Train Like a Dentist; Get Paid Like a Janitor

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...

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

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

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 life will 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

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

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!

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