Comments on Lessons Learned and Laborings Lost: Evangelicalism and the Coming Kingdom

james - good points about home church/mega church....

2005-12-12T18:54:00.000-05:00

james - good points about home church/mega church.

As much as I'm not a fan of mega churches (or even "micro churches" - 100 member or less), it would be foolish and unrealistic for me to suggest that all megachurches should disband and become house churches.

But my past has proved that my assignment in life cannot be fullfilled within a megachurch context.

It's good to know that people like your friend feel called to them. I'm sure he/she is needed. Thanks for sharing.

Howdy Anon,Thanks for the clarification. I do app...

2005-12-12T18:20:00.000-05:00

Howdy Anon,

Thanks for the clarification. I do appreciate your apology, and please understand there's no hard feelings. I generally appreciate the criticism if it does come from a named source of some kind, as it is too easy in the blogosphere to hide one's self and throw comments from the peanut gallery, if you know what I mean. Had you given a name (even a nickname of some kind) and mentioned that you are part of such and such church, and then mentioned your points of contention I think it would have been easier to engage in a discussion. That's just my personal preference.

Understand also that I know and have many friends who work in more mainline churches, and I even have a friend who was once part of 'Sinners & Saints' and now works for a large megachurch in the midwest. There is no issue here. I do not believe that house churches are the only means of doing church. It is A way but not the only way. Obviously, I believe there are certain advantages house churches have, otherwise I might not be participating in this way, but I'm sure you feel that the way you do church has its advantages as well. And again, this is totally fine.

Thanks again for you clarification Anon. Is there something else I can call you besides Anon?

peace,

james

James, I'm sorry I offended you and after re-readi...

2005-12-12T15:37:00.000-05:00

James, I'm sorry I offended you and after re-reading my post, I understand where you're coming from. My sincerest appologies. I didn't leave a name because I don't know you and you don't know me. I just happened upon your blog. And to be honest, I'm not in the practice of spending any significant time on the internet, so I doubt I'll be stopping by your blog again. Just an explanation. And after I thought about what I wrote, I decided I won't be posting on anyone's blog again when it comes to something as emotional as this. The point I was trying to make would have come better from someone you know and respect, rather than from some person you don't even know. And I was doing the exact thing that I hate...causing division between Christians. I have read several of your posts and I think Sinners and Saints sounds like a great ministry. Anything that is bringing people to the Lord is what I love. I think my post got so emotional because I think the ministries that I'm involved in are great too....I've seen so many people's lives changed and it's exciting. I guess I got a little defensive of something I love and have invested so much of my life into. Again, I'm sorry and hope that you and your family have a merry Christmas.

amen. Anonymous you got james all wrong. i have ...

2005-12-12T15:07:00.000-05:00

amen.

Anonymous you got james all wrong. i have known the dude for more than a decade and he is none of the things you accused him of.

I agree with james, sounds like you didn't even read the post, just some of the comments.

maybe something here hit on the truth and you are reacting to that but you can't see that so you put all your energy into name calling.

as james said, sack up and name yourself

Lee: Great to hear from you. I think what i like ...

2005-12-12T12:22:00.000-05:00

Lee:

Great to hear from you. I think what i like best about your statement is the line "...the question here is not whether a person is an evangelist, but rather what form that evangelism takes." Too true.

Anonymous:

I'd really like to take you seriously, but for starters it's really difficult to do so when you don't leave a name. Second, it would be much easier for me to read your comments in "love and sincereity" if i thought you had actually read this post with some attention to detail. As it stands, all you've essentially done is draw some assupmtions as to who you think i am. So far you have labeled me "emergent" "nasty towards the mainstream church" "stroking my ego" and one who thinks he "has all the answers." Had you read the post with some clarity rather than standing behind a cloak of anonymity, spouting out assumptions as to what I believe, you might realize that I'm really only laying bare a bit of my past, and allowing others to see how I am working through this. Nowhere in this post have I stated that "mainstream churches suck," "emergent is the only way to go," and "check me out I have all the answers." Perhaps you could spend a bit of time perusing some of my previous posts in order to better find what I believe and what issues I'm currently working through, rather than kicking me a charge to "get over myself." You might actully learn a bit about how i feel towards humility and pride.

Do you feel threatened somehow by my candor? Or perhaps that I believe my church past hasn't provided me with the clearest understanding of the Kingdom of God?

