this way, all believers lead in their own way.

The goal of each expression of leadership is to lead the church to Jesus Christ, the true and only Head of the body.

The interesting thing is that in this type of church life, we don’t use labels or titles. So the reality of the gifts and ministries are present, but in most cases, we don’t earmark or point them out. (Sometimes those who are engaged in itinerant ministry will acknowledge who the overseers are, but this is dependent on the specific situation of a particular church).

In my experience, the believers in these types of churches are so busy pursuing and expressing the riches of Christ that “leadership” never comes up as an issue or subject. Jesus is their Head, and they seek to know and follow Him together. That’s about as much time they spend talking about leadership in the churches. It’s really a non-issue.

I have the impression that it was this way for the early Christians too. Just count the number of times the words "elder", "shepherd", or "overseer" are mentioned in the New Testament, and then count the number of times Christ is mentioned or referred to. That says volumes, I think.

KG: Which scriptures would you point to as being reflective of your views concerning organic church?

Frank: I’ve come to the conclusion that there are only two subjects in the entire Bible: Jesus Christ and His church. Everything else can be juiced down to those two realities.

Someone may object by saying that God the Father and the Holy Spirit are the subjects of the Bible. But remember, the fullness of the Godhead dwells in Christ. God is Father because He has a Son. The Spirit is the Spirit of Christ, and He has come to manifest and glorify Christ. Biblically speaking, there is no God outside of Jesus Christ. God is known in and through the Son.

Jesus Himself said that "all Scripture testifies of me." So Genesis 1 to Revelation 22 is an unfolding of Christ and the church on every page. I add "church" because the church is never separate from Christ – it is His body and bride. She is depicted through many of the types of the Old Testament, such as all the brides of the Patriarchs, the tabernacle, the temple, the nation of Israel, etc.

Jesus Himself incessantly talked about the church. In fact, He did so more than He did the Kingdom of God. If you’re only counting the word ekklesia you’ll completely miss this.

Jesus never used the word "Trinity" or "Godhead," yet every time He spoke of His Father and the Spirit, He was talking about the Triune God. In the same way, every time you see that little band of Twelve men and some women who lived in community with one another with Christ as Head, you’re looking at the prototype – the earthly embryo of the ekklesia – that Jesus Christ said He would build. And when the Lord spoke of the vine and the branches, “my brethren,” the light of the world, the salt of the earth, etc. He was referring to the church. If we understand what the Kingdom really is, we’ll discover that after the ascension of Christ, the Kingdom came in, with, and through the church.

So for me, it’s not a matter of going to certain proof texts to build a model for church. It’s seeing the whole sweeping, epic saga of the biblical drama from Genesis to Revelation. And that drama is all about the Triune God known and expressed through Jesus Christ and His eternal quest for a bride, a house, a body, and a family (which is the church). I unfold this thesis in From Eternity to Here, which seeks (in an admittedly frail way) to unveil the eternal purpose of God – the mission to which we are all called – throughout the entire Bible.

Once our eyes are opened to see His eternal purpose, we suddenly have a new Bible in our hands and a new vision of the Lord before our eyes. The Bible turns from black-and-white to Technicolor, and the Lord becomes infinitively greater to us.

Neil: Wow, um, all of them? All scriptures are profitable for training in righteousness. In our training, we point to the parables of Christ a lot (especially Mark 4). Jesus’ usage of the word church in Matthew is important to us (2xs). Ephesians is a powerful treatise on church for us as well. Acts is foundational of our view of a church multiplication movement. The letters to the seven churches in Revelation is also very important to us.

KG: Have you ever met one another in person and/or read one another's books?

Neil: To my knowledge, we have met twice, emailed a couple times and talked on the phone once. I have read Pagan Christianity, How to Start a House Church, and Finding Organic Church. I skimmed Reimagining Church, but haven’t read it entirely yet. I think Pagan Christianity is Frank’s best work and we carry it in our online store. I am grateful that he invested the time to produce this seminal work. Thanks Frank. I have also listened to a couple of his talks online, visited his website a few times and read some of his articles.

Frank: We’ve met face-to-face twice at conferences, but we didn’t have much time together. So far I’ve read one book by Neil and several articles. We have a number of good mutual friends. I have a lot of respect for Neil and am thankful for his contribution to the body of Christ.

I’ve made this statement to a few people, but I’ll say it publicly for the first time. I’d love to see a Summit that includes all those who are pioneering and influencing the missional church movement/phenomenon to be locked in a room together for 3 days. The first day would be an informal "get to know one another" time, very casual and relaxed. The next day, each person would have a solid hour to share their heart, their burden, their vision, and their present work with everyone else. A time of questions from the group and answers would follow.

We would all get to know one another better as people rather than from a distance as authors and speakers. If no homicides occurred during those 3 days :), it seems to me that the worst case scenario would be that we’d all better understand one another and what makes each of us tick. That alone would be worth the time, in my judgment. In the best case scenario, we’d all be sharpened, adjusted, and perhaps we’d even see some co-laboring going on in different degrees. And a lot of misunderstanding, assumptions, and confusion would disappear.

I am pessimistic that someone could actually put such a Summit together; but if they were able to, I’d move heaven and earth to attend and participate. (I’d even offer to help with the planning.)

Incidentally, Pagan Christianity is fairly well-known, but it’s not my most important or best work. It’s just the first half of a conversation – the deconstructive part. Its objective is to blow the rocks out of the quarry. But that’s all it does. Reading it by itself is like listening to the first fifteen minutes of an hour-long phone conversation, then hanging up the phone – never knowing what was said afterward. For this reason, Pagan was never meant to be a stand-alone book. It’s part of a multi-volume series. My most important and best book (hands down) is From Eternity to Here with Jesus Manifesto perhaps tied neck-and-neck.

KG: What do you see as the most striking differences between your version of "Organic" church and the other person's version? Why does it matter?

Neil: Frank does not seem to be as favorable to multiplication movements as I am. I gather that he sees church taking a long time to mature to the place where it can give birth to another church, while I see reproduction as able to occur much faster. Ironically, we both point to Acts to support our point of view.

I believe Frank teaches that one must be part of an organic church to start one and that an apostle must be involved. I think that is probably one of the best ways, but not the only way. It seems to me that Frank teaches that apostles start churches and that not everyone can do it. I tend to go the opposite direction and teach that anyone can start a family. Not everyone is an apostle and not everyone can lay a foundation for a church multiplication movement, but they can certainly reach their friends and start a spiritual family. Anyone that has Christ in them has what it takes to start a spiritual family. Some families are less inclined to reproduce rapidly and start a movement, because an apostolic and prophetic foundation is necessary for this.

I also see that an apostolic foundation can be extended without the apostle needing to be present. Colossians, Hieropolis and Laodicea were begun by Epaphras but it was Paul who laid the apostolic foundation so he could write to them as their apostle even though they’d never seen his face (Col. 2:1-3).

I see maturity for people and the church to be a life-long process so I believe that the church can reproduce throughout that process, even in the first year. We have experience in this as well. I have personally started probably six or seven churches, but grand-parented and great-grand-parented dozens more. Our training has catalyzed the start of thousands of churches. The church I currently am part of has been in existence for ten years and sent off 35+ church planters all around the world. It has birthed other networks and has several generations of churches.

Frank emphasizes the spiritual life together connected to Jesus, and I admire that. We do as well, but we tend to emphasize apostolic mission much more in addition to the presence of Jesus and our nurturing relationships. I see church as the fruit of disciple-making, not the other way around. Our life together is better because each of us is connected to Jesus, each other and our mission to the world. We refer to this as the DNA of organic church, which stands for Divine Truth, Nurturing Relationships, and Apostolic Mission. We teach emphatically that all components of the DNA must be in every part of the church from the smallest unit of disciple in relation to another disciple. We teach that the components should not be supplanted, supplemented or separated. The organic life of the church springs from the DNA at work in the heart of disciples together.

Frank: I think the only way we can accurately answer that question is if Neil and I sat down for several hours to discuss our views, observations, and experiences.

I’m pretty convinced that Epaphras was a "sent one" who received training from Paul in Ephesus, then went back to his hometown in Colosse and planted a church there that met in Philemon’s home and in two other nearby cities in the Lycus valley. I detail this account elsewhere with documentation, but that’s a short riff.

Regarding church multiplication, I’ll simply say that I believe in the multiplication of the church (I usually call it "transplantation"). But I don’t regard it as a template or metric of anything.

In my experience and observation, as well as my study of the New Testament, a specific church should follow the Lord’s leading on when and how to multiply. Like so many other things in organic church life, discerning the season is imperative.

Consequently, when and how to multiply a church is more of an art than a science. It’s dependent on the art of hearing the Spirit and rightly perceiving the season. Thus it will differ depending on the season of a particular church’s life, the spiritual maturity and development of the group, the kind of foundation that has been laid, and many other variables. If these elements are ignored, multiplication can easily lead to quick dissolution of one or both groups. That’s been my observation anyway.

It’s also not wise to push toddlers outside of the home and expect them to reproduce. So again, I’m of the opinion that there’s a danger of making multiplication a method, a science, or even a goal. I believe the goal should be God’s eternal purpose, the heavenly vision that Paul labored under and that provoked him to plant and nurture organic believing communities.

Regarding church planting, I don’t believe that an organic church can only come into existence by the hand of those who are called to plant churches. Organic church life can occur spontaneously . . . and it often does. As I write these words, it’s taking place right now among numerous college campuses across this country. The students who are touching and tasting it don’t know exactly what it is (except that it’s glorious), and they are probably not calling it "organic church life." Yet the problem is that body life (the way I’ve been describing it) is extremely fragile, and it doesn’t last very long. It invariably dies within a short period of time. It either dissolves or it devolves into an institutional form and a clergy figure emerges to take it over.

Its chances of survival are much better if there is experienced outside spiritual input that knows how to center the group on Christ, help prepare and navigate it through the inevitable pitfalls, and give it the kind of equipping to sustain it in a spiritual way without human organization or control. This sort of spiritual input can take many forms, but the traveling ministry of broken, experienced, Christ-centered, humble, and non-sectarian itinerants who eventually leave the group to the Lord is one of the most common in the New Testament narrative. It of course isn’t a panacea (nothing is), but it can be a tremendous benefit.

As for the subject of movements, that’s too big of an issue to go into here, I think. And it’s quite complicated. (I plan to address it in the future.) I’ll just say that numbers don’t impress me at all. I grew up in a movement that stressed numbers and “counting.” The problem came with exaggerating the data (which is the scourge of virtually every movement – whether Christian or nonchristian). To get the "accurate/real" figure, you had to cut it in half and divide by two [Symbol] Einstein couldn’t be more correct when he said, "Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted."

I believe this applies to the work of God.

All told, my impression is that Neil and I probably agree more than we may disagree. Both of us are often associated with "the house church movement," yet I get the impression that we share a common feature here. Neither of us makes the home our center. The living room isn’t our passion. As I’ve often said, meeting in a home doesn’t make you a church anymore than sitting in a donut shop makes you a police officer. :)

While a house has many advantages as a gathering place, there’s nothing magical about meeting in a living room. Not all house churches are “organic” (the way I’ve been using the word) – so "organic church" is not a synonym for "house church." I suspect that Neil would agree with this.

"Not Funny 'ha-ha'; Funny Queer?"

2010-07-18T09:58:00.001-04:00

The "Innovation Station" Facebook page asked the following question.

Homosexuality and Christianity can be a polarizing topic. Some churches choose to ignore scriptural references to homosexuality because they feel it promotes hatred and prejudice toward praticing homosexuals and that a loving God would never condemn such practices. Somes churches have no problem with homosexuals attending their churches but draw the line when it comes to ordaining homosexuals or allowing them in leadership. If pushed to state their policy, they indicate that they believe homosexuality is a sin. Still other churches are openly hostile to gays and feel it is their divine duty to point out their sin publicly with little or no grace.

In what ways is your church being challenged on this topic? How are you handling it?

I simply wish to post how I answered the question.

How and where does God begin his transforming work in a person's life that leads them to salvation? The woman caught in the act of adultery has what appears as an ambiguous resolution: "Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more." The woman at the well has what appears to be no resolution. Yet a transformation process seems to have started to take place in her life as she goes to find people so they can meet the person of Jesus. Nichodemus doesn't make "a decision for Christ" in John 3. Jesus never extends an "invitation" - yet we still see him in John 7, and then once again in John 19.

The homosexual issue is very challenging to the church today. Some seem to be more selective in pointing out this issue and making self-righteous pronouncements, than other manifestations of "missing the mark." Jesus indicates a surprise characterization of those who will gather at the "feast" in God's Kingdom in Luke 13:22-28. He also says elsewhere that you will know people by their "fruits" (no pun).

Is this an excuse for us to look at others to make a determination of their eternal destiny - or is it a caveat for our own lives to be living in obedience to his character. Again - the woman "caught" has a penetrating principle that involve the joints and marrow of our souls.

This present challenge is illustrated quite well in the popular 1996 movie "Sling Blade." The main character struggles to understand God's scriptural principles in many ways - including parents who used a facade of Christianity as an abusive and brutal governing tool. He articulates his perplexity with the issue of homosexuality through the character played by the late John Ritter (Vaughan Cunningham). Vaughan is a conscientious person who is upfront about his struggles with attraction to the same sex. Near the end of the movie, Karl asks Vaughan to assume parental responsibility for Karl's young friend, Frank.

Karl's final words to Vaughan correlate with Jesus' words to the woman about to be stoned to death: "I don't reckon you have to go with women to be a good daddy to a boy. You been real square-dealin' with me. The Bible says two men ought not lay together. But I don't reckon the Good Lord would send anybody like you to Hades."

The church needs to not dilute God's truth by ignoring what has clearly been characterized as one manifestation wrong-doing among many. Likewise, the church should not create a hierarchy where homosexuality is worse than heterosexual lust, or any other manifestation of wrong-doing (even manipulating numbers on a 1040 that benefits self).

Another teaching of Jesus is profoundly personal. It's the metaphor of the 2 men praying in Luke 18:9-14. We need to keep this teaching in our personal pipes and smoke it as often as we can.

"To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everybody else, Jesus told this parable:' Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee stood up and prayed about himself: "God, I thank you that I am not like other men—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get." But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, "God, have mercy on me, a sinner." I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.' "

Aircraft Carrier Turn?

2010-06-24T17:20:00.000-04:00

Sometimes when I quote writers, it results in some directing their frustration right at me. "I'm just the messenger" and I'm just passing on insightful thoughts that resonate with my passion.

Perhaps a recent quote I saw on FB from an author "friend" - attributed to Arthur Schopenhauer - is appropriate to pass on? "All truth passes through 3 stages. 1. It is ridiculed. 2. It is violently opposed. 3. It is accepted as being self-evident."

Several quotes from Leonard Sweet's 1999 book *SoulTsumani" in chapter 7 ("Get Dechurched") are none other than suggestions to readers - especially those involved with church leadership. Written 11 years ago and considering the lingering MO of the organized church, I'm prompted to assess out loud: "Ain't gonna happen anytime soon." I hope I am soon proven mistaken. If it does happen, it will be like the proverbial aircraft carrier turning.

These are paragraphs I have highlighted in the chapter that convey the essence of Sweet's challenges. I really believe that the dependency to cling to an increasingly ineffective paradigm is stunting the vital growth of God's Kingdom in this fragmented culture we live in. One of the problems that causes an overwhelming reluctancy (as I have observed) is the anger and frustration of those who draw resources from the the platform/pew format. Frankly, I believe there is a fear to "let go and let God."
Step out! And then look around and you may find a few who are indeed following "whole-heartedly."

