Archive

Archive for the ‘Leadership’ Category

Just For Men?

February 9, 2012 1 comment

Rant follows…. you’ve been warned!

Mark Driscoll says marriage is about women giving men what they “need”. None of this wimpy “Submit to one another as unto the Lord” stuff for Driscoll. Where would you read that kind of garbage, anyway? Oh, yeah…. (Ephesians 5:21)

(While Driscoll’s vision might sound fun for a while, I want a partner to share all of life with, not merely an eternal sex slave.)

John Piper says that Christianity is mostly masculine. So forget all that garbage about God gathering us under God’s wings like a mother bird. Who made that image up anyway? Oh, yeah…. (Matthew 23:37)

Why do I single these thoughts out? Because these men present themselves as important speakers and writers. Because too many innocent people will find their books in stores and assume the authors write with Biblical authority. Because these men are “conservative” (whatever that means), many will never question anything they say or write.

Where in the scriptures are women second-class citizens? Is real grace only available for “he-men”, macho jock-types, and not for male artists, musicians, poets, and dreamers?

I hope this seems like a silly debate to you. The problem is that too many are falling for this garbage because it’s the current “in” thing. (“Itching ears” anyone?)

Our church (Memorial Baptist, Columbus, Indiana) and our denomination (the American Baptist Churches in the USA) are blessed through many women with leadership gifts. I’m proud to say that I’ve learned much from the women God has placed in my life. (I’ll put Molly Marshall, president of Central Baptist Theological Seminary, up against any theologian or preacher any where any time. Period.)

When will we realize we’re missing out on the movement of God’s Spirit by insisting on limiting that movement to men? (Or white men? Or educated men? Or rich men? Or…….??)

Heaven, Hell, and Rob Bell

October 12, 2011 Leave a comment

It seems impossible to avoid the controversy stirred by reactions to Rob Bell’s latest book, Love Wins. Notice my careful (for once) choice of wording: the controversy that’s been getting attention has been stirred by reactions to the book. We’ve done Rob Bell a great disservice by not engaging the questions he is raising.

Bell wants us to address one of the oldest questions of evangelical theology: How can a loving God send people to hell? This can only be fully explored by asking “What is the nature of the salvation Jesus proclaimed? What is the nature of sin? What is the nature of God’s love for us?” The controversy has been over “Does Rob Bell believe in hell?” and “Is Rob Bell a universalist?” Sadly, commentators have focused so much on the latter questions that we’ve yet again avoided the former, essential questions.

Bell’s detractors are right on one point: it’s quite difficult to discern from Love Wins what Bell actually believes about hell. To Bell’s credit, he never says that this is a book of systematic theology. It’s a book about God’s desire for each of us, a desire rooted in the unconditional love God has for all persons. God already loves each of us, and nothing we ever do (or don’t do) will change that!

(By the way, who picks up a Rob Bell book or video for an exposition of systematic theology? Bell is first and foremost a story-teller, and he relies heavily on those skills in Love Wins. Systematic theology comes from philosophers and academicians. Bell never claims to be presenting a formal theological system.)

Bell and his publisher can be faulted for not addressing anticipated reactions to this book. Given the potential for misunderstanding his intentions and/or conclusions, I would’ve appreciated at least a chapter with some formal statements to reduce chances for confusion. Readers who aren’t accustomed to a story-telling format could be too easily swayed by Bell’s detractors into missing his points.
For me, Bell’s conclusion is that God wants nothing more in the whole universe than to love each one of us. We can either decide to come home to God or we can choose to refuse God’s love. Salvation isn’t about religious formalities and rituals, but about a restored relationship. This is much deeper and much more significant than merely “getting into heaven.”

One cannot understand Bell’s argument without taking note of his choice of a Biblical narrative framework, that of the older son in the story of the lost sons (Luke 15:25-32). The younger son, who by every religious guideline should have been condemned to hell, turns away from his rejection of his father and comes back home. The older son refuses to take part in the celebration for his brother. We can tell from the older son’s comments that, even though he never geographically left home, he had also rejected their father’s love. The father left the invitation open for the older son; the choice was his.