Sack up, indentify yourself and let's have a beneficial discussion.

Do you really think that posts like this are helpi...

2005-12-12T11:06:00.000-05:00

Do you really think that posts like this are helping the Kingdom? I'm one of these evangelicals that you're talking about and I think a lot of the emergent church ideas are great. But it's hard to look past all the negativity that comes along with it. It's not the ideology behind it, but the people behind it. I continually come in contact with people who are part of this movement that are disrespectful and downright nasty towards the mainstream church. I'm just letting you know in all love and sincerity that you're not helping the Kingdom. This divisiveness is only hurting us all. It may be stroking your ego to think, "Yeah, I get it... and all those megachurches and evangelicals are completely out of touch with the world and are really making of fool out of what it means to be a Christian." But you're not helping! Basically I'm saying, get over yourself! Maybe with age and maturity, you'll discover that you don't have all the answers. Bringing down everyone else isn't helping anyone.

Reading thru the entire post and comments....whew!...

2005-12-11T13:20:00.000-05:00

Reading thru the entire post and comments....whew!!! I was prompted to look up the word evangelism, and was surprised to find it was only associated with the Christian faith.

Interesting...so I wondered what it is called when the Dalai Lama speaks, or when any Rabi/Rabbi, Mullah, or even Steve Jobs or Bill Gates speaks?

I always thought that evangelism simply meant that one attempts to advance a particular point of view. So then I went to an online encyclopedia and found that "Evangelism is the preaching of the Christian Gospel, or by extension any other form of preaching or proselytizing". The last part of this definition made me feel better about my original understanding of the word. Then I checked the word origin and found the word evangelist comes from the Koine Greek word εὐάγγελος ("eu-angelos"), meaning bringer of good news....like Steve Jobs?

So it seems that anyone with an opinion or set of beliefs is an evangelist either actively or passively and we cannot avoid it...so if that is true, then it seems to me the question here is not whether a person is an evangelist, but rather what form that evangelism takes. I don't usually post, just got caught up in the questions.

Thanks for the stimulation James. Now back to work.

Thanks for the word Rick. I've always known you we...

2005-12-08T15:25:00.000-05:00

Thanks for the word Rick. I've always known you were a reader, regardless of posts or not. Always glad to have your thoughts though.

i have been in much agreement with so much of your...

2005-12-08T13:30:00.000-05:00

i have been in much agreement with so much of your posting lately but have not commented because by time I read your blog and Gentry's, there are many comments.

I feel I can usually add nothing to the conversation at this point, so I keep silent. But, my silence does not mean I am not engaged.

peace.

Glad you are seeing the light regarding U2.

"While I don't think the Bible should be kept from...

2005-12-07T20:36:00.000-05:00

"While I don't think the Bible should be kept from us, I think we need to look again at how we treat/revere it's content. And I think we're better off learning about it in a good community of believers."

that is the key. learning about it in a good community of believers. I recall what a friend of mine says at the beginning of all his OT classes, "God is and has been creating a holy people for himself."

a people, not individuals with their own pet interpretations, but a community.

i think that is what sets you and i apart from modern-northamerican-eh-vangelicalism: individualism marked by personal prvate religious experiences and accountability to community.

not that you or i do not believe in personal experiences but those experiences are interpreted by the community.

likewise eh-vangelicals would have us all believe the very western and enlightenment paradigm of personal interpretation. i think this is the priesthood of the believer grossly misinterpreted.

there is more here but i will desist

Samwise,That's definitely an interesting struggle ...

2005-12-07T18:15:00.000-05:00

Samwise,

That's definitely an interesting struggle that's hit your church. Personally, (and as you've noted) I don't see how we can label the Bible as obsolete. Tis useful for teaching, and instruction, and really it gives us a great picture of how the Kingdom plays out. I learn this more and more as teach in church every 3 weeks or so.

I think I might fall into Hauerwas' camp though, (as Landis pointed out) in regard to how we treat the Scriptures...

Hauerwas -> " I do not believe, in the Church’s current circumstance, that each person in the Church thereby is given the right to interpret the Scripture . . . Most North American Christians assume that they have a right, if not an obligation, to read the Bible. I challenge that assumption. No task is more important than for the Church to take the Bible out of the hands of individual Christians in North America.