One criticism I have heard from those involved in "professional" ministry is that the insights shared by the more intense Christ-Following authors, are not to be given heavy consideration since they are not equal in potency as God's revealed Word. Would it be fair for me to reverse such logic and tell one that oracle presentation should bear the same scrutiny?

Whether I receive insight from a book or a delivered message does not matter. It is still proclamation by those gifted to probe God's truth and present it in ways that instill ecclesiastical obedience.

I hope these quotations are beneficial to those who read and motivational to seek out the challenge of fulfilling Christ's commission in today's fluid culture.

One of our greatest killers is the notion that what we don't know isn't worth anything. One of our greatest challenges is how to come to terms with what we don't know and the too many things we know that aren't true. Because the church has failed to be both a learning organism and an unlearning organism, our intellectual capital is steadily depreciating. (p. 146)

Before there can be a Postmodern Reformation, however, there must first be a Postmodern Deformation. Structural deformation leads to spiritual formation, which leads to ecclesial reformation. (p. 147)

What irony that in the midst of a spiritual heat wave in the culture, in the church it's a deep freeze. Establishment religion now looks back nostalgically at a wonderful past and looks forward anxiously at a frightening future. The problem is even deeper than the statistics of 25 years of mainstream membership loss reveal. (p. 149)

The default assumption of the modern church was a material theology that said "Got a problem, get a program." For the church to minister in postmodern culture, it must dematerialize its thinking. (p. 152)

Prayer moves things in another world, an unseen world - a world more read, more powerful, and more lasting that this one. (p. 152)

Every organism must learn how to devolve - to "let go at the top," to lose control, to cell out, to reverse oneself and become less optimal, less efficient, less fit, less ordered and organized. (p. 152)

...decentralization is the push of power downward from the center to the margins, from vertical to horizontal. from "command-and-control" organizations to "cultivate and coordinate" empowered organisms. (p.153) [JS: This is one dynamic that creates fear for those dependent on the former - as I have personally observed].

Deconversion will take place through ther development of "a folk apologetic" (George Hunter's phrase) - a folk theology that is built on narratives, not concepts or categories. People are not prone to move away from one home unless they see a good alternative available. A "folk apologetic" is not a "for-all-time" wywtematic theology but a "for-now" peity that is built on "as-they-should-be" beliefs.(p. 155)

In this Digital Age, the monolithic mass markets of the mid- and high-modern era have broken up and diversified. We have gone in my lifetime from a mass market to a micromarket to new mass customized market. [JS: My example - Just Budweiser worked until Fat Tire came along. Now Aneheiser Busch is marketing Amber Bock] (p. 158)

The key to ministry in this next reformation is intellectual capital in general, and innovation and creativity in particular. In the new world one thing is certain: What works today won't work tomorrow...The need to prepare for ongoing adaptive change makes innovation and creativity the key survival skills in navigating the chaotic world of the 21st century. How embarrassing that the institution that worships the Creator is so often bankrupt of creativity! (p. 159)

Lose Focus. If you try to see it, you'll never see it. You first must loosen up and let things get cloudy. Deconstruct your world. Give up preconceived notions of how to do ministry...Deconstruct you old way of seeing and hearing and doing. Give up preconceived notions of how to do ministry. "Fuzzy" is good. (p. 160)

Be a "middle-of-the-roader," and you will get run over by both sets of oncoming traffic. (p. 161)

The essence of complexity is the ability to look at many things at once to think more than one thought at a time, to abandon old fixations and make new connections, following you intuitions and trusting the Spirit. (163)

But in the same way the G.P. in medicine became extinct, only to come back as a speciality in Family Medicine, so the church must give up congregational, mass thinking and learn to niche the "generals" it took for granted...
One of the great challenges for the church, therefore, is to niche multigenerational worship. mulitgenerational missions, multigenerational education. (p. 164)

How small a niche? In a culture that has shifted from mass to micro cultures, you can't establish too small a niche...
This is a culture that revels in quality coffee; There were 200 coffee houses in the US in 1989, almost 10,000 just 10 years later (p. 165) [JS: Keep in mind that this was written in 1999. I'm certain that the number is far beyond the one printed.]

Demassification and decentralization are polarizing churches over such things as abortion, homosexuality, economics, lifestyles, and the allocation of resources between the young and the old. Church warfare in the postmodern era is less over theological issues than social and stylistic issues. Each side boasts a politically correct and theologically correct position.
We need churches and leaders willing to take experimental antibiotics against the "them" versus "us" virus that is plaguing society. We need communities of faith and faith leaders who will not discover an Enlightenment-style via media between the competing pro-choice/pro-life ideologies, for example, but will pioneer a modus vivendi through irreconcilable and intractable forms of belief that cannot be harmonized or balanced, only bridged. (p. 166)

FROM THINK-BIG-THINK-SIMPLE TO THINK-SMALL-THINK-COMPLEX
In fact, part of the problem with too much "contemporary worship" is that there is insufficient complexity rich enough to express the involution of Christian doctrine.
Postmodern ministry is the parting of the commonplace to reveal the complex.
The wonder of Jesus is not either-or. The wonder of Jesus is and/also. He was the most complex person who ever lived, which enabled him to live the most simple life that's ever been lived. (p. 167)

Can the church help people slow down, even shut down? Can the church help people "simplify" their lives?
You can find it in the grassroots campaigns to "simplify government" and "simplify preaching" (both of which often confuse complexity with verbosity). (p. 169)

The simple life of faith can be lived only by passing through immense complexities. Simplicity is not the starting point, but the ending point.
Faith is not simple. Faith can only become simple.
Christianity is the first religion that was not temple based.
To determine to what degree your church is tample based, look at your budget and figure out what percentage of your money is spent on maintaining you temple.
Nor was Christianity priest based. The decentralization of ministry in the glocal church means a decentralization of leadership and responsibility. (p. 170) [JS: I'm wondering why Sweet did not ask the question again in regards to budget as it related to the "priest."]

The dedifferentiating phenomenon is breaking down the walls between highbrow and lowbrow, between public and private, performer and audience...
Dedifferentiation is blurring the delineations between the sacred and profane, the worldly and the godly, church and state, politics and entertainment, the serious and the trivial, the quality and the tabloid, the real and the imaginary - all boundary-defined categories that are legacies of the past.
It (postmodernism) plunders and parodies with abandon until "nothing is inappropriate, excorporated; the exclusive is included, distinctions and categories dissolved into coequal fragments. (p. 171)

In a boundary world, life is predictable, controllable, familiar, and well-delineated. In a border world, life is ill-defined, diffuse, anxiety-ridden, riddled with uncertainty - and often violent. Jesus ministered on the borders; he dissolved and crossed boundaries.
Postmodern leaders need not be afraid of fuzzy ministry or mixed ministry, Fuzzy is good, as "fuzzy logic" has now instructed us...In a culture of mix masters, leadership requires paradox making, the ability to put things together in odd, original ways. (p. 172)

You want your church to be beautiful? Give people the power. Let them choose. The church for too long has lived by the one-size-fits all "Panty Hose Principle." It is time to move to "the Platinum Rule." It's a gift to us from Jesus. (p. 173)

Every generation has different cultural experiences, knowledge bases, and aesthetic sensibilities. Each generation operates in a different linguistic, satorial, and myth system from the preceding generations. In religious terms this means that every generation must be reached for Christ differently. (p. 175)

Jesus was masterfully adaptable and flexible - yet all the while the central core of his message remained unchanged. Jesus communicated a gospel that was always the same and always changing. He sent us out into the world instructing us what to do. He never told us how to do it. The what remains the same. The how is always changing. (p. 176)

Patriot Prince?

2010-06-01T11:26:00.005-04:00

This post requires a prefaced disclaimer. Let there be no misunderstanding that I consider myself blessed to have been born in this country. But I count myself as a Follower of Christ first and would be willing to renounce my "citizenship" in the US before I would ever renounce my allegiance to God's Messiah.

In the early 90s, punk rock group Bad Religion released the song "American Jesus." Although, I do not totally align with the political mind-set of the group, I can clearly understand the frustration they communicate through the lyrics of the song.

I don't need to be a global citizen,
'Cause I'm blessed by nationality,
I'm a member of a growing populace,
We enforce our popularity
There are things that seem to pull us under and
There are things that drag us down,
But there's a power and a vital presence
That's lurking all around

We've got the American Jesus
See him on the interstate,
We've got the American Jesus
He helped build the president's estate

I feel sorry for the earth's population
'Cause so few live in the U.S.A,
At least the foreigners can copy our morality,
They can visit but they cannot stay,
Only precious few can garner our prosperity,
It makes us walk with renewed confidence,
We've got a place to go when we die
And the architect resides right here

We've got the American Jesus
Bolstering national faith
We've got the American Jesus
Overwhelming millions every day

He's the farmers' barren fields, (In God)
He's the force the army wields, (We trust)
He's the expression on the faces of the starving millions, (Because he's one of us)
The power of the man. (Break down)
He's the fuel that drives the Klan, (Cave in)
He's the motive and the conscience of the murderer (He can redeem your sin)
He's the preacher on TV, (Strong heart)
He's the false sincerity, (Clear mind)
He's the form letter that's written by the big computer, (And infinitely kind)
He's the nuclear bombs, (You lose)
He's the kids with no moms (We win)
And I'm fearful that he's inside ME (He is our champion)

We've got the American Jesus
See him on the interstate
We've got the American Jesus
Exercising his authority
We've got the American Jesus
Bolstering National faith
We've got the American Jesus
Overwhelming millions every day

One nation under God(x10)

Many of the American expression of Christian faith will convey a concern about the "watering down" of the principles and message of God. These are often the very same folks who think 2 Chronicles 7:14 directly applies to the United States of America. In case you don't recall the verse(which is actually the middle of a sentence), it goes like this:

"if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land."

"Land" is interpreted to mean a sovereign nation - particularly The United States of America - by many of those who are concerned about the "watering down" of God's principles.

The context of the entire chapter has to do with the existence of the temple and the monarchy in Israel - neither of which remain today.

One may be tempted to say that this fact buttresses the point. Think before you are tempted to make such a correlation. It was the faithfulness and love of God alone that maintained his chosen people to the point of God's own entering into the realm of humanity (through Jesus Christ) without a temple and a king. The United States of America is a byproduct of the grace and freedom ushered into the realm of humanity - far, far down the line of the historical infection of the good news. There are no reference points or distinguishable borders that hinder the spread (e.g. Ethiopian eunuch, Cornelius, Lydia...) which brings about pure freedom to all who believe.

If I look for a particular city on Google maps, I have many reference points to use. The major points are the distinguishable borders established by states. When I happen to fly across the country, I often look down to see if I can identify the major US metropolitan areas. The only reference point I have may be a river or a mountain range (the very ones that ran and stood alone for many millennia). I can hardly determine where Colorado ends and Kansas begins. No one has painted distinguishable lines (yet).

Each time I have this experience of looking down upon the vital resource of the earth, I imagine God looking down and not seeing the distinguishable limitations that plague us. Yet we hold high the banner of "freedom" in our nation.

What is ultimate freedom? Is it not the breakdown of limitations and distinctions? Isn't that what Paul taught in Galatians 3:21-29?

"Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law. But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.
Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christthat we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.

So what makes many "Americans" equate citizenry in the nation on equal par with following Christ? Does God's Anointed wear an American flag lapel pin? How can one treat the stars and stripes with such a lofty reverence when it represents such a large distinguishable sovereign state? We are the most free nation on the face of the earth, but we are far from being the humblest. Do we realize that it really wasn't that long ago that we crashed the borders here and now are fortifying them? We broke undocumented laws to establish and vote on ones that we like.

Many fear the breakdown of our nation due to the loss of morality. Its demise is undeniable and the lack of discipline and pure standards distresses me. But we suffer the same self righteousness of the Pharisees as we conveniently look to the darkness of others and utter pronouncements rather than look within ourselves and see the same chaos that nailed Christ to the tree.

What does God see in America that he didn't see with Babylon or Rome or any powerful nation that has ever existed? God sees that same darkness and chaos that prompted him to be born into our midst (God so loved the world) and defeat the destiny that he himself traveled and defeated for our ultimate freedom.

The call of 2 Chronicles 7 is universal. "Land" comes from a Hebrew word that can also be translated as "world." That's the place where we all live; the one God looks down upon and sees no distinguishable markings.

The grace of our Lord was poured out on me abundantly, along with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the worst. But for that very reason I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ Jesus might display his unlimited patience as an example for those who would believe on him and receive eternal life. ~ 1 Timothy 1:14-16

The Mystery of Change is Not Controllable

2010-05-28T16:16:00.002-04:00

For some reason, I missed this book. I picked up a copy about 3 years ago and never looked into it. I don't know why I didn't, because I enjoyed reading "Aqua Church" by Leonard Sweet about 10 years ago.

Being the slow and meticulous reader I am, I have read and reread pages and chapters. As I go, I take black pen and underline portions while also writing notes in the margins.

I am simply amazed at the insight of this book - especially since most of what Leonard Sweet wrote 11 years ago is happening with remarkable accuracy today.

I am inserting a rather long excerpt that I find very affirming. It is about change and transition. In particular, I resonate with the theme of "chaordics". I never knew that my own "SOP" (Standard Operation Procedure) had a name. It's such a relief to know that my own resistance to structure (in tyrannical form) actually finds purpose and can indeed lead toward progress and impact. Of all the causes within humanity, the church needs to move forward and facilitate transformation in human lives.

CHANGE HAS CHANGED ~ So far, so good. But we have not gone very far yet. This book is built on a critical distinction between change ad transition. William Bridges is known for his distinguishing the differences between change and transition. In his view, “It isn’t the changes that do you in, it’s the transitions.” For Bridges the difference between the two is that “Change is situational: the new site, the new boss, the new team roles, the new policy. Transition is the psychological process people go through to come to terms with the new situation.”

With due regards to Bridges for his helpful contribution to seeing change as external and transition as internal, I want to make an even more critical distinction between “change” and “transition.” For the purposes of SoulTsunami, here is the difference: Change is incremental. Transition is supersonic change at the edge of chaos that phases from incremental to exponential.
Change is when you have to do better what you already know how to do.
Transition is when you have to do what you don’t know who to do.

Change has always been with us as the one “constant of history.” The society painters of the 1770s and 1780s, for example, were presented with a constant challenge: Hair fashions changed so rapidly and wildly that clients brought their portraits back and asked to have their head “updated.”

Transition is when change changes, when change is no longer incremental but exponential. One of the key features of the day in which we live is the accelerating pace of change itself. Some experts are no longer talking about “change” but “churn” and “blur.” In 1989, people bought vinyl albums; no one bought CDs. Within seven years vinyl albums had become collector’s items purchased by jazz aficionados and club DJs who still spin wax. In 1991, my favorite TV station, the Weather Channel, didn’t exist. Five years later, an estimated 200,000 homes tuned to the Weather Channel daily. Inventions used to generate profits for decades. Now many inventions, especially in electronics, have a typical life span of two months. The pace of change is so fast on the Internet that is said that cyberspace time must be reckoned in dog years: Just as one year of a dog’s life is like seven years of our lives, so one year on the Internet is like seven years in real life.

Postmoderns live on a different planet from their modern parents and grandparents. “We’re at a point of absolute, supreme discontinuity,” global consultant and futurist Watts Wacker proclaims. “Human beings were not built to process what we’re going through now. Two generations ago people didn’t move more than 50 miles away from where they were born. Today if you live in New York City, you see 8000 commercial messages a day.” A little more than a hundred years ago, people were put in prison if they couldn’t pay their debts. A little less than a hundred years ago, all of a woman’s property became her husband’s legal property when she married, and even she was considered property.