The story of the lost sons has no end. What did the older son ultimately do? Jesus was speaking to religious leaders who were rejecting his message of love and reconciliation (Luke 15:1-2). Were they too in danger of choosing to stand outside the party, choosing self and hell over God’s unconditional love? What did they ultimately do? What will we ultimately do?

My thoughts now (so don’t blame Bell for what follows):

We tend to limit salvation to “what do you believe with your head about Jesus?” There’s gotta be more to it that this. If that’s all there is to salvation, then what was the point of the cross and resurrection? What was the point of incarnation? We insult the life-transforming Good News of Jesus when we water it down to a few points of dogma.

Is salvation really about surrendering all of life to the radical love of God? Can one really say “Yes” to God’s radical love without being transformed by that same love?

What if God chooses to welcome home some (or even many) who have not formally assented to the religion we have created around Jesus but have responded to God’s love? What if some who have formally assented to the religion we have created around Jesus choose to stand outside the celebration, refusing to be transformed by the love of God?

I’m not saying at all that we come to God on our own terms, according to whatever religious system (or lack thereof) we prefer. I am saying that God is not limited to the framework of our own favorite religious system. Hell is about rejecting God’s love, not about rejecting a religious system.

Psalm 84:10 (NRSV) says, “I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God than live in the tents of wickedness.” Many of us want to be “bouncers” in the house of God, choosing who gets in and who doesn’t. That’s not what a doorkeeper at the temple (the house of God) did. The doorkeeper kept things ready for worship, making sure all the supplies and tools were ready. The doorkeeper also made sure the people were ready for honoring God. The doorkeepers facilitated worship, helping the people come to God.

How can we, those who live our lives after the teachings and example of Jesus, help connect people to this live-giving, life-transforming love of God as revealed in Jesus? This is what should be driving us as God’s church.

Next up: Francis Chan disappointingly misses the point.

A Church That Lasts– Knowing How to Serve

April 1, 2010 5 comments

A church that lasts knows how to serve. Notice that I didn’t say “a church that lasts serves.” Serving and knowing how to serve are two different things.

Often when we serve, we reach out to meet the needs of our community as we have defined them. At that point, the focus is on ourselves, not on the ones we are serving nor on the Christ in whose name we serve. We congratulate ourselves for trying, even if no one responds. We never bother asking why no one responds– we assume no one is interested in what WE wanted to do. (Would you go back to a restaurant where the waiters bring you what they want instead of taking your order for what you want?)

A church that knows how to serve knows that serving grows best out of relationship. It is only in relationship with our neighbors that we can discover the needs they want addressed and the questions they are asking. Through relationships our neighbors discover that we really care about them more than we care about improving our local mission statistics. A church that knows how to serve knows that our neighbors aren’t just the means to a bigger goal; our neighbors are the goal.

Even if our definition of people’s needs is correct, when we build relationships and invest time and self in our neighbors, we uncover the more immediate concerns that are preventing them from addressing (or maybe even seeing) their deeper needs.

An important part of knowing how to serve is knowing how to be served. Allowing others to serve us respects their dignity and recognizes the worth God has created in each of them as well. Being served, especially when we are being served by those whom we are also serving, can build strong community, even among strangers.

We must also remember that we aren’t merely serving someone; we are serving with them. Those being served are on an equal level with those serving. Even if they are physically unable to help with the task, their mere presence contributes to the project. Let the elderly lady whose house we are painting bake cookies for us; that’s her contribution to the project. Let the person to whom we are taking food help bring it inside; that’s their contribution.

Good serving starts by good listening. We have to be quiet ourselves to hear what others are saying. When we listen to their hurts, to their fears, and to their questions, then we can better connect them with the Good News of Jesus and what the grace of God has to say to their situation. This kind of serving brings us all, recipient and servant, closer to God.

A Church That Lasts: Making Disciples

March 6, 2010 Leave a comment

Jesus left us the command to make disciples of “all peoples everywhere” (GNT). (“Nations” does not necessarily refer to political entities, but to “ethnicities”.) That sounds like a simple command. However, what is a true disciple of Jesus?

(I strongly suggest viewing Rob Bell’s NOOMA video “Dust” here.)