Let us no longer give the Bible to all children when they enter the third grade or whenever their assumed rise to Christian maturity is marked, such as eighth-grade commencements. Let us rather tell them and their parents that they are possessed by habits far too corrupt for them to be encouraged to read the Bible on their own."

While I don't think the Bible should be kept from us, I think we need to look again at how we treat/revere it's content. And I think we're better off learning about it in a good community of believers.

Thanks for the words Sam. And thanks for the quote Landis!

Good thoughts James. I definitely agree that gett...

2005-12-07T17:29:00.000-05:00

Good thoughts James. I definitely agree that getting people to understand discipleship should never be separated from conversion (be it one Friday night at such and such a place, or over the course of several years). One thing that's come up in our demonation (Methodist) that you briefly mentioned is the issue of Scriptural authority. The UMC is struggling with a particular social issue - people in this debate can be divided into those with a strong view of Scriptural authority (containing instructions for life and godliness) or a weaker view of Scripture (holy writings that are obsolete to modern/postmodern individuals.

As a friend said, "I don't agree with the church's stance on homosexuality." Rooted in enlightenment thought and a child of the 60s, the goal would be to love all people and accept them just the way they are. But Scripture calls us to be holy. The disciple needs to be disciplined. Our Christian life is not about indulging each and every desire we might have. We submit ourselves to an authority greater than us - the Lord God. And we know him by reading his word and interpreting it through the Holy Spirit.

All this to say the Scriptural authority is a mark of Evangelicals. Read any mission statement, statement of faith of any institution. If the first thing starts, "We believe the Bible..."
BINGO - Evangelical institution.

I really don't know the definitions of words like ...

2005-12-07T14:45:00.000-05:00

I really don't know the definitions of words like "evangelism" and "evangelical", and a whole bunch of others, etc. I am pathetically undereducated in that realm.

But I do know there's a human desire to want to "force" people to be like us, etc. And I'm convinced that God can and will "do the changing" in a person if that person lets him.

I saw this clearly in Walter Heidenreich's testimony. He was full fledged, dope doin', commune livin' hippie in the early 70's. He found Jesus during an acid trip gone bad. Yet he continued to live his lifestyle for 6-12 months because the church wouldn't accept him. He slowly, volluntarilly gave up his sins when he discovered these sins were in his way of knowing God more. No human had to force him into a mold.

So...if evangelical means forcing, than count me out.

my f*cking relatively long response was deleted be...

2005-12-07T14:40:00.000-05:00

my f*cking relatively long response was deleted because my computer froze. but we talked earlier today and it is beer o'clock.

I agree with Gentry, that line about our lives bei...

2005-12-07T14:19:00.000-05:00

I agree with Gentry, that line about our lives being our evangelism really moved me.

Perhaps my angst with being categorized as an evan...

2005-12-07T13:00:00.000-05:00

Perhaps my angst with being categorized as an evangelical is akin to the growing number of Christians who are no longer care to be called "Christian." It's not so much that they're denying their devotion to Christ as Lord, but more that they're simply fed up with what the term "Christian" has come to mean, and who can be considered among their constituants. Personally, I prefer to call myself a "Follower of Christ" rather than a Christian, simply because I think it carries a stronger emphasis on who it is that we follow. But when asked if I am a Christian, i do not deny that I am one. Perhaps I can do this with the term evangelical as well . . . though I'm not sure what else to call it.

then again, citizens of the Kingdom of God could e...

2005-12-07T12:22:00.000-05:00

then again, citizens of the Kingdom of God could easily become another sectarian way of saying "i follow paul," "i follow apollos," or "i follow apollo (cue james brown)," so my latter suggestion might not be the best.

"our lives are our evangelism." never was a more e...

2005-12-07T11:54:00.000-05:00

"our lives are our evangelism." never was a more evangelical comment uttered.

i have suggested that s & s is evangelical because our characteristics (we hold to the trustworthiness of scripture, are serious about social justice, seek to be Christ's compassion and gospel proclamation in this world, we are open and willing associate with all manner of Christians and organizations that further the mission of God, etc.). however, though we evidence many eh-van-gelical characteristics, none of us give a damn about ee-van-gelical culture (a semantic distinction that my buddy Ryan initiated...man, how the ee-van-gelicals hated him). i guess one could say, with more than a little cheek, that we are "in but not of" eh-van-gelicalism.

perhaps a better way to put it would be that we are citizens and proponents of the Kingdom of God. yeah, i like the sound of that.