The speed of life is leaving skid marks. Scientific information doubles every 12 years. General information doubles every two-and-a-half years. We know the first law of computer programming: “And given program, when running, is obsolete.” “Moore’s Law” (named after Gordon Moore, co-founder of Intel Corporation), which says that the power of computer chips doubles every 18 months, is much too conservative. Since the late 1950s, there has been a 100,000-fold rise in computer power times a thousandfold drop in cost. In fact, Intel now boasts that it is doubling the computing power of the world every year.

The half-life of education is getting shorter and shorter. The shelf-life of resources is getting narrower and narrower. Only the after-life is getting longer and longer – and that’s because our information vase is a graveyard of rotting doctrines and after-life ideas that we continually resurrect no matter how rancid they are.

What we read about in science fiction is soon fact. In fact, science fiction has become more science than fiction. More information is generated in one hour than you can take in over the course of one life. A weekday edition of the New Your Times now carries more information than the average person in the 17th century would digest in a lifetime. In some ways, in fact, the knowledge race has replaced the arms race.

Up until now, the computer revolution was more change than transition. Computers spelled not a revolution in what we do so much as a speeding up of what we have always done. We are now using computers to do what humans have never done before.

In February 1996 the most powerful chess computer (Deep Blue) took on world champion Garry Kaspoarov and won one and tied two of six games. It lost, by the way, because it was too logical – the human edge was intuition.

When the computer played the rematch with the human in April 1997, it didn’t make that mistake again. And it won. (Interestingly, the Hal 5000 was born on the date of 20 April 1997 in the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey.) But even more “transitional” was what happened at the Web site IBM put together to enable the world to follow each move as it happened and to play along virtually. Five million “hits” took place on the first day, bringing the IBM server to its knees. Hundreds of people from 75 countries played along with the computer and Kasparov.

Here’s the difference between change and transition. Pretend you are making and omelet. What kind of instrument do you pick out of the drawer to begin the omelet? A whisk or fork is Standard Operating Procedure (SOP). Then you add equal amounts of air and fat, and stir the air and fat together: air, fat, air, fat, air, fat. For a period of time all you are doing is stirring more air and fat, air and fat together. That’s change.

There comes a time, however, when you stir one more increment of change – air, fat – and change becomes transition. Once you pass through a threshold, a whole new world is created. Liquid becomes solid. The old SOPs which worked so well in a change/liquid world mess things up in a transition/solid world. Once you cross a threshold, new Standard Operating Procedures are required. A lot of churches are doing whisk ministry in a spatula world.

Pretend you are a photographer. Adding a few frames per second only speeds up your work. Ten frames per second: photography. Fifteen frames per second: photography. Twenty frames per second: photography. By adding more frames per second, I am only changing the speed of my craft. But there comes a time – 21, 22, 23 frames per second – when I cross a threshold – 24 frames per second – into a whole new world. Change becomes transition. Photography becomes cinematography. Stills becomes cinema.

What is good cinematography is different from what is good photography. One evaluates each genre on it own terms, in terms of its meaning, it references, and how they are to be understood. To judge the art of cinematography by the standards of the art of photography is to engage in categorical imperialism. We imperialize one art form when we impose it on another art form.

There are many print-culture imperialists writing in the church today. They judge what is good ministry in postmodern, electronic culture by what is good ministry in modern, print culture.

CHOOSE RESILIENCE OVER STABILITY, CHAOS OVER ORDER ~ You can’t grow without making changes. You can’t live without making changes. Or in the words of Peter Drucker, “Every organization of today has to build into its very structure…organized abandonment of everything it does.” A world of discontinuous change elevates resilience over stability as one of it highest attributes.

When asked to explain the stability of their life and customs, the Greeks had a saying:

‘tsi ta vrikame, etsi that t’ afisoume”
“That’s how we found things, that’s how we’ll leave them.”

No longer. Even the Greeks willy-nilly are leaving things different than they found them. Arguably the most change-resistant institution in the world, the British monarchy, is finding that it has to change if it is to survive into the 2K and 21-C. The monarchy has had to change. Welfare, health care, and the workforce have had to change. The world is changing all around us, and we in the church think we don’t get our turn?

Chaos is a better strategy for survival than order. It is not just that order can be reached out of chaos, or that one can only perceive chaos in relation to some perceived order. The emerging science of complexity, the generating science of postmodernity, argues that chaos is essential to the emergence of order. Chaos and order coexist and emerge from one another.

The modern era of Newton and Locke was an era of Order: a world of natural laws, of hard facts, of well-defined structures operating with clock-work precision. The Protestant Reformation adapted the Christian faith to this highly ordered, linear universe, and those brands of Protestants, like the Puritans first and the Methodists second, who were best able to highly order and structure their disciplines of belief and behavior fared the best.

Moderns were taught that this world-machine evolved with highly set regulations and rules of the game. If we follow the regs and play by the rules, then predictable things happen in life. Go against these laws or break the rules, and predictably unbalanced things will happen. It was a cost-benefit exogenous theology where we were on the outside looking in, rather than a part of what we are looking at.

The postmodern era is dominated by metaphors of chaos and complexity, not law and order. Complexity theory is the study of systems that behave orderly even though you might expect them to be anarchic (weather, rain forests, the stock market, the job market). Advanced micro- and macro- physics has given up it love affair with logical and mathematical consistency and rational prediction and control – it now embraces chaos, uncertainty, and complexity.

What complexity theory is teaching us is that we are living “on the edge of chaos” in a world that is ill-defined, out of control, and in constant glow and flux. We live in a world that is more weird than we ever imagined – a world that is fractal, self-replicating, inflationary, unpredictable, and filled with strange attractors. We do not live in linear time and space, but in curved time and space and nonlinear iterative processes. The modern world taught that this is a causal universe. We know now that this is actually an ever-curving universe. Rather than stasis and order, the dynamics of life-systems are non-linear, where the rules of the game keep changing because the game keeps changing. One plays on the run and while everything is moving. Rather than set goalposts, processes and patterns are the name of the game.

In a state of equilibrium, nothing happens! Enduring organisms embrace a strategy toward a life of disequilibrium over stability. They expect and sustain disruption. Organisms that stagnate and die settle into equilibrium and harmony. Stability is less to be desired than resilience.

In postmodern culture, fluidity wins out over fixity. Instead of “structuring” and “ordering” and “solidifying” reality, cyberspace “bends” and “blends” and “melts.” Life is a fluid realm. But fluid does not mean “anything goes,” as any captain of a boat can tell you; fluid is a different kind of going.

Stability is the capacity of a system to return to equilibrium after it has been disturbed. Resilience is the “measure of the persistence of a system and its ability to absorb change and disturbance.” An organism’s adaptive response depends on its agility in getting outside of itself and seeing from different angle and patterns. Not to be able to get one’s way is a recipe for survival.

CHAORDIC LEADERSHIP ~ Change leaders and change teams operate on the boundary of chaos and order – or what Dee Hock, the man who created the trillion-dollar Visa credit-card empire, call the “chaordic” zone.

A “chaord” has been defined as “a self-organizing, adaptive, nonlinear complex system (whether physical, biological or social) that simultaneously exhibits characteristics of order and chaos, that exists between rigidity and flexibility.” The church is by its very definition a chaordic organism – an organic, free-form community driven by mission and responsive to it indigenous environments. The early church was almost a textbook definition of “chaordic”: fluid, flat, fast off its feet, and strong on it feet with control at the edges only.

Any network or partnership, any alliance or institution, can become “chaordic” if it in some ways fights the forces of order and planners and embraces change and chaos. Chaordic leaders see change and chaos as their friends, not enemies.

The most creative places in nature, where life is born and renewed, are “chaordic” zones. The most creative times in history are those hinge moments when chaos and order overlap. Historian Gordon Wood has argued that “the time of the greatest religious chaos” in America was also the time of the greatest “originality in American history.”

“Chaos theory” is a relatively small subset of the science of complexity. “Chaos” – or as Katherine Hayles puts it better, “chaotics” – is the study of systems that are so sensitive to minuscule influences that they appear random and capricious but aren’t. In fact, there is harmony amid the chaos, and stability can both inhere in and issue from disorderliness. “Universality” is an aspect of chaos theory that is overlooked but is perhaps its most important feature.

“Universality” means that transitions from order to chaos and vice versa are both predictable and universal. The lower the complexity, the higher the predictability. Transitions from order to chaos are the result of the increased complexity of a system.

Chaotics teaches us that if you add a little more chaos into a chaotic system you get order. In fact, physicists now believe that a little disorder can nudge organizations out of turbulence into order. This is the key theological insight of chaotics: sensitive dependence on initial conditions. The uniqueness of complex systems resides in the way in which small changes in a dynamical system can generate exponential outcomes, even divergent outcomes. Small changes in one world can create massive changes in another world.

What does all this stuff about “chaordic” and “chaotic” mean?

It means that unfathomable possibilities are at your fingertips at every moment. It means that what you do can literally change the world.

Don’t believe me? Try this thought experiment. Air molecules are colliding all the time in a room. Imaging God removing one electron from the edges of the universe. Its effect is to lessen the gravitational force on the air molecules bouncing in the room. After only 50 collisions, two molecules that would have collided if God had not removed that one single electron now miss hitting one another. After only a fraction of a second, the trajectories of two electrons are different because of God’s removing one electron at the edge of the known universe.

Still don’t believe me? Try this experiment. Set aside 15 minutes a day to read a book. Now calculate how many books that becomes in a year? Two dozen. How many books in a lifetime? On thousand – or five times what you read in college.

The church is missing the boat on what it means to be a leader. Our problem is not a need for leadership to add sanity and order to an insane, irrational system. The church is bursting at the seams with rationality, decency, order, dignity, and predictability.

What it needs is the holy intoxications of foolishness, humor, craziness, outrageousness, creative disorder and passion. T Scott Gross, whose book Positively Outrageous Service is a key look at the future, tells the story of an Italian restaurant that began its business by putting all its money onto one form of advertisement: randomly selection an evening every month when everyone ate free, without advance notice. Business is still booming.

Vinod Khosla, cofounder of Sun Microsystems, isolates the key to keeping Sun innovative: the ability to integrate and celebrate the “flakes” within the system. “You have to be willing to put up with some unusual people because some of the most creative people are very unusual.” Can your church celebrate those who are unusual, zany, “flaky”? Chaordic leaders call each of us to let the unusual in us out – to launch out into the deep, to lift anchor, to climb out on the edges, to live our passion. To forget moving mountains and try moving molecules, even at the outer edges of the known universe. Or in the words of the Bonaro Overstreet poem, “To One Who Doubts the Worth of Doing Anything If You Can’t Do Everything”:

You say the little efforts that I make
will do no good: they never will prevail
to tip the hovering scale
where justice hangs in the balance
I don’t think
I ever thought they would.
But I am prejudiced beyond debate
in favor of my right to choose which side
shall fell the stubborn ounces of my weight.

Scooting to the Top

2010-05-13T12:11:00.001-04:00

Two stories to share here.

Story # 1
When we lived in Colorado, we would periodically drive up to the top of Pike’s Peak in the summer. You obviously can’t do it in the winter as the grated road is covered under several feet of snow above the tree line.

Back then (around 2000) we would pay about $10 per carload and travel the 19 miles of windy road to the 14,155-foot summit. I don’t remember how long it took, but it seemed like an eternity for going less than 20 miles. It always felt like a feat when we would finish the climb and get out of the car into the cold, thin air.

Story # 2
About 10 years ago, my brother’s father-in-law acquired a Vespa when he was in his 70’s. If you don’t know what that is, it’s one of those little Italian scooters that became more popular when gasoline peaked at 4+ dollars a few years ago.

His family called it “Hardly a Davidson.” He even had a helmet with the HD logo on it. The Vespa got him from point A to point B, but not with the same speed and comfort of a car, truck or even the real HD. Besides the lethargic pace it provided, he also had to endure a lot of people pointing and laughing.

Combining 2 Stories
Lately at Java Journey people ask us how we are doing. They most often mean that they want to know how business is progressing. I tell them that we are indeed making progress, but it is gradual and slow. Being non-profit and depending on volunteers and donations to operate, does not provide the means of quickly creating a cash flow that will bolster our endeavor. But that does not mean that we are not experiencing an ascent in our momentum. So I communicate this to the people who ask by way of illustration.

The only way I can give them a visual of Java Journey’s progress is to inform them that our pace is sort of like climbing Pike’s Peak with a Vespa scooter. We’re moving from point A to point B and we’re gaining altitude as we progress. But it’s hard to notice when the rest of the world expects rising to the top to happen with much more speed.

Once Again "Hand to the plow, hand to the plo...."

2010-05-09T09:26:00.000-04:00

"Sunday's Coming" Movie Trailer from North Point Media on Vimeo.

This is a border line scathing parody and what I see now each time I enter into one of these venues. Every form does not take long to lose its function. So - I exercise a more critical self-examination of our own methodologies.

The Rapture

2010-04-17T09:32:00.001-04:00

So when they met together, they asked him, "Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?" He said to them: "It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth." –Acts 1:6-8

The very last words Jesus uttered to his disciples represented a mandate and emphasis on being “witnesses” (a word which has its own fuzzy ideas today). His concern, as I understand, was for us to embody his truth in the way that we live day to day. They asked Jesus a question that would require him to provide details of what the completion of his reign would look like. He basically told them not to worry about it (“It is not for you to know…”). The irony of this event is what “two men dressed in white” say after they see the Lord becomes hidden from their sight: “ ‘Men of Galilee,’ they said, ‘why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven.’ ”

“Come back in the same way” has become a model of specific MO for Jesus to simply shift gears into reverse and one day fulfill the sketchy details of 2 obscure passages sited to answer the question asked by the disciples that Jesus avoided answering.

There is a lot of talk among Christ followers today over end times and a curiosity called “The Rapture.” The derivation of the word comes from a Latin concept of “being caught up” – literally ascending into the air. The idea is based on 2 obscure passages of scripture: 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 and Matthew 24:29-31 (There are those who even split these 2 in dissecting eschatology, but I won’t follow this rabbit trail now).

How can so many hang their hat in regards to detail and characterization of eschatological matters on a handful of verses, when the whole issue of eschatology has such a multifaceted scheme throughout the rest of scripture? This is obviously a rhetorical question because it cannot be successfully answered.

If one took a per capita approach to detail with other passages, the “being caught-up” scenario of 1 Thess and the “gather/taken” of Matt. 24 would demand far less consideration. I’m not throwing that consideration out, but treating it in context with the characterization of other biblical scenarios. Unfortunately, such other passages (like 1 Cor 15:12-58) are crammed into the eisegetical plot created by biblical commentators beginning as recent as the 18th century and propelled in the 19th century by the likes of John Darby.

The rather lengthy theological train, left by Darby, continually hangs another hat on another passage (why should this scriptural potluck supper approach surprise me?) – namely 2 Tim. 2:15. Using the 1611 English translation used most often for this passage, it reads as follows: “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (interesting how spell checker hiccupped on a couple of words here).

The rather clever and arrogant application of this has one taking all of God’s revelation and dissecting it into anatomical segments. The result is sort of like working a Rubik’s Cube where all the colors are mixed up but they actually belong neatly together. Just do an online search of “Dispensational Chart” and look at what is available out there. Print one out and see if you can discover the comprehensive clarity others have.

Sadly, this has resulted in many pulpiteers and Sunday School Quarterly readers – er I mean teachers, regurgitating this crafted contortion of God’s mysterious truth.

I decided to take a much closer look at this pivotal passage and have discovered that it is surprisingly closer to what Jesus really meant when he provided insight for his disciples in Acts 1.