A disciple is one who follows a master. In Jesus’ day, a disciple would literally leave everything and follow a rabbi from place to place. The disciple sought to model his life after the rabbi’s values, absorbing as much of the rabbi’s teachings and values as possible. The goal was to pass those teachings and those values along to another generation.

Which is a long way to go to say this: being a disciple is far more involved than merely believing the right ideas. If the right ideas (doctrines, theology, dogma, etc.) were all that mattered, then the cross wasn’t necessary. Something more is clearly going on. Otherwise, why the incarnation (God-in-the-flesh)?

The humanity of Jesus tells me that Jesus came to show us all how to live in this world too. The cross of Christ redeems (frees, saves, re-purposes) all of life, not only life-after-death. Jesus came to show us how to live this life in relationship with God and with God’s people. Therefore, making disciples goes beyond ideas into the realities of everyday living. Churches who make disciples help us live all of life in view of “God-with-us”.

How do “recovering sinners” (again, Shane Claiborne; see the post on Authenticity) respond to others’ sinfulness? How do we love the unlovable? How do we live out the Sermon on the Mount and the Great Commandments in a “looking out for Number One” world? How do we show hope to those from whom life has stolen all hope?

Churches that last make disciples. Not converts, not students, but disciples– people who are working together to model all of life after Jesus.

A Church That Lasts: Authenticity

March 3, 2010 3 comments

What will mark the church of the future? More importantly, what characteristics make the difference between a church that stands for decades and one that folds after the current generation is gone? What makes a church last for generations?

Authenticity is one such trait. Authenticity may be viewed in several different ways. I am not talking here about doctrinal purity or some other human, works-oriented notion that screams “look at how good we are.” I am talking about authenticity of relationships, beliefs, and practices.

The church is called to authentic relationships. We are not a church of perfect, sinless people looking for people just like ourselves. We are a church of “recovering sinners” (Shane Claiborne) looking to help each other on the journey toward Christ. This kind of church seeks to create a safe environment where members and guests can share their struggles in order to share the burden together. We don’t seek to judge another’s fallen-ness, but rather offer to help each other get up and get back on track toward Christ. We do so fully realizing that, at some point, we have needed and will need the same help ourselves.

The church is called to authentic beliefs. Again, I’m not talking about doctrinal purity, but beliefs that grow out of a fundamental conviction that God is life-giving grace. Do we focus so much on heaven that we forget grace calls us to change this world? Do our beliefs emphasize what Jesus emphasized, or just the parts we like? (Have you noticed that it’s much easier to live out the 10 Commandments than it is to live the Sermon on the Mount?) Are we honest about the difficulties of selflessly following Jesus in a self-centered world?

And we are called to authentic practices. Do we say “everyone welcome” then hope certain people don’t attend? What about “red and yellow, black and white”? What about “pierced and dyed, tattooed and spiked”? Are we baptizing and sharing communion as proclamations of grace, or as mere commandment-keeping? Do our worship services help people encounter grace or scratch our “itching ears”?

I realize this is pretty radical stuff. But… well, there are no “buts”. The gospel calls us to a radical, authentic life of grace. Are we ready to rise (under the power of God’s Spirit) to the challenge?

Categories: Church Stuff, Leadership

Why Aren’t “Evangelicals” Leading the Health Care Reform Movement?

February 16, 2010 Leave a comment

I’ve tried to avoid politics here. Not because I’m scared or anything like that, but because I know my limitations. It’s going to be hard to do this without becoming another shrill angry voice. We have more than enough of those already.

(And, by the way, take “health care reform movement” out of the title and put ANY social issue in and my point still applies.)

By “evangelical,” I mean those of us who are convinced that the Good News of Jesus has profound implications for everyday living. Jesus came to offer a new way of life to all people. The Good News isn’t about improved doctrinal statements nor is it only for the wealthy and powerful. God sees all human beings as valuable, integral parts of God’s family, and offers the same new life in Christ to every one.

This brand of evangelical led the charge to abolish slavery. This kind of evangelical led the mental health care movement. This kind of evangelical seeks to help out in any troubled situation, citing the Hebrew scripture’s frequent mandates to take care of the poor, widow, orphan, and alien. These evangelicals are genuinely troubled by Jesus warnings’ that when we fail to take care of the “least of these,” we have failed Jesus.