Dave,Yes, and know that I'm not trying to bait you...

2005-12-07T10:49:00.000-05:00

Dave,

Yes, and know that I'm not trying to bait you into some kind of women in the church debate. Just saying that I believe the status of women should be restored to that of equals.

When Paul and Peter wrote their letters I don't think that they were wrong in what they wrote, anymore than what Paul wrote concerning slavery in the NT. Condsider though that slavery (at least in America) has since been abolished. One could construct a biblically justifyable case for slavery with a static reading of the Scriptures. When the hermeneutic of redemption is used in our interpretation however, we understand that slavery should be abolished and slaves be restored to their status as equals among the Kingdom. I believe Paul's theology envisioned some kind of redemptive application when he wrote his letters, as his writings characterizing slavery seemed to hold them in higher status when viewed in contrast to the standard cultural treatment of slaves. I hope that made sense.

I view Paul and Peter's writings on women similarly. The status of women among the members of the Kingdom was viewed in higher regard, than that of the standard view of their time. If we are to read the Scriptures without the redemptive hermenutical lens and apply them statically to our culture today, I think we could just as easily justify slavery for our time.

But the Kingdom alive through God's people today presents a restoration of all things, demonstrating how God created it in the beginning, and testifying to how it will be in the end. Kind of the whole, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

Word. Sounds like it's Beer O'Clock. Who's buying?

however you normally define evangelical, like you ...

2005-12-07T10:02:00.000-05:00

however you normally define evangelical, like you said, their "main thrust" is to spread the gospel, that would apply to Catholics, Anglicans/Episcopalians, and Eastern Orthodox folks. most Anlicans/Episcopalians are considered evangelical (e.g. N.T. Wright, J.I. Packer, John Stott). i will concede that normally "inerrancy" is tagged into evangelical belief with its sole authority as the guide of the church (to generally weed out Catholics and Orthodox folks).

although i don't care to debate the women in the church issue, are you implying that what Peter and Paul said about women (albeit 1 Timothy 2, 1 Cor. 11, 1 Peter 3) is wrong? i still don't think i'm grasping your view of Scripture. blogging can be such a limited medium, we need to just talk. "infallibility" and "literal interpretation" i don't think should be equated.

Look forward to your thoughts, donald.

2005-12-07T06:36:00.000-05:00

Look forward to your thoughts, donald.

Great post, James. It's gonna take me a while to g...

2005-12-07T00:44:00.000-05:00

Great post, James. It's gonna take me a while to get my head around all of it.

I've thought about this a bit recently. Great pos...

2005-12-06T21:07:00.000-05:00

I've thought about this a bit recently. Great post. I consider myself evangelical (I pronounce it ehvangelical) but not Evangelical (eevangelical). Symantics I guess. But in my head, I know the difference.

Sorry there Fletch. My comment was posted only ha...

2005-12-06T21:05:00.000-05:00

Sorry there Fletch. My comment was posted only having read the first two comments. Thanks for the background on the origination of the term "Evangelical." It's helpful.

Dale,Right you are my friend, right you are. God ...

2005-12-06T20:59:00.000-05:00

Dale,

Right you are my friend, right you are. God is much bigger than our best and worst. Thanks for saying it.

Dave,

I think you're right. I/we may be a evangelical(s). Though what does your definition that "believing the gospel" say of others denominations of the Christian faith who are not evangelical? Catholic, Anglican, Episcopalian, Eastern Orthodoxy. These all believe the Gospel, though are not evangelical. Can I still live the Gospel and not be an evangelical

On "the weaker vessel." Yes, I used this term specifically to note how certain members of the evangelical church often employ the literal application or "infallibility" of the Scriptures, in order to promote the womans place in the church body, i.e. can't be teachers, can't be leaders, etc...

As members of the Kingdom, I believe the unequal status of women in our culture (and in the church) needs to be restored. This testifies to the how it was in the beginning and how it will be when God will restore all things. The church should also testify to this (as 1 Peter 3:7 notes even notes "equal heirs").

On U2: I'm definitely going to check in with one of the U2 books on the market. I'm actually waiting for the Brazos Press release, One Step Closer. Brazos being one of the best publishers on the Christian market, has yet to disappoint...Unlike Relevant Books...so much potential, and such a let down.