“Rightly dividing” does not convey a segmenting of reveled truth but rather has a context which involves daily transformation. It has a progressive/procedural meaning from the Greek ὀρθοτομέω (orthotomeō). It has more to do with death to self and reigning with Christ, the context of which is provided in vv 11&12 and correlates with Heb 12:1-3 (Perseverance/fix).

“Study” does not have its academic/Western understanding. The word contains a meaning of diligence- perseverance – progressing. The same word is used in Gal 2:10 “Continue” (NIV; omitted in KJV) and in Eph 4:3 “Endeavor.”

Taking the concepts of the original language, we cannot come away with a Rubik’s Cube approach to God’s truth. In retranslating the verse, it should read: “Keep going to be an accurate representation as one who goes about the whole embodiment of truth without shame.”

I’m sure there are those who would have knee-jerk reactions to this exercise, but I truly believe that I have considered the context of Paul’s address to Timothy as well as the concepts conveyed in the words used in light of what Jesus teaches. Paul elsewhere addresses followers with these words from 2 Corinthians 3:1-3

Are we beginning to commend ourselves again? Or do we need, like some people, letters of recommendation to you or from you? You yourselves are our letter, written on our hearts, known and read by everybody. You show that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.

How does this relate to the topic of focus? “The Rapture?” concept/dogma is a byproduct of taking the words of Paul to young Timothy as meaning a diligent academic focus combined with shuffling sections of God’s revealed Word over the ages into a constructed cube that dare not be disassembled – and then resting in the notion that God notarizes ones soul due to the effort. I believe that is the reason that you don’t see the same treatment of the complexity of I Cor 15. It would be like reducing a piece of paper past the 14th fold and cramming into the cube. It just won’t go, so it becomes a mere footnote, if anything.

Once again, I’m not discarding the possibility that the culmination of God’s Kingdom through the Messiah, Jesus, may result in a “caught up” scenario – and then again, it may not. I don’t know and I’m okay with that since Jesus said “…it is not for you to know…” Paul himself stated that we only know “in part” and that we will not fully know as we are now “fully known” until the culmination of all things.

It’s just that I believe that taking such an approach to God’s Word is the exercising of poor stewardship. If we isolate ourselves to highlight, copy and paste compliant passages to satisfy a constructed system, we neglect not only the essence of other passages of truth that don’t comply, but the salt and light principle the world needs to preserve its destiny.

Which takes us back to Jesus final words. His emphasis is on only living with the day to day opportunities we have as “witnesses.” Somewhere between putting a hand to the plow and not looking back – and – not worrying about tomorrow as each day has enough trouble of its own, is a thing called the present, otherwise known as “today.” Seems to me the increment of taking up the cross and following has a much similar frequency.

Therefore, my dear brothers, stand firm. Let nothing move you. Always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord, because you know that your labor in the Lord is not in vain. ~1 Cor 15:58

Mazel Tov!

2010-04-14T09:47:00.000-04:00

The reality of the busy-ness of life delayed the anticipated arrival of the Conti Twin Star 2, but Christmas morning came yesterday afternoon at 2149 N Center St.

I kept watching for a proverbial pot to boil out the front door waiting for a semi to pull up with our new toy. All of the sudden, I hear a very loud banging on the back steel door about 100 feet away. It's a good thing I got my new hearing aid for my "good" ear last week since I actually detected the initial hand to door engagement.

I did a quick jog to the door and opened it. The man started to ask "Java Jo..." when I said "Yeah! You've got our espresso machine."

Rhett Mullinax (our new super volunteer) and Ben showed up in time to help me move it to a table (200+ lb) until we could move the old machine over. It took us about an hour to get it hooked up and powered up (in NC lingo: "cut on.") The boilers filled up and achieved proper temperature in about 25 minutes. After filling up the new grinder (which came with the package) and flushing the system a bit, we started pulling shots.

I had the first consumed latte from it (which is pictured above) and found it delightfully smooth. Not that the old machine did not produce a good flavor, but this one created a "new and improved" version.

Over the next few days, we will become familiarized with it and train our volunteers how to use it. It should not be much of a challenge since this one is easier to use than the old Conti machine. It's also faster and will help us expedite the making of espresso-based beverages during rush times (like Friday night live music).

We will use the old one for remote purposes since it is portable and uses 110v.

If you're local, come and check out our "new arrival."

Do We Really "Take Up the Cross?"

2010-04-07T09:15:00.000-04:00

My ongoing search for "What did Jesus really - really mean?" abides.

“Mutiny on the Bounty” is a classic novel and movie about an historic conflict over power and authority. Many critics deem the book and film as inaccurately presenting the facts as history documents. When you dissect the epic, it breaks down to a struggle of power and influence. If you are familiar with the actual events that create the story, the final consequences reveal the inner heart of the parties involved. The Charles Laughton character ends up all the integrity and the Clark Cable character ends up surrounded by folly.

Every organization has a set of policies and procedures that are designed to give the organization guidance. Followers are expected to adhere. For some reason (which we all know to be the nature of humanity) organizations often end up with a disparity between those who create the policies and those expected to follow them.

The drive for creating standards comes from power and authority. The acquiring of power and authority is something most human beings desire. To be in control is to be able to administer your will or the will of those who are like-minded.

This is a universal paradigm which Jesus challenged in context to following him. I don't think this principle is implemented in our westernized culture.

Matt 20 ²⁰Then the mother of Zebedee's sons came to Jesus with her sons and, kneeling down, asked a favor of him. ²¹"What is it you want?" he asked. She said, "Grant that one of these two sons of mine may sit at your right and the other at your left in your kingdom." ²²"You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said to them. "Can you drink the cup I am going to drink?" "We can," they answered. ²³Jesus said to them, "You will indeed drink from my cup, but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared by my Father." ²⁴When the ten heard about this, they were indignant with the two brothers. ²⁵Jesus called them together and said, "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. ²⁶Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, ²⁷and whoever wants to be first must be your slave— ²⁸just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

"Not so with you" contains a second person plural pronoun and serves as an antecedent to "whoever" (or literally "that one") in verses 26 & 27. So Jesus is not only addressing the disciples, He is setting forth a foundational criteria for all who desire to follow Him.

In our corporate employer/employee; management/workforce culture, we have created a disparity that does not really fall in line with this "Kingdom MO." Many who even espouse a "servant leadership" approach are not willing to sacrifice their position of authority. The power, no matter how humble one attempts to be, is enslaving.

One can only imagine what might take place for the cause and purpose of God's Kingdom in Christ Jesus, if we are really willing to act as servants and slaves.

Relevant Rendering

2010-04-05T20:12:00.001-04:00

As English only has one word for love; it also only has one word for evil. We lose so much context by the limitations. Lk 11:13 has always been a challenging verse to me and others. I'm chiefly thankful that I took a chunk of my life doing school so I could learn how to break down the original language.

This is what the verse says. This is Jesus teaching.

"If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!"

Many are uncomfortable with Jesus saying that we are "evil" but that is created by our tiny understanding of what he really meant.

"Evil" in this passage comes from the word "poneros" (πονηρός). Its meaning suggests "hardship," "frustration," "annoyance." So how could we rephrase this to convey what is meant today? Here is what I suggest. Translate "poneros" with "pain in @$$." Now substitute "can be a..." before it so that it reads: "If you then, though you can be a pain in the @$$, know how to give good gifts to your children..."

Now - doesn't that make more sense? It does to me, and I think it's a fair translation.

You're welcome to challenge me, but try not to be poneros.

Leonard Sweet's FB Postings

2010-04-01T10:08:00.000-04:00

Today:

" 'You are righteous, O Lord; I cannot disagree; yet let me talk with You of Your judgments' Jer. 12:1. God is always right; but we can argue."

Then a follow up comment with a quotation:

" 'Levi-Yitzhak of Berditchev, who told God that unless he began to answer his prayers, he would refuse to say them any more. He warned God that if he did not improve, then God would be in for a tough time at the Last Judgment! And when people criticized him for ‘impious’ words, he said that, as a child of Israel, one may say anything.' Elie Wiesel, Souls on Fire, 111."

This may be part of the answer to my question: "Why were/are so many great comedians Jewish?"

A Summation of Jesus' Teaching

2010-03-30T19:15:00.000-04:00

As many do, I will often put meaningful quotations on my Facebook status. Author and Organic Church spokesperson Neil Cole posted this on his Facebook Status today.

"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted." ~A. Einstein

This resonates with me especially when Java Journey is measured by conventional standards of "ministry" and "church." It's so difficult to tell some people that we don't have "members"; we don't take "attendance" - yet many lives are being transformed by our obedience to Christ and his commission.

Kicking Basketballs

2010-03-23T07:18:00.000-04:00

I'm reviewing the book "Church Turned Inside Out" by Linda Bergquist and Allan Karr for the Ministry in Motion website. As I was looking back through the pages, I reread something that serves as a powerful illustration of the cultural need we have to reevaluate our notions and mindsets.

This comes from chapter 7: "Designing in Culture."

...Alvin Toffler says, "The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot unlearn and relearn." Despite Jesus' teaching about love, humility, and service, this is a really difficult posture for many because we assume ourselves to be teachers rather than learners.

In the summer of 2006, Allan and his family spent a month in Spain. One week, Allan's children helped an American group with a basketball camp in an upscale Alcobendes neighborhood, just north of Madrid. That same week, the World Cup championships were being played in Germany, and Spain was in the championship hunt. The camp was being held in a futbol pitch converted into a basketball court, by adding portable hoops (goals). The Americans rolled out rubber basketballs and all the children started kicking them, taking shots at the soccer goals on the pitch. The Americans running the camp screamed, "Stop kicking the balls!" After a few minutes, the director of the camp called the children into a meeting and told them that it was against the rules of basketball. Allan asked another leader, "Why don't you just play soccer on the pitch; the goals are already there? The American leader said they couldn't play soccer because no one from their group knew how to teach soccer. Allan asked, "Why don't you let them teach you? You will still have the missionary contact you hope to have with them." The leader said, "We are the ones here to teach; we're supposed to be the experts."

...Proverbs 1:5 says, "Let the wise listen and add to their learning." Being a learner is the convergence of two qualities: humility and the understanding that in order to evolve into an indigenized servant of the people group, the people have much to teach the missionary about sharing the truth with contextual relevance.

When I think about designing in culture, I also think about how the landscape has changed drastically within my own lifetime. The need for adjusting our mindset and challenging our notions persists. We need to watch and learn.

In the "Church Planting" classes and seminars I have attended throughout my "career" - it was consistently taught that the best way to "grow" a "church" was to begin in a sprawling community (most often a large metropolitan suburb). From what I've observed, it takes a large amount of capital resources to commence, operate and maintain. But when the desired mushrooming effect occurs (most often from other churches), it seems to diminish the intimacy, cultural relevance and development of a Kingdom mindset. A very small percentage on the outside are drawn in, but the majority of everyday people drive by gazing at the clever marquee wondering what those people do in there every week. A pattern develops where 3 in 1 oil is needed for both the front door and the back door.

Many in our American culture today are kicking basketballs. Many are still screaming that it is against the rules.

Order Out of Order

2010-03-15T08:51:00.000-04:00

How difficult is letting our "yes" be "yes" and our "no" - "no" ? Very difficult today. Authenticity is simple but very rigorous. Breaking it down, it involves the putting aside of self and the fear of what others may think about us (me). Sounds like the sneaky shroud of pride. How would I know? BTDT!

Jesus addresses his followers in Matthew 23 and dresses down those who serve as a negative example. When I peel the proverbial onion, I see more of myself in the latter than I do the former.

What makes it difficult is the cultural mind-set that surrounds us. Pretentiousness is an epidemic plague. But Jesus addresses that in Matthew 23 and in rather harsh fashion.

The picture above this post is that of Henry Martyn Robert. He invented the beauty that transformed into beast called "Robert's Rule of Order."

I know, I KNOW! We need guidelines to avoid chaos. That's all I hear when I take potshots at RR (can't put that second one backward). But when I read verses 16-22, All I can think of is the parliamentary gibberish I hear when I am present at official meetings.

"Woe to you, blind guides! You say, 'If anyone swears by the temple, it means nothing; but if anyone swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath.' You blind fools! Which is greater: the gold, or the temple that makes the gold sacred? You also say, 'If anyone swears by the altar, it means nothing; but if anyone swears by the gift on it, he is bound by his oath.' You blind men! Which is greater: the gift, or the altar that makes the gift sacred? Therefore, he who swears by the altar swears by it and by everything on it. And he who swears by the temple swears by it and by the one who dwells in it. And he who swears by heaven swears by God's throne and by the one who sits on it."

I am presently experiencing the amazing spirit of cooperation - resulting in productivity - that comes about when like-minded people work on placing aside their pride and self-proposed will to allow God to accomplish divine desires. The "yes" "yes" - "no" "no" principle actually works. It just takes work.

A What Church?

2010-03-11T08:10:00.000-05:00

I recently posted on Facebook that I joined the Organic Church Today network (which itself has a Facebook format). I've had many people do the Victrola dog head tilt when I've mentioned "Organic Church," but a long-time friend from high school days, had a response that made me "Lol."

Her post: "organic ~ like, you don't spray anything on it?" She later asked for a definition.

Another friend stated that he did not like the term "organic" since he had heard it used too often as a marketing ploy in reference to food and such by "self-absorbed people."

"Organic" has been a word and concept for longer than any trendish reference to it - just as "gay" was before the 1960s.

I believe the use of the concept in describing the effort to recapture the deeper purpose of God's intention for the Church is warranted. But I have also discovered that it is difficult to "define" what it means probably because of the challenging combination of a person's idea of "organic" coupled with a person's idea of "church."

I am thankful for the great effort done at the CrossLife website to define what cannot really be defined. Perhaps this is part of what Jesus meant in giving God's Kingdom a cryptic (woops! - stumbling block buzzword) *secretive* character.

This is not so much a definition. Instead, it serves somewhat as a manifesto; at least, a manifesto for CrossLife. We do not consider ourselves revolutionaries. We are certainly not the first people to question the status quo. We are, by far, not the first people to leave the institution of established religion. We are not the first to ignore long-held traditions of men while choosing, rather, to be led by a sincere desire to follow Christ alone. We are not the first to make many mistakes in a pioneering journey away from the acceptable and known, and into the freedom of the unknown. We are not at the forefront of any movement.1 We are not charismatic leaders with great hordes of followers. We are few, simple, normal, marginally educated, yet passionate lovers of God and people.

Now that we have cleared the air of clichéd platitudes, false impressions, and hollow humility, we can be very real.

First, and we think foremost, organic church is not reactionary, against-everything-traditional, or change-for-the-sake-of-change. It is not all about “doing” church outside of institutional structures such as buildings, budgets, programs, traditions, and hierarchical leadership. It is not about being different, better, or new. These are issues that tend to attract the most attention, but they are not central to the practice of organic forms of church. Organic church is not an attempt to avoid perceived wrongs, but is rather a significant, Spirit-lead moving of God toward “being” the church of God in real life.

Second, organic church is not a model. It is not a structure. It is not a system of actions that can be manipulated for a desired gain or outcome. It is not a scheme into which we plug people into for the purpose of making them into something else. It is not so much a way of “doing” church as it is the Way to “be” the church every day. It is a holistic approach to life, spirituality, and the Kingdom of God through a personal and communal relationship with Jesus Christ.