Instead of shouting the Good News from the mountaintops, church has allowed politicians (conservative and liberal) to take over and use us to deliver their messages. Instead of being the voice of God for a troubled world, we have allowed ourselves to become campaign machinery, more concerned about votes and contributions than about the people for whom Jesus died.

I’m not saying we should endorse whatever health care legislation comes along. I’m saying the opposite. We should be leading the charge in outlining the values and priorities of such a health care overhaul. We should be the loudest voice warning about the dangers of a health care system guided solely by profits. We should be the loudest voice warning about the dangers of irresponsible personal choices.

From what I’ve seen, conservatives and liberals have all missed the point. How can we be “pro-life” and not care about that life after birth? When did “pro-choice” come to mean avoiding responsibility for one’s own actions? Why do I have to choose one ridiculously extreme, self-centered  ideology over another? Isn’t there a better way?

I choose to follow Jesus instead. And that includes following Jesus as he cares for “the least of these.”

Categories: Helping People, Leadership

Haiti Update

February 13, 2010 Leave a comment

An update from one of my favorite writers/bloggers, Anne Jackson, about her trip to Haiti

http://flowerdust.net/2010/02/13/cities-of-angels/

The Need for Long-Term Relief in Haiti

February 8, 2010 Leave a comment

Tony Campolo says it so much better than I ever could. He’s been serving there for years and has seen what life is like down there.

Over-Serving is Not Service

February 2, 2010 Leave a comment

I actually did think about this one for Sunday, but it didn’t fit the flow. Then again, that’s why I started the blog.

No matter what our intentions are, if we are so busy working in church or other activities that we don’t have time for family or for our own spiritual development, we’re too busy!

At this point, I’m not talking about service that claims to be honoring God when we’re really honoring self. I’m talking about well-intentioned over-serving. Whether we feel like God will pay more attention to us or whether we want to do as much as we can for God, we miss the point when we sign up for anything and everything.

We should be thinking about service as calling. How is God calling me to use my resources (talents, passions, possessions, finances, etc.) for others? How is God calling me to contribute to my church’s in-house ministries? How is God calling me to contribute to ministry in my community?

As in mind my last post (Church Work is Not Necessarily Service), we must remember that busy-ness in God’s name can hinder us from truly opening up to God. We should seek out one (or a few, but not several) place to serve in church, a place that will not only allow us to contribute to the whole but also allow us to grow spiritually as well. When we’re serving in God’s way in God’s time, we experience optimal results, not only for ourselves, but also for our church family and our community.

If you’re on the verge of burnout from over-serving, or if you’ve given up on church after giving it 150%, check out Anne Jackson’s little book Mad Church Disease. It’s a very personal, bluntly honest testimony about the dangers of sacrificing self for the institution of "church" rather than celebrating church as the life-giving body of Christ.

Church Work Is Not Necessarily Service!

February 1, 2010 1 comment

There are far too many thoughts after yesterday’s sermon on the discipline of service to make one brief post. I’ll try to stretch out the main ones over a couple of posts for easier digestion.

I wish I had made this point yesterday: church work and service are two different things. While one can serve through church work, one can easily be heavily involved in church work and not serve anyone but one’s self. How to tell the difference? We must take a long, honest, hard look at why we’re doing what we’re doing in church.

Church work can be motivated by several misguided factors: desiring to impress God or others with our busy-ness in his name, attempting to earn God’s favor or our place in heaven, wishing to control church through our work, or attempting to avoid serious self-reflection by staying preoccupied. These fail to qualify as service because the focus isn’t on someone else. In fact, in each of these situations, our church work is hindering us from genuinely serving anyone other than self.

Church work becomes service when the focus is on someone else. How can I help someone else explore their relationship with God? How can I help remove distractions from the worship or study experience? How can I make someone feel wanted and welcomed here? What can I do to help someone else experience God here?

We have all benefited from someone else helping us better focus on God during the worship time or some other time: janitors, ushers, nursery staff, children’s church staff, etc. Next Sunday, be sure and thank them for their service to us, and let’s see how we can learn from them how to serve each other and our guests better.

Up next: quit doing so much so you can serve better!

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.