Third, it has become obvious to us that organic church is probably not for everyone, everywhere. While we believe our practices are direct applications of Scripture for our 21st Century setting, we find that many Christians reject some of these positions. Whether these reactions are substantiated by the Spirit or are just a reaction to anything perceived to be “different” is a matter of opinion. We are not here to convince, but only to share and follow God’s leadership in our lives. You must decide for yourself through Scripture and historical evidence whether these concepts represent the Truth or man-made fabrications.

Fourth, we don’t have a chip on our shoulder. We are not against institutional forms of church.2 While our ideas, values, practices, and often vocabulary stand in contrast to institutional expression, we believe ourselves to be a part of Christ’s collective family of the redeemed. We love our brothers and sisters in Christ and only hope to offer the world a candid view of what Jesus taught and the Way He lived. While few would debate the various post-third century, Constantinian structures adopted by most medieval and modern institutional churches, we are convinced that these systems often prevail as subtle substitutes for authentically living the Way of Jesus.

Finally, we, in no way, claim to have this whole thing figured out. We are in process. We are on a journey. We are discovering increasingly more the freedom Christ offers from sin, the trappings of the world system, and the religious bondage that holds many captive. We have much to learn. We claim no authority or exclusivity. God is working in and through His people all over the world to bring the Kingdom into our reality. We only offer ourselves to be a tool in His hands to accomplish His work.

So, what is organic church?3 Frank Viola4, an innovative organic thinker and practitioner, offers one of the best statements as to what organic church is and looks like practically:

“By ‘organic church,’ I mean a non-traditional church that is born out of spiritual life instead of being constructed by human institutions and held together by religious programs. Organic church life is a grass roots experience that is marked by face-to-face community, every member functioning, open-participatory meetings (opposed to pastor-to-pew services), non-hierarchical leadership, and the centrality and supremacy of Jesus Christ as the functional Leader and Head of the gatherings. Put another way, organic church life is the experience of the Body of Christ. In its purest form, it’s the fellowship of the Triune God brought to earth and experienced by human beings.”5

Organic forms of church life are appearing everywhere. They are as diverse as they are numerous. No single definition exists, which leads to a valid conclusion: organic church is not definable. The leading thinkers and practitioners of organic churches offer no methods to copy or systems to implement. The basic meaning of ‘organic’ offers some direction: natural. Something that is truly organic has not been manipulated by people in order to yield a particular outcome. True, organic church is simply the result of obeying the final command of Jesus:

“I have been given all authority in heaven and on earth. Therefore, go and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Teach these new disciples to obey all the commands I have given you. And be sure of this: I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” (Matthew 28:18-20, NLT)

Jesus never said to go start churches. In fact, earlier in the Gospel According to Matthew, Jesus said,

“I will build my church.” (Matthew 16:18, NLT)

Jesus clearly gave His disciples instructions to make disciples for His Kingdom, while He would be about the work of building His church. Jesus doesn’t need our systems, organizations, hierarchies of power, budgets, or any other institutional structures.

Be sure, this doesn’t mean that any random, free-for-all gathering of believers is considered a church. Organic doesn’t imply that no structure or organization exists. In fact, an overview of early church history in the book of Acts illustrates the developing organization of early churches. These churches were growing and multiplying at astronomical rates. By Acts 6:7 we can see that the number of Christ-followers had exploded and were indeed being multiplied, not just added. As organization was needed, churches made the appropriate choices. This organization wasn’t derived and forced; it was spontaneous and fit specific needs.6 One would expect that if the need for a particular structure no longer existed, that structure would be put aside. In like manner, as various forms of organization were needed they would be added with a specific purpose.7

History, however, reveals that structure after structure and tradition after tradition was added to church life with few, if any of them, being tossed aside when their usefulness concluded. Organic, spontaneous, Spirit-driven life was slowly and inadvertently replaced by layers of bureaucracy and tradition. These rigid structures replaced servant leadership with positional authority, free-will offerings with budget demands, spontaneous gatherings throughout the week with program-driven schedules of performance activities, the priesthood of all believers with a separated clergy who is hired by the church to produce spiritual goods for the consuming audience, and the list continues. While various factions and denominations developed their own versions of institutionalism, the effect was pretty much the same: only the few (the clergy) had a “special” calling to run the institution. This, in turn, left everyone else to occupy a pew and volunteer for programs.8

Today, we are convinced that God is breathing a fresh wind into the world. Some observe this development as a passing fad. Some see a turning away from the faith. Yet, many recognize this as a great opportunity to bring freshness to the cause of Christ.9 Some see the situation as the challenge of our generation to show the relevance of the Master who gave His life for the world 2,000 years ago. Our passion is to see people follow Christ into His work of expanding His Kingdom.

One thing is for certain, church is changing. For years culture wars have been waging within churches over dress codes, music styles, various programs, and budgetary issues. Many people have been caught in the crossfire and burned by situations outside of their control, often leaving a negative impression of church. Years of institutional struggles have left a new generation desperate for authenticity. From the ashes of unfortunate battles rises a cry to simplify. A fresh question has emerged: What can churches eliminate and still be the church of the New Testament? Church planters, pastors, and even ordinary Christians are asking this question in one way or another in ever-growing numbers. While the debate will always wage among theologians, we have come to understand that the church, at the cellular level, is simply a gathering of believers who seek to follow the Way of Jesus. Yet, this transition to simplicity is not easy, often becoming a great source of pain for those on the journey. Leaving that which is accepted is not popular. As Dresden James said,

“A truth’s initial commotion is directly proportional to how deeply the lie was believed. It wasn’t the world being round that agitated people, but that the world wasn’t flat. When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.”10

We must not, however, throw caution to the wind. We must not gather up everything we don’t like about church, bundle it together, and toss it into the burn pile. We must be students of history. We must be clear about our objectives. We must be careful with our criticisms, and focus more on what Jesus Christ is calling us to be, rather than to be against. As stated earlier, organic church is not so much about what is better or worse organizationally, but rather concerns expressing the life of Christ in all that we do. Our focus must be on making and developing disciples of Christ. Let Jesus build His church. Let organization develop naturally without human manipulation to get the “results” we think are right. Let us break free from the institutional mold developed over the years, while remaining faithful to the Word of God.

This is but skimming the surface of what “organic church” is…

I hope someone comes up with a better word/term, but for now, I think "Organic" is very appropriate.

A Most Interesting Question

2010-03-05T09:57:00.000-05:00

A good friend of mine recently sent me this "Christian Quote of the Day (CQOD) from George Barna (Evangelism that Works - 1995). I'm not sure if I can answer the question, but it certainly makes me ponder the possibility.

It occurred to me that in our work with secular organizations, the leader shapes the heart and passion of the corporate entity. In our work with non-profit organizations, we have found the same principle to be operative. When it comes to the focus of the organization, the people who serve there tend to take on many of the core personality traits of the leader toward fulfilling the mandate of the organization. If this is true, and most churches seem to lack the fervor and focus for evangelism, is it reasonable to conclude that it may be because of the lack of zeal most pastors have for identifying, befriending, loving and evangelizing non-Christian people?

Interesting that "my job" starting out at a previous church was to pick this area ("Evangelism") up. Strange that it didn't really happen as "designed" and we wound up (just before I left and after a building went up) just being a vacuum for disgruntled consumers from other ecclesiastical venues.

Ahead of the Growing Pack

2010-03-02T09:30:00.000-05:00

I was just now introduced today to another "Ecclesiastical Recalibration" voice - one who has been around for awhile. This resourceful and insightful person is from Europe. His name is Wolfgang (obviously Deutch) Simson. Wolfgang is of Hungarian, German and Jewish descent, and is married to Mercy (Indian).

In 1998 (twelve years ago!) he published an insightful work that has been echoed in various writings since. It is called: "Fifteen Theses towards a Re-Incarnation of Church." The sentence the precedes the block of the theses is amazing prophetic.

God is changing the Church, and that, in turn, will change the world. Millions of Christians around the world are aware of an imminent reformation of global proportions. They say, in effect: "Church as we know it is preventing Church as God wants it."

1. Church is a Way of Life, not a series of religious meetings.

Before they where called Christians, followers of Christ have been called "The Way". One of the reasons was, that they have literally found "the way to live." The nature of Church is not reflected in a constant series of religious meetings lead by professional clergy in holy rooms specially reserved to experience Jesus, but in the prophetic way followers of Christ live their everyday life in spiritually extended families as a vivid answer to the questions society faces, at the place where it counts most: in their homes.

2. Time to change the system

In aligning itself to the religious patterns of the day, the historic Orthodox Church after Constantine in the 4th century AD adopted a religious system which was in essence Old Testament, complete with priests, altar, a Christian temple (cathedral), frankincense and a Jewish, synagogue-style worship pattern. The Roman Catholic Church went on to canonize the system. Luther did reform the content of the gospel, but left the outer forms of "church" remarkably untouched; the Free-Churches freed the system from the State, the Baptists then baptized it, the Quakers dry-cleaned it, the Salvation Army put it into a uniform, the Pentecostals anointed it and the Charismatics renewed it, but until today nobody has really changed the superstructure. It is about time to do just that.

3. The Third Reformation.

In rediscovering the gospel of salvation by faith and grace alone, Luther started to reform the Church through a reformation of theology. In the 18th century through movements like the Moravians there was a recovery of a new intimacy with God, which led to a reformation of spirituality, the Second Reformation. Now God is touching the wineskins themselves, initiating a Third Reformation, a reformation of structure.

4. From Church-Houses to house-churches

Since New Testament times, there is no such thing as "a house of God". At the cost of his life, Stephen reminded unequivocally: God does not live in temples made by human hands. The Church is the people of God. The Church, therefore, was and is at home where people are at home: in ordinary houses. There, the people of God: share their lives in the power of the Holy Spirit, have "meetings," that is, they eat when they meet; they often do not even hesitate to sell private property and share material and spiritual blessings, teach each other in real-life situations how to obey God's word—dialogue- and not professor-style, pray and prophesy with each other, baptize, 'lose their face' and their ego by confessing their sins, regaining a new corporate identity by experiencing love, acceptance and forgiveness.

5. The church has to become small in order to grow big.

Most churches of today are simply too big to provide real fellowship. They have too often become "fellowships without fellowship." The New Testament Church was a mass of small groups, typically between 10 and 15 people. It grew not upward into big congregations between 20 and 300 people filling a cathedral and making real, mutual communication improbable. Instead, it multiplied "sideward"—like organic cells—once these groups reached around 15-20 people. Then, if possible, it drew all the Christians together into citywide celebrations, as with Solomon's Temple court in Jerusalem. The traditional congregational church as we know it is, statistically speaking, neither big nor beautiful, but rather a sad compromise, an overgrown house-church and an under-grown celebration, often missing the dynamics of both.

6. No church is led by a Pastor alone

The local church is not lead by a Pastor, but fathered by an Elder, a local person of wisdom and reality. The local house-churches are then networked into a movement by the combination of elders and members of the so-called five-fold ministries (Apostles, Prophets, Pastors, Evangelists and Teachers) circulating "from house to house," whereby there is a special foundational role to play for the apostolic and prophetic ministries (Eph. 2:20, and 4:11.12). A Pastor (shepherd) is a very necessary part of the whole team, but he cannot fulfill more than a part of the whole task of "equipping the saints for the ministry," and has to be complemented synergistically by the other four ministries in order to function properly.

7. The right pieces – fitted together in the wrong way

In doing a puzzle, we need to have the right original for the pieces, otherwise the final product, the whole picture, turns out wrong, and the individual pieces do not make much sense. This has happened to large parts of the Christian world: we have all the right pieces, but have fitted them together wrong, because of fear, tradition, religious jealousy and a power-and-control mentality. As water is found in three forms—ice, water and steam—the five ministries mentioned in Eph. 4:11-12, the Apostles, Prophets, Pastors, Teachers and Evangelists are also found today, but not always in the right forms and in the right places: they are often frozen to ice in the rigid system of institutionalized Christianity; they sometimes exist as clear water; or they have vanished like steam into the thin air of free-flying ministries and "independent" churches, accountable to no-one. As it is best to water flowers with the fluid version of water, these five equipping ministries will have to be transformed back into new—and at the same time age-old—forms, so that the whole spiritual organism can flourish and the individual "ministers" can find their proper role and place in the whole. That is one more reason why we need to return back to the Maker's original and blueprint for the Church.

8. God does not leave the Church in the hands of bureaucratic clergy

No expression of a New Testament church is ever led by just one professional "holy man" doing the business of communicating with God and then feeding some relatively passive religious consumers Moses-style. Christianity has adopted this method from pagan religions, or at best from the Old Testament. The heavy professionalization of the church since Constantine has now been a pervasive influence long enough, dividing the people of God artificially into laity and clergy. According to the New Testament (1 Tim. 2:5), "there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." God simply does not bless religious professionals to force themselves in-between people and God forever. The veil is torn, and God is allowing people to access Himself directly through Jesus Christ, the only Way. To enable the priesthood of all believers, the present system will have to change completely. Bureaucracy is the most dubious of all administrative systems, because it basically asks only two questions: yes or no. There is no room for spontaneity and humanity, no room for real life. This may be OK for politics and companies, but not the Church. God seems to be in the business of delivering His Church from a Babylonian captivity of religious bureaucrats and controlling spirits into the public domain, the hands of ordinary people made extraordinary by God, who, like in the old days, may still smell of fish, perfume and revolution.

9. Return from organized to organic forms of Christianity

The "Body of Christ" is a vivid description of an organic, not an organized, being. Church consists on its local level of a multitude of spiritual families, which are organically related to each other as a network, where the way the pieces are functioning together is an integral part of the message of the whole. What has become a maximum of organization with a minimum of organism, has to be changed into a minimum of organization to allow a maximum of organism. Too much organization has, like a straightjacket, often choked the organism for fear that something might go wrong. Fear is the opposite of faith, and not exactly a Christian virtue. Fear wants to control, faith can trust. Control, therefore, may be good, but trust is better. The Body of Christ is entrusted by God into the hands of steward-minded people with a supernatural charismatic gift to believe God that He is still in control, even if they are not. A development of trust-related regional and national networks, not a new arrangement of political ecumenism is necessary for organic forms of Christianity to reemerge.

10. From worshipping our worship to worshipping God

The image of much of contemporary Christianity can be summarized, a bit euphemistically, as holy people coming regularly to a holy place at a holy day at a holy hour to participate in a holy ritual lead by a holy man dressed in holy clothes against a holy fee. Since this regular performance-oriented enterprise called "worship service" requires a lot of organizational talent and administrative bureaucracy to keep going, formalized and institutionalized patterns developed quickly into rigid traditions. Statistically, a traditional 1-2 hour "worship service" is very resource-hungry but actually produces very little fruit in terms of discipling people, that is, in changed lives. Economically speaking, it might be a "high input and low output" structure. Traditionally, the desire to "worship in the right way" has led to much denominationalism, confessionalism and nominalism. This not only ignores that Christians are called to "worship in truth and in spirit," not in cathedrals holding songbooks, but also ignores that most of life is informal, and so is Christianity as "the Way of Life." Do we need to change from being powerful actors to start "acting powerfully?"

11. Stop bringing people to church, and start bringing the church to the people

The church is changing back from being a Come-structure to being again a Go-structure. As one result, the Church needs to stop trying to bring people "into the church," and start bringing the Church to the people. The mission of the Church will never be accomplished just by adding to the existing structure; it will take nothing less than a mushrooming of the church through spontaneous multiplication of itself into areas of the population of the world, where Christ is not yet known.

12. Rediscovering the "Lord's Supper" to be a real supper with real food

Church tradition has managed to "celebrate the Lord's Supper" in a homeopathic and deeply religious form, characteristically with a few drops of wine, a tasteless cookie and a sad face. However, the "Lord's Supper" was actually more a substantial supper with a symbolic meaning, than a symbolic supper with a substantial meaning. God is restoring eating back into our meeting.

13. From Denominations to city-wide celebrations

Jesus called a universal movement, and what came was a series of religious companies with global chains marketing their special brands of Christianity and competing with each other. Through this branding of Christianity most of Protestantism has, therefore, become politically insignificant and often more concerned with traditional specialties and religious infighting than with developing a collective testimony before the world. Jesus simply never asked people to organize themselves into denominations. In the early days of the Church, Christians had a dual identity: they were truly His church and vertically converted to God, and then organized themselves according to geography, that is, converting also horizontally to each other on earth. This means not only Christian neighbors organizing themselves into neighborhood- or house-churches, where they share their lives locally, but Christians coming together as a collective identity as much as they can for citywide or regional celebrations expressing the corporateness of the Church of the city or region. Authenticity in the neighborhoods connected with a regional or citywide corporate identity will make the Church not only politically significant and spiritually convincing, but will allow a return to the biblical model of the City-Church.

14. Developing a persecution-proof spirit

They crucified Jesus, the Boss of all the Christians. Today, his followers are often more into titles, medals and social respectability, or, worst of all, they remain silent and are not worth being noticed at all. "Blessed are you when you are persecuted", says Jesus. Biblical Christianity is a healthy threat to pagan godlessness and sinfulness, a world overcome by greed, materialism, jealousy and any amount of demonic standards of ethics, sex, money and power. Contemporary Christianity in many countries is simply too harmless and polite to be worth persecuting. But as Christians again live out New Testament standards of life and, for example, call sin as sin, conversion or persecution has been, is and will be the natural reaction of the world. Instead of nesting comfortably in temporary zones of religious liberty, Christians will have to prepare to be again discovered as the main culprits against global humanism, the modern slavery of having to have fun and the outright worship of Self, the wrong centre of the universe. That is why Christians will and must feel the "repressive tolerance" of a world which has lost any absolutes and therefore refuses to recognize and obey its creator God with his absolute standards. Coupled with the growing ideologization, privatization and spiritualization of politics and economics, Christians will—sooner than most think—have their chance to stand happily accused in the company of Jesus. They need to prepare now for the future by developing a persecution-proof spirit and an even more persecution-proof structure.

15. The Church comes home

Where is the easiest place, say, for a man to be spiritual? Maybe again, is it hiding behind a big pulpit, dressed up in holy robes, preaching holy words to a faceless crowd and then disappearing into an office? And what is the most difficult—and therefore most meaningful—place for a man to be spiritual? At home, in the presence of his wife and children, where everything he does and says is automatically put through a spiritual litmus test against reality, where hypocrisy can be effectively weeded out and authenticity can grow. Much of Christianity has fled the family, often as a place of its own spiritual defeat, and then has organized artificial performances in sacred buildings far from the atmosphere of real life. As God is in the business of recapturing the homes, the church turns back to its roots—back to where it came from. It literally comes home, completing the circle of Church history at the end of world history.

I love his description of "sideward" multiplication of the church. Kind of sounds like yeast in a batch of dough, doesn't it?

The Need for Deprogramming the “Left Behind” Mind-set

2010-02-19T13:03:00.000-05:00

I've just started my usual slow-paced reading with a new book. Right off of the bat, the heart of the author (Richard Sterns - President of World Vision) is percussing from the pages to my fingers as I read. The title is "The Hole In Our Gospel." Great title!

I'm copying some excerpts from his introductory pages to post on this blog in order to share his insight and prompt you to buy this book.

More and more, our view of the gospel has been narrowed to a simple transaction, marked by checking a box on a bingo card at some prayer breakfast, registering a decision for Christ, or coming forward during an altar call. I have to admit that my own view of evangelism, based on the Great Commission, amounted to just that for many years. It was about saving as many people from hell as possible – for the next life. It minimized any concern for those same people in this life. It wasn’t as important that they were poor or hungry or persecuted, or perhaps rich, greedy, and arrogant; we just had to get them to pray the “sinner’s prayer” and then move on to the next potential convert…

There is a real problem with this limited view of the kingdom of God; it is not the whole gospel. Instead, it’s a gospel with a gaping hole. First, focusing almost exclusively on the afterlife reduces the importance of what God expects of us in this life. The kingdom of God, which Christ said is “within you” (Luke 17:21 NKJV), was intended to change and challenge everything in our fallen world in the here and now. It was not meant to be a way to leave the world but rather the means to actually redeem it. Yes, it first requires that we repent of our own sinfulness and totally surrender our individual lives to follow Christ, but then we are also commanded to go into the world – to bear fruit by lifting up the poor and the marginalized, challenging injustice wherever we find it, rejecting the worldly values found within every culture, and loving our neighbors as ourselves. While our “joining” in the kingdom of God may begin with a decision, a transaction, it requires so much more than that.

I believe that we have reduced the gospel from a dynamic and beautiful symphony of God’s love for and in the world to a bare and strident monotone. We have taken this amazing good news from God, originally presented in high definition and Dolby stereo, and reduced it to grainy, black-and-white, silent movie. In doing so, we have also stripped it of much of its power to change not only the human heart but the world. This is especially reflected in our limited view of evangelism. Jesus commanded His followers to take the good news of reconciliation and forgiveness to the ends of the earth. The dictate is the same today.

Christianity is a faith that was meant to spread – but not through coercion. God’s love was intended to be demonstrated, not dictated. Our job is not to manipulate to induce others to agree with us or to leave their religion and embrace Christianity. Our charge is to both proclaim and embody the gospel so that others can see, hear, and feel God’s love in tangible ways. When we are living out our faith with integrity and compassion in the world, God can use to give others a glimpse of His love and character. It is God – not us – who works in the hearts of men and women to forgive and redeem. Coercion is not necessary or even particularly helpful. God is responsible for the harvest – but we must plant, water, and cultivate the seeds.

Let’s look more closely at this metaphor, often used in the New Testament to describe evangelism (see, for example, Matthew 9:37-38; Mark 4:1-20, 26-29; Luke 10:1-3; and John 4:35-38). For most of the twentieth century, American evangelists really honed in on this idea of the harvest, believing that the fruit was already ripe and just needed to be picked. This was the essence of Billy Graham’s great global crusades, Campus Crusade’s pamphlet The Four Spiritual Laws, The JESUS Film, and Evangelism Explosion. All of these tools and efforts were highly effective at proclaiming the good news that our sins could be forgiven if we committed our lives to Christ. Many millions of people did commit their lives to Him. In fact, my own life was influenced by both The Four Spiritual Laws and Billy Graham Crusade, so I can personally attest to how successful these “harvest techniques” are at harvesting fruit that has already ripened.

But what about the fruit that hasn’t ripened? For most of us who made our first-time commitments to Christ as adults, our stories were not of instant conversion the first time we ever heard about Jesus. In fact, according to the Barna Research Group, only about 6 percent of people who are not Christians by the age of eighteen will become Christians by the age of eighteen will become Christians later in life. It is rare that a simple recitation of the gospel will cause people to instantly change their minds. It usually takes much more than that. Our own narratives typically involve a journey of discovery marked by relationships with respected friends and loved ones, reading, discussions, learning about the basis for the Christian faith, seeing the difference faith made in the lives of people we knew and witnessing genuine faith demonstrated through acts of love and kindness toward others. In other words, before we became “ripe” for harvest, a lot of other things had to happen first.

Think about all the things that must happen before there can be a good harvest of crops. First, someone has to go and prepare the land. This is backbreaking work that involves felling trees, pulling massive stumps out of the ground, extracting rocks and boulders from the field, and moving them aside. But there’s no harvest yet. Next the soil has to be broken up. The earth needs to be plowed, fertilizer churned in with the soil, and orderly rows tilled to prepare for the seed. Then the seeds must be carefully planted and covered. But still no harvest. Perhaps a fence needs to be built to protect the plants from animals that might devour them. And always, the seedlings must be carefully watered, nurtured, and fed over the long growing season.

There are sometimes setbacks – bad weather, blights, floods, and insects – that can jeopardize the harvest. But if all of the hard work is done faithfully and with perseverance, and if God provides good seed and favorable weather, finally a glorious harvest is the result.

Haven’t we heard the stories of faithful missionaries who dedicated their whole lives in another country without seeing even one person embrace Christ as Savior – only to learn that fifty years later there was a tremendous harvest? In out instant-gratification society, we would prefer to go directly to the harvest. Who wants to do all that hard work of stump pulling and boulder removing? But isn’t all of that “other” work the essence of the coming of the kingdom of God in its fullness?

Get this book - "must reading."

Shalom!

Uh 1... 2... 3... hit it!

2010-02-03T12:02:00.000-05:00

Reading “Church Turned Inside Out” is like looking at a commentary on the raw data provided by George Barna. Authors Linda Berquist and Allan Karr (B&K) provide some great insight on the distinctions between an “Attractional Church” (AC) and a “Relational Church”(RC). By contrasting the two, I see the transition that has taken place in our lives over the past 9 years.

AC’s are big on “first impression” (front door/lobby, colors, aroma, sound, etc.). They are central and use a hierarchical structure. Organizational leadership and “job descriptions” are imperative. They use advertising, parking lot banners, leaflets, even movie type trailer videos that promote “come, hear, see, experience!”

They work well in cultures that are “still influenced strongly by modernism and in which centralized organizational systems are still perceived as the best way to organize.”

The highest challenges for AC’s are financial. A lot of money is demanded to commence, proceed, operate and maintain due to a majority of income being used for mortgage, utilities and staff salaries. It is the opinion of the authors that “the high investment of resources required to sustain the organization means many of these churches never develop a kingdom ecclesiology.” Assimilation is valued, but extremely difficult. And as a result, “there can be a large back door.”

Further quoting B&K “…a more consumer or audience culture (as opposed to a participatory culture)…” is a major draw.

RC’s are much more basic communities thriving on relational dynamics which enable them to focus more fully on expanding relationships and missional engagement. B&K surmise that “they tend to be structured simply and are organized as either a single cell or a decentralized network of affiliated cell groups.” RC’s are usually led by lay people or bi-vocationally. There is rarely a hierarchy consisting of clergy/lay people since leadership “is based more on spiritual and relational authority than on positional authority structures…They not only gather relationally but also focus both internally (ministry to one another) and externally (evangelism and hospitality) on relationship. Intimacy and accountability are byproducts.”

RC’s gather informally and encourage open participation. Teaching and sharing is open to all who are present and participants can ask questions or make comments freely. The gatherings are not dependent on location or a specific day or time. Homes, coffee shops, parks, etc are typical venues for RC gatherings.

Finances are not nearly as challenging to RC’s as they are to AC’s. This creates a freedom to direct resources to many more outside causes.

The greatest challenge for RC’s is the tendency to allow relationship to overshadow mission and a condescending attitude toward conventional forms of expression. It is the common “holy huddle” problem.

For Teena and me, the consequence between investing energy and time in each context has been radically different. Stress and pressure seem to be diminished greatly in the RC paradigm than it is in the AC paradigm due to the decrease of lofty and sometimes unrealistic expectations. The sacrifice has been a steady income with a “regular job” – but the adventure and intrigue makes up for the lack tremendously.

More "Church" and "Pastor" Nouns

2010-01-31T09:36:00.001-05:00

"Doing" versus "being" continues to be God's method of "ecclesiastical recalibration." The following is the conclusion of chapter 8 of "Church Turned Inside Out" by Linda Berquist and Allan Karr. It serves as a clarification of the internal churning I experienced when I would hear someone in a hierarchical context refer to themselves as "your pastor." "Not so with you" (Mt. 20:25-27) and "...you are not to be called... (Mt. 23:8-11) would always pop in my head.

In times of great change, such as the days we live in now, new kinds of leaders surface. They have a different kind of relationship with their culture. In their book Understanding Folk Religion, Hiebert, Shaw and Tienow claim that stable eras of history are characterized by formal religious institutions led by priestly types. Unstable times breed anti-institutionalism, during which more prophetic types surface and lead.

Priests are leaders in the religious establishment. They represent the people to God and sustain the life of their religious community by exercising ritual and symbolic authority. They get their authority and power from their office, which they acquire through institutional processes such as appointment, election, and inheritance. They are often trained in schools and have mastered the performance of religious rituals. They focus on proper procedures, doing things in an orderly manner, keeping the laws, and following the rules. They are keepers of tradition and corporate memory.

This has been the modern era’s leadership paradigm, but the times are changing and we see a shift occurring. Prophets are found “when old structures are inadequate for new situations; times of social turbulence, political turmoil, and spiritual crisis.” Prophets of old lived simple and frugal lives, and in the anti-institutional climate of today people are looking for leaders who live more simply. Rather than appointment to an office, prophets gain their authority through their charisma and spiritual credibility, from character and a message of foretelling the truth and exhorting people to focus on God. They tend to self-identify and live in relationship to society and its institutions as outsiders (priests are insiders). In relation to the church, they act as reformers and critics and are detached, with no territorial ties and no place in hierarchy. They are dynamic change agents. And consequently they are looked at as dangerous opponents of the institutions. The shift of power to leaders of this kind is usually quite threatening to the priestly leaders of modern institutions, but we are nevertheless anticipating the change and the design implications it suggests.

"If your time to you
Is worth savin'
Then you better start swimmin'
Or you'll sink like a stone." -Bob Dylan

Espresso Shots No. 1

2010-01-25T14:11:00.000-05:00

Hoping the audio doesn't drag like it did when I reviewed. If it does, have a laugh and enjoy it.

Jeff

Espresso Shots

2010-01-25T11:10:00.000-05:00

I'm trying something new for me. I want to periodically podcast thoughts that I have. This first one is in low resolution and a bit blurry. I'll tweak that for the next one. Any feedback will probably be taken personally - but that's good for me so "fire away."

Grand Opening

2010-01-13T12:04:00.001-05:00

Our official Grand Opening will take place on Friday and Saturday - January 22 & 23. We'll be open 6 am to 10 pm on Friday and 7 am to 10 pm on Saturday.

There will be some fun give-aways and free sample beverages given out on both days. We'll offer a 10% discount to all students who present an official school ID.

On Friday evening at 7 pm "Sinai Vessel" (a local group) will preform in concert.

Come and check out the warmest and most inviting Coffee Shop in town!

"I Do Believe in Spooks...I Do I Do I Do..."

2010-01-12T06:50:00.000-05:00

Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. One man's faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. -Romans 14:1-3

When I first started gleaning from the thoughts and hearts of those who were considered as "emerging" among followers of Christ, I was fascinated with the gift of a refreshed hermeneutical approach to scripture - especially the depth of the teachings of Jesus. "Refreshed" only in that it seemed to be more accurately a rekindling.

It didn't take too long for naysayers to arise who communicated misunderstanding and fear aimed at the simultaneous voices as if they were all part of a diabolical conspiracy. All of the sudden, some in the church were espousing an unlimited number of additional shooters in Dealy Plaza.

My greatest disappointment came from one whom I considered a pioneer in taking risks (in the late 60s and early 70s) to reach people whom conventional thinkers neglected. My own spiritual pilgrimage is linked to this break-through. He took it upon himself and his ministry to decry these voices as "heretical" (an accusation he himself endured). Those who followed this Apollos, epidemically contracted this fear and without really researching and listening to those whom were being labeled as apostate. I remember, in my last context, a few of them asking me my take hoping I would decry the "emerging" voices as being adversarial.

The fear and misunderstanding continue.

Linda Berquist and Allan Karr - in their book Church Turned Inside Out - describe this fear very accurately likening it to God's chosen people's reluctant transitioning from Egypt to the Promised Land.

Thousands of years ago, the rebellious people of Israel sent spies to probe the new territory God had prepared for them. When those secondhand sources came back with stories about giants, the Israelites kept wandering around where they had already been and eventually died without ever entering the Promised Land. Most people today live in a wilderness story, unaware of the new and different land and uncomfortable with where it my lead. We focus on giants and ignore God's promises. Why do some people believe that the emerging age mean the demise of Christianity and the rise of Eastern religions? We believe, by contrast, that the emerging era is more compatible with biblical Christianity than most people imagine.

For many years George Barna has probed and published objective data with the Western cultural expression of Christianity. Pulpiteers and Conference speakers were comfortable utilizing his data in order to sustain their paradigms. When Barna began to make conclusions and urge followers to consider the voices of those who were willing to abandon convention for the sake of successful mission, giants in the land emerged.

Barna stated the following concern in his blog from yesterday.

On a recent blog post I read (not linked intentionally), an internationally known church leader quoted a statistic (actually, misquoted it) from the Barna Group and followed it up with an inaccurate and inappropriate claim: “According to George Barna, at least 20,000 Evangelicals won’t attend an organized church, but are meeting in homes. This is a dangerous trend as these groups can become isolationist and cult-like.”

...What bothers me most is the statement that people meeting in house churches “can become isolationist and cult-like.” The critical word in this accusation is “can.” Alternatively, is it possible that house churches can become places of genuine worship and loving outreach? Is it possible that house churches can represent the kingdom of God more effectively than conventional churches? What about the possibility of a conventional church becoming “isolationist and cult-like” –- can that happen? Can the preacher in a conventional church teach heresy? Can a conventional church become so lost in its programs and routines that not a single person gets saved through that church over the course of a year (or more)?

I dread the day – which may be here – when church leaders, with good intentions, are comfortable imitating the insufferable journalistic practices of lazy or ignorant reporters who convert a single instance into a “trend.” We unjustly disparage good people by making such broad and unsupported claims. If we are supposed to be people of integrity and righteousness, our words should reflect truth and love.

I sincerely believe that it is fear that creates this paralysis. It's like the fourth watch of the night when Jesus walked out to the disciples on the Sea of Galilee. They did not recognize God's Anointed moving toward them thinking he was a "spook." The gospel account states that they "cried out in fear." Jesus assured them that he was the same Lord they knew and trusted on the safe shore and commanded them not to be paralyzed with fear. But they stayed in the boat. All but one.

The incident continues with Peter's early transformation. He's the only one who is willing to try. And even though he cried out for help, he was beyond the buoyant security the others clung to. That is why he becomes our poster boy of incrementally overcoming fear and blazing a trail for subsequent followers.

No - We Really Kant

2010-01-11T08:33:00.000-05:00

The end of John 15:5 stings with the words χωρὶς ἐμοῦ οὐ δύνασθε ποιεῖν οὐδέν. English does not contain the double negative of the original language since our conventional created "standard" and mind-set does not allow it, but if it did, it would look like: "Without me, you can do no - nothing."

Linda Bergquist and Allan Karr have done a great job of surmising what has historically lead to the current need of ecclesiastical recalibration. This is an excellent excerpt from their combined work in chapter 4 of Church Turned Inside Out.

First, in modernism the world is seen as a collection of things that may be dominated, ordered, counted, and possessed by people. This view of the world leads to an understanding of the universe that is mechanistic, deterministic, compartmentalized, and organized foundationally (hierarchically). More is better than less, and large is better than small. This is the world that invented mass production and franchises. It has also been the “era of organization.” Business and organizational theory, efficiency flow charts, and multi-national corporations organize and manage people, things and information in an increasingly global economy.

This aspect of modernity is not necessarily negative, but it is something that was culturally inherited, and not inherent to the nature of the church. It is not the existence of these ideas that is troublesome to our ecclesiology; it is that they are so readily embraced without questioning the extent to which they serve the meaning of the gospel and the mission of the church. Unwittingly we confuse entrepreneurial business leaders (people who control, count, order, and expand organizations) with apostolically gifted servants of God. We err by substituting our own goals for God’s clear direction, and we miss the mark when we measure success by solely quantitative means. More than fifty years ago, some of the greatest lovers of the church were already starting to react to the church’s conformity to culture. C.S. Lewis wrote: “I live in the Managerial Age, in a world of ‘Admin.’ The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid ‘dens of crime’ that Dickens loved to paint. It is not done even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voice.”

…We must pay attention to the reality that some other aspect of Scripture may help new generations of Christians more fully embrace their faith. This would not be the first time that the focal point from which God spoke into culture changed. The Bible tells us that the cultural heresy God called Moses to speak into was idol worship. And the cultural problem Paul most effectively addressed was legalism. The church after modernism is already birthing its own reformers who will speak new meaning into the worldview of a new age. Instead of trusting imperfect humankind, as in the Enlightenment era, the church before us will need to relearn how to recenter its hope in the person of Christ.

I have been saturated with 8 years of "professional training." There are portions of it that have proven to be helpful, if done in the right context. Like a Retriever ascending to a dry shore, it has been a personal challenge for me to shake off the water that mandates me to be the "leader" and allow Christ to lead his people - I mean really lead. I have made the amazing discovery, that Jesus does a pretty descent job taking precedence while working through a network of gifted followers to accomplish Kingdom advances in a lost and hungry culture.

Sophisticated Horoscopes?

2010-01-02T08:38:00.000-05:00

I've recently been challenged from a friend about a caveat of sharing elements of personal transformation. All I can say is that this is the only way I can communicate the internal work that is occurring in my life. My hope is to share the rigorous challenge and not to disrupt one's own progress.

Chapter 3 of Church Turned Inside Out is about "Cultivating Community." I find myself seeing the contrast of what I've experienced in the recent past and what I'm learning presently. "Community" like "Church" can be treated either in noun form or verb form. Noun is information; verb is implementation. One is based on expectation; the other requires exploration. In short, I'm discovering that the exploration is more potent than the expectation.

We could ask that each participant of the ministry team be assessed. Then, on the basis of experiences, spiritual gift inventories, strength-finding processes, and personality profiles, each person would typically be assigned a task in line with the apparent needs of the church. This way of working, however, says nothing about the interaction between the individuals who fulfill their assigned roles, according to their gifting and passions. In this structural model, teamship is assumed but may never be realized, mainly because structural assignments are often made presuming the church is an organization, rather than a true team. Studies prove that this way of organizing does not tend to produce the same quality of work or the same level of satisfaction as a group of people who negotiate real networks, meaning teams who recognize the group as an extension of the concepts of self…Breakthrough ways of thinking, designing, and producing happen best when people recognize the genius of connecting with one another. We know of several churches and networks that are now thinking of the leadership structure as a connected team rather than a hierarchical organization.

By the way, one of the authors of CTIO (Linda Bergquist) sent me an e-mail of encouragement and support of what we're doing with our present situation. My thanks to her for that and for the insight I'm receiving from this new book.

Aha! Again

2009-12-31T08:01:00.000-05:00

I’ve been on a yellow-caution pace (my normal reading “speed”) through Church Turned Inside Out by Linda Bergquist and Allan Karr. It’s a bit deeper than some of the other books I have been reading over the past few years. I read the following paragraph in a bit of a morning zone; stopped and read it again. I read it one more time and found my soul spilling out onto the page. The words are descriptive of what I’ve sensed and agonized about over the last 10+ years.

In ministry, we sometimes adopt prescribed roles or scripts because they are “working” well, and seemingly bearing much fruit for others. We attend conferences where mega-fruit bearers challenge us in new ways, and sometimes our egos are challenged as a result. We want to bear much fruit too; after all, the mission of God is what we structure our lives around. So we stop working in ways that reflect how we are naturally and supernaturally created, change the way we do ministry, attempt to reengineer our personhood, and sometimes actually become more successful as a result. For a period of time this satisfies, but eventually we burn out and wonder why. It’s because we are working contrary to how we are designed. It is also because we confuse fruit bearing with producing visible, countable results, as indicated by the common questions “How’d ya do last Sunday?” “How many showed up on Easter?” “Baptize anyone yet this year?”

Some of the counsel I’ve received from some insightful folks along my journey did not sink in when first given. I didn’t “get it” when a friend stepped outside of his administrative role and told me to put on my resume who I really actually was and not the format suggested in seminary class. I recall reacting with the Victrola dog look when Reggie McNeal stated at a seminar: “It is about you, despite what you may have heard.”

I didn’t comprehend as I had indeed adopted “prescribed roles or scripts” that followed an accepted formula of institutionalized dimensions. When burn-out and confusion resulted, I realized that I was not functioning according to my talent and ability. I had to take a risk to discover how to work in ways that were complementary and not contradictory. It’s been a major element of my own recent transformation process. I’m certainly not approaching a stretched out tape, but I believe I can make out what appears to be a finish line.

New Website

2009-12-29T08:12:00.001-05:00

Java Journey's website has been updated by co-manager Ben Curfman. Check it out (unless, of course, you linked from there).

This week, we will have an incremental (a consistent JJ pace) "soft opening." We hope to have our POS system up and running and baristas trained. We are still awaiting the service and repair of our main super automatic espresso machine. The delay is related to the ordering and shipping of parts via CA, via Spain. Since it was idle for 2 years, some gaskets and o-rings dried up.

We had a successful Christmas Eve candlelight gathering and a concert on the 26th. We had a nice group of people for both.

Spread the word that Java Journey is in first gear and letting out the clutch.

We Are Ready to Open!

2009-12-19T08:45:00.000-05:00

On Thursday, December 17, 2009, Java Journey passed final inspection by the city of Hickory, NC and received a certificate of occupancy. We are rejoicing. However, we've still got some tasks to complete before we can open.

The espresso machines are still in Asheville being serviced for operation. The single group machine (Conti) is ready, but still in the possession of co-manager Ben Curfman in Asheville as an uncharacteristic snow storm hit our area yesterday and he is snowbound. The fully automatic machine (Azkoyen Xpression) is awaiting parts for the heat exchange boiler (o-ring leaking). We will have a "soft opening" beginning Monday (Christmas week) and serve regular brewed coffee, tea and baked good. We will also have bulk coffee for sale.

Momentum is building, but as is typical in our joint pilgrimage - it is incremental (sometimes emphasizing "mental").

Insightful

2009-12-06T08:37:00.000-05:00

I love this quote from John A.T. Robinson in Frank Viola's book "Finding Organic Church." Although I can't agree with Robinson's view of universal salvation, he had some very profound observations about many arbitrary notions that ecclesiastical hierarchy held.

As the Preacher of Ecclesiastes saw, "There is a time to break down, and a time to build up ...a time to keep silence and a time to speak." And the second Reformation, if it comes, will be distinguished from the first by the fact that it is a time of reticence, of stripping down, or traveling light. The church will go through its baggage and discover how much it can better do without, alike in doctrine and in organization.

Now I (and you) know why I cannot stand having "Rev" in front of my name and a decorative strip of cloth around my neck - among many other things.

A Fransican Benediction

2009-11-18T08:01:00.000-05:00

Teena shared this with me this morning. It's one of those "Yes/Ouch" things.

May God bless you with discomfort at
easy answers, half-truths, and superficial relationships,
so that you may live deep within your heart.

May God bless you with anger at
injustice, oppression, and exploitation of people,
so that you may work for justice, freedom and peace.

May God bless you with tears to shed
for those who suffer from pain, rejection, starvation and war,
so that you may reach our your hand to comfort them and turn their
pain to joy.

And may God bless you with enough foolishness to believe
that you can make a difference in this world,
so that you can do what others claim cannot be done.

Well Stated

2009-11-18T07:09:00.000-05:00

This is a quotation at the beginning of Chapter 13 of Frank Viola's book "Finding Organic Church" (DC Cook 2009). It's by the late John A.T. Robinson, former Anglican bishop. Although, I do not agree with most of his theology (he was a universalist), he did a great job of illuminating the overall preoccupation and distraction of the Institutional Church.

The real trouble is not in fact that the Church is too rich, but that it has become heavily institutionalized, with a crushing investment in maintenance. It has the characteristics of the dinosaur and the battleship. It is saddled with a plant and programme beyond its means, so that it is absorbed in problems of supply and preoccupied with survival. The inertia of the machine is such that the financial allocations, the legalities, the channels of organization, the attitudes of mind, are all set in the direction of continuing the enhancing of the status quo. If one wants to pursue a course which cuts across these channels, then most of one's energies are exhausted before one ever reaches the enemy lines.

Well said. I now know why there was often a churning of my stomach when I was part of weakly (sic) "staff meetings" in a former paradigm and had to step outside for some solar energy and a few snorts of fresh oxygen.

The Future Has Become Present

2009-11-06T14:52:00.003-05:00

We have had conversations with many people who resonated to various degrees to what Teena and I envision. There has often been a need to explain or clarify some of what makes our hearts beat. Never have we had such free-flowing conversation until we met Ben and Rebekah Curfman. God has bent our mutual paths so that they are now crossed. We are excited and joyful.

Ben posted this on Facebook and I am putting here for other friends and the reading community may see.

Nine years ago I had a unique experience in my relationship with God. Many people interpret their experience as a “call to full-time Christian service/ministry.” The experience is different for everyone. For me, it was at a Christian summer camp during a worship service. I was thirteen years old at the time. I did not hear the audible voice of God. I was not visited by an angel. I just simply became extremely aware of the pain and confusion in this world and my responsibility to share the hope that I had.

Since that time, it has been an interesting road. Because of my religious background, I felt that I needed to find a position or description of what God had set my heart toward. I pursued this calling through bible studies and heavy church involvement in high school, two years of religious education in a liberal arts college, and another two years of religious education at the school I will soon graduate from. During that time the question had been burning in my mind: “What is it I am supposed to do? How will I define myself?” I am finding more and more that God has defined my ministry of His Gospel precisely how he wanted to – namely by creating me the way He did. I am my own definition.

Knowing this, I began to ask myself, “If there were no limitations on where or what I could do to accomplish the mission placed in my heart, where would I go and what would I do?” Sometimes the right answers are discovered only through the right questions. I soon found that I was not most effective in a traditional church setting both because of growing convictions about traditional church practice and limitations on the scope of ministry I felt let to do. I decided that an atmosphere most conducive to ministry was a coffee shop.

After prayer, I began considering opening a coffee shop in Asheville, North Carolina in order to minister one-on-one with individuals who need personal attention and mentoring in their spiritual lives. After all, coffee and Christianity are two of my greatest passions. My wife and I began praying, along with others, that God would open the right opportunity for this ministry to take place. I specifically began praying for someone to handle the shop from a business perspective, so I could focus on my strengths – coffee and ministry.

A few weeks later I was visiting my parents near Hickory, North Carolina where I grew up. The Lord showed me then that the Hickory area is in desperate spiritual need. I had never realized that such a need existed in my hometown. The next question came: “Lord, would you have us begin the coffee shop ministry here in Hickory?” So we prayed again for a few weeks. The next time I visited my parents we went out to eat. Before sitting at our table, however, I recognized a good friend that I used to attend church with. I had shared our vision for a coffee shop ministry with him a couple of months prior to this meeting. He told me about a place called Java Journey that was opening soon. He said that their vision seemed similar to ours and that I should get in touch with them. So I did.

We contacted Jeff and Teena Stewart, one of the key couples involved in the ministry of Java Journey. I offered my services in the coffee industry and my ministry experience to them as a way of "throwing out the fleece" as Gideon did. “Surely they already had help and wouldn't need someone such as myself,” I thought. Nevertheless, we felt that we needed to at least get in contact in case the Lord was making a way for us. He has.

After some great conversations and a sharing of passions, Rebekah and I have agreed to relocate to the Hickory area and make a serious effort to change the community with the Gospel through Java Journey. We believe that this is what God has been preparing us for. We will be seeking financial and prayer support in order to make this a reality, with the faith that God will provide our every need as He has done in the past. I will be continuing school until the spring of next year when I graduate in addition to helping Jeff and Teena manage Java Journey. We ask for your prayers, gifts, and encouragement as it is an exhilarating and terrifying experience at the same time. We will also be seeking part-time jobs to take care of our living expenses until Java Journey gets off the ground financially.

Burning Questions

2009-11-03T07:22:00.001-05:00

I found this while doing some web-surfing ("cowabunga"). The page has no dates and broken links. A friend of mine recently drew the same comparison of the use of "organic" with the food industry marketing strategy. "NOT to be confused with..." is all I can say.

The questions asked have been on my mind and in my heart for several years. At first I thought "Purpose-Driven" was the answer, but eventually realized it was merely a racing stripe on a Model T.

I love being stretched and then sharing the pain with others!

The UK is facing an organic revival! Check out (sorry!) tesco.com and you can get organic everything from the standard organic fruit and vegetables to organic baby food, organic wine and even organic pet food. So maybe it is time for the Church to go organic too, or maybe it was always meant to be an organic community movement of the followers of Jesus Christ anyway? Perhaps during the last two millennia the Church has been spoiled by a multitude of additives and preservatives and now we just can't tell the difference.

Once upon a time God spoke through a prophet saying "I hate, I despise your religious feasts; I cannot stand your assemblies. Even though you bring me burnt offerings, I will not accept them. Though you bring me choice fellowship offerings, I will have no regard for them. Away with the noise of your songs! I will not listen to the music of your harps. But let justice roll on like a river, righteousness like a never failing stream!"

Rethinking "Church"
Do you ever get fed up with the religiousness of communion? When Jesus said "do this whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me" (1 Cor. 11.25) he was not instituting a religious ceremony but rather encouraging us to remember him every time we eat and drink together. As the church goes organic we will do a lot more eating and drinking with friends, neighbours and strangers because that is where real community is built.

Do you ever get fed up with meetings? How often do we hear it quoted from the Bible "do not give up meeting together" as the reason for attending the Sunday meeting every week or to coax you to join a small group or attend the latest series of special meetings? Biblical theology makes it very clear that it is impossible to 'go to church' - when anyone aligns their life with Jesus Christ they are initiated into his community: the church (1 Cor.12.13). As the church goes organic people will stop 'going to church' and start being the church 24 hours a day 7 days a week.

Do you ever get fed up with paying your church tax? Why should we be disempowered by centralised giving mechanisms? As the church goes organic it will empower individuals and households to do such things as: give to those in the community in hardship, save up and buy a set of text books for a local school, support facilitators of the Christian community or put aside money in case of a natural disaster.

Do you ever get fed up with singing the songs? Within the evangelical, charismatic and Pentecostal traditions of the church, which many of us have grown up in and love - worship has been reduced to the singing of hymns and songs. Our language of 'lets worship' gives us away - if we don't mean it, then lets not say it. As the church goes organic it will encounter God in the whole of life as we offer ourselves as living sacrifices to God (Rom.12.1).

Make it happen
Perhaps you, like me, feel like this but you dare not say anything because you know you might get branded as 'unsound'. As the Director General of the BBC, Greg Dyke says 'lets cut the crap and make it happen'! Everything you have called Church call it congregation and everyone you have called a Church leader call them a congregational leader. As an organic community of the followers of Jesus Christ we are all the church and leaders of it in every sector of society. Let's take the name church upon ourselves because we are the church - it does not exist outside of us. As a friend of mine says: 'whoever gets the name church, wins'.

Let's put a stop to our pre-occupation with meetings and lets rediscover organic community. Let's grow a faith that is meaningful for life, for our workplace, for our households and for our neighbourhoods. These are the places where we spend our time. These are the arenas where our faith needs to work rather than confining our faith to a few hours a week in a meeting. Let's encourage our congregational leaders to reinvent themselves to coach and facilitate an organic grassroots movement of the followers of Jesus Christ.

We must expect that like every new church movement in history this groundswell (which I do not want to name) will not be recognised as a valid form of church by the majority. However let's be different from every other new church movement in history and say this is just another way of being and doing church rather than 'the way' and thereby condemning everyone else.

Let's stop taking the additives and preservatives and let rot and die what is meant to rot and die and see something organic begin.

Matt Bird is Director of Joshua Generation a charity developing leaders to transform society, a strategic management consultant, author Christian Book of the Year 2002 'Manifesto for life' and Councillor for the London Borough of Merton.

Cleared for Drywalling

2009-09-30T07:37:00.000-04:00

I got to Java Journey shortly before 8 am to let 82-year old volunteer, Joe Guthrie, in so he could frame the doorway for the French doors. I knew the city inspector was coming later and I had to finish what he was going to review. We met Joe when he stopped by on a Saturday morning on July 18th when the youth from Trinity Church in Greensboro were volunteering. He told me he loved to work on things as a volunteer and gave me his number. After he finished the French door frame he asked: "What else you got?" I told him the other 3 door frames needed wood added, so he did that!

The inspector arrived while Joe was working on the other doors. I fully expected that we would be told to make a few adjustments and then call for a subsequent inspection. I was making haste taking into account the work to tweak everything and then be ready by the end of the week to be given a green light. The concern was brought on by the fact that 20-30 volunteers are scheduled to gather at 2149 N Center St on Sunday to put up sheetrock.

What a joyful surprise when the inspector spent about a total of fifteen minutes before saying: "I'll let you move on with this." Part of the time he looked at plans, wiring and plumbing, and asked a few questions. The rest was filled by conversation of our mutual enjoyment of music (I told him he looked like Peter Yarrow and found out he plays the drums).

Today was another big mile-marker day.

Organic Elements in the Corporate World?!

2009-09-22T07:55:00.000-04:00

My friend, Dennis Cheuvront, e-mailed this link to me: The Customer is the Boss at FAVI by Kevin Meyer. Dennis sent it to me as it parallels principles of Java Journey and our "liquid church" gatherings (I love the idea of the "plant manager" in the blog).

It amazingly sounds like a lot of the things espoused by a single individual a couple millennium ago and the earliest form of his community. Applied in today's society, it may look something like this.

Sadly, many of us are indeed "measuring something irrelevant."

Finding Balance

2009-09-21T07:14:00.000-04:00

I'm still reading and enjoying the book "The Rabbit and The Elephant - Why Small is the New Big for Today's Church" by Tony and Felicity Dale and George Barna.

In a discussion about "The Values That Define Us" there is a needed caveat for those who may become prone to smugness. But it is followed by another courageous observation about the M.O. most conventional churches operate with.

I must confess that it is easier to view the challenge from an outside-looking-in perspective than it is when trees hide a forest. I recall squirming in my seat hearing such observations during seminars with Reggie McNeal and George Barna when I was in that proverbial forest not that long ago.

Any of us who think that we have all the answers or that we are 'where things are really happening' are merely deluding ourselves. A synergy occurs when we lay aside our differences and work together across the body of Christ.

Christians in the West have followed the gods of the American dream of materialism, or popularity, of numbers. We have become performance driven rather than love motivated. We give Jesus the title of "Lord" or "Head of the Church," but in reality, we devise our own plans and then ask Him to bless them. We build buildings and create programs, following the advice of church-growth statisticians, and then we expect the Holy Spirit to come in power. And when, in His great mercy, He delights to bless us through some of these things, we presume that we have built His dream church. How can we have fooled ourselves so badly?

I would like to publicly acknowledge and express gratitude toward Trinity Fellowship of Hickory - under the leadership of Dodd Drake - for recognizing and proactively supporting Java Journey. TF has prayed for JJ and promoted our cause. Many have volunteered to spend time and energy on the build out effort.

The family of Safe Harbor Rescue Mission has also spent many hours helping JJ prepare to launch.

This is the kind of synergy mentioned in the quotation. Both ministries have not caved into the M.O. of growing big just to grow big.

I pray that more of this will happen across the American ecclesiastical landscape.

Melting Ice Blocks

2009-09-17T04:40:00.000-04:00

I'm borrowing a quote from a FB friend's blog (Brad Boydston) that he pasted from the "Out of Ur" (David Fitch) blog posted yesterday.

...Having said all this, the “great halls” (stadiums) of preaching distribution will not connect to the lost souls of post-Christendom. Post-Christian people are not attracted to the sermon as the first place to go in their spiritual distress. We must help leaders understand that if you spend 35-40 hours a week in your office preparing a good sermon on Sunday, making it not only theologically competent (which is worthy) but slick, you are ministering to the dying vestiges of Christendom.

You know my "mantra" that this is all based on a blind dependency on an M.O. we refuse to see and break away from. The paradigm is the old church as a big block of ice sitting at one location never to move. The institutional church is hooked on invitation/attraction and all it is really doing is shuffling a small percentage of society from ice block to ice block. So we persist with the poor stewardship of pouring our resources into the block and expecting someone to sit within it for several hours per week to dazzle the shuffled masses.

Alan Hirsch has stated that in America a large percentage of evangelical churches are "tussling with each other" to reach a small percentage of the population. He qualifies the small percentage by noting the a majority of Americans report an alienation from the current form of "church" where you go to one location on one day a week for an hour or more.

Tony & Felicty Dale (with George Barna) have nailed the problem in their recent book "The Rabbit and the Elephant" with this observation:

"Liquid church happens when we stop inviting others to come to church and instead we go out into every sphere of society as the Lord leads. We reach out to our neighbors or our coworkers, and instead of asking them to come to church, we get together with those people right where they live and work. In this way, segments of society that might never have experienced church life are affected by the Kingdom of God."

May the Holy Spirit's heat once again go to work!

What Is an Organic Church?

2009-09-12T07:41:00.000-04:00

-Frank Viola, Finding Organic Church 2009 (pp 20 & 21)

As I have stated elsewhere, I’ve been using this term for over fifteen years now. Today it has become somewhat of a clay word, being molded and shaped to mean a variety of different things by a variety of different people.

By organic church, I mean a church that is born out of a spiritual life instead of being constructed by human institutions and held together by religious programs. Organic church life is a grassroots experience that is marked by face-to-face community, every-member functioning, open-participatory meeting (as opposed to pastor-to pew services), nonhierarchical leadership, and the centrality and supremacy of Jesus Christ as the functional Leader and Head of the gathering.

By contrast, whenever we sin-scarred mortals try to create a church the same way we would start a business, we are defying the organic nature of church life. An organic church is one that is naturally produce when a group of people has encountered Jesus Christ in reality (external ecclesiastical props being unnecessary) and the DNA of the church is free to work without hindrance. It’s the difference between standing in front of a fan and standing outdoors on a windy day.

To summarize, an organic church is not a theater with a script. It’s a lifestyle – an authentic journey with the Lord Jesus and His disciples.

The difference between organic churches and nonorganic churches is the difference between General Motors and a vegetable garden. One is founded by humans, the other is birthed by God. One is artificial, the other is living.

For this reason, church planters are like farmers and midwives.

No Kingdom on YouTube

2009-09-11T07:58:00.000-04:00

Matt 24:14
And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come (NIV).

On a piece of paper, write down what you think this statement of Jesus means. (Did you get this from a Sunday School quarterly?)

καὶ κηρυχθήσεται τοῦτο τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς βασιλείας ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ οἰκουμένῃ εἰς μαρτύριον πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν καὶ τότε ἥξει τὸ τέλος

Concept translation:

And this message that brings joy of the reign of God through his Messiah shall be proclaimed throughout the whole inhabited earth leading to a testimony to all various groups of people. And then the completion shall be present.

Kind of a riddle, isn’t it?

Read Luke 17
20Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, 21nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you."
22Then he said to his disciples, "The time is coming when you will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man, but you will not see it. 23Men will tell you, 'There he is!' or 'Here he is!' Do not go running off after them.

ἐντός = inside

The Kingdom is NOT observable.

Question: “Can you really see inside you?” Try it.

There’s no “here” nor “there” is there!

Look at verse 37.

37"Where, Lord?" they asked.
He replied, "Where there is a dead body, there the vultures will gather."
(NIV)

What on earth does THIS mean???

OBSERVATION. “Dead body”/”vultures” "Where?" is the wrong question!

Kingdom cannot be viewed

NIV omits a needed concept in 17:21 that the KJV includes. ἰδού “I-doo” KJV: “Behold” is now “Look!” “Check it out!” - the YouTube prompter.

This buttresses the point that Jesus often made about the "secrecy" aspect of the Kingdom. It's not "can't tell because I'm not supposed to." It's "I cannot present this reign in a tangible form. It is much deeper and runs farther than anything imaginable - because it is life-transforming and eternal."

Saturated Synthesis

2009-09-10T08:04:00.000-04:00

Deuteronomy 16:21 Do not set up any wooden Asherah pole beside the altar you build to the LORD your God...

Vent warning - I have a confession. I don't know if I am fueled by frustration or jealousy when I see fellow believers evidencing their passion for play, big toys and self-aggrandisement with photos of huge campers and running around with little ATV's on Facebook. Or snorkeling in tropical waters far off - or even false eyelashes and implants. I realize that the measure I use (no pun) will be used for me as well, but I think it may be deeper than a surface annoyance. It looks like some type of justifying blindness. The justifying usually comes via a 10% check conveniently placed in a plate or box at the one location-for one+ hour-on one day a week. I'm going to once again place blame on the cultural condition we find ourselves in (therein the blindness).

A good friend (Jim Black) posted a link on FB that articulates the problem. It is an article from Minnesota Christian Chronicle Online published last month. It is called The good news in the decline of American Christianity written by Greg Boyd

This following insight jumped off the page for me as indicative but also as a personal caveat.

By contrast, whenever Christianity has become popular among those who are part of the dominant culture, it has tended to stagnate. While there are exceptions, the Christianity of the dominant culture has always tended to absorb and even “Christianize” the core values of its culture. It has thus tended to manifest less and less of the unique, counter-cultural values of the Jesus-looking Kingdom—values such as humility, simplicity, self-sacrificial service, community, unconditional love and non-violence.

The unique power and beauty of the Gospel tends to get diluted, and the church gradually is reduced to little more than a slightly Christianized version of the broader culture.

My response was a Charlie Brownian "THAT'S IT!"

Lord, help me to discover the secrecy of the Kingdom virtues of dying to self on a daily basis. Sting me with conviction when I start to erect any kind of Asherim beside the altar I build to you.

Awaited Milestone

2009-09-02T19:27:00.000-04:00

A very busy day today.

In the midst of all my activity was a phone call I received from Hickory city planning department. They called to inform me that our plans had been approved but they needed an estimate on the cost of the project. I basically wet my finger and pointed up in the air and came up with a number. They also informed me that I had to have a licensed contractor sign the application. I didn't think we needed one as I was told that only a licensed plumber and licensed electrician had to sign off on the mechanical requirements of the build out.

I called one of our friends (Matt Taylor - the worship leader at Trinity Fellowship) whose father is a licensed contractor and had looked at our space in the past to offer advice. He told me to call his father and that he would call him to let him know I would contact him. Mike (his name) agreed to sign the application and will meet me tomorrow morning at the city planning office.

So after tomorrow - we are cleared to start the major work to transform the space into an operational Coffee Shop and intentional ministry. We are rejoicing.

If you can lend your support in any way by locally volunteering, supplying materials or supporting us financially (tax deductible) we would be very grateful. Please contact one of us so we can give you further information.

Thanks and keep up your prayers. Blessings!