Todd Thielen

Church - "What is it here for?"

Sun, 26 Aug 2007 03:51:00 GMT

Something’s eating at me. I’m really trying to determine if it is the Holy Spirit or if it’s just my mind being dissatisfied with status quo. The question I’m working through is, “What on earth is the Church here for?”

If I look at my own local church, I see in our actions that we are mixed up as to what we’re trying to accomplish. There are a number of fallacious ideas, some of which are as follows:

1. Timing: When we meet – There are people that believe that the day of the week – as well as the time of that day – are found prescriptively in Scripture. Therefore, only “church” can only occur on Sunday mornings at 9:00 AM for Sunday School and 11:00 AM for “Worship”.

OK, the only place in Scripture where Sunday morning is highlighted is in Acts 20 where it says that they were gathered together to “break bread” and Paul talked until after Midnight. You might be able to make a case from Christ being raised on the first day of the week and that we should meet then as a memorial to Christ. You could even make a case from history that the Church (big “C” intended) has typically met together on Sunday mornings. The fact of it, though, is that there is no prescription anywhere in Scripture that dictates that we should meet on Sunday mornings.

The point I am attempting to make here is that people bring their own ideas of what “church” is supposed to be like into the time that we gather – whether it is Biblical or Christian. Those two words are not necessarily synonymous. Sometimes those words may actually stand in contrast to each other.

2. Target Audience: Who we speak to. There are people who believe that we should “target” certain people based on the age/philosophy/generation by creating an atmosphere where everything is geared to reach them in particular.

I, personally, have a huge issue with this. Not that we can’t be inclusive of those people groups, but to consciously target those groups by changing the methodology – at the exclusion of others – just doesn’t make sense. You all know me as a “techie” kind of guy, but the tech stuff is only a tool to be used. And then only applied to make the biggest impact. To have videos during every sermon destroys the impact they could have based on two things: First, there’s a point that comes where a video actually distracts from the core message we are trying to proclaim – We end up using a video for the purpose of having a video just so we can say that we’re “communicating” effectively; and, two, the overuse of videos cause people to either tune them out or to question why in the world we are watching cartoons instead of hearing the Word of God proclaimed.

I fully understand that we must be able to culturally proclaim the Word of the Lord. You could not find a more committed supporter of this truth. But, we can’t bastardize God’s Word by corrupting it with things that distract from the Bible itself.

There IS an appropriate target audience, though – believers. The church service is for those who profess Christ. The foundational purpose of the church is the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, that is, the propagation of the gospel. The body has gotten into a bad habit of thinking that the church is where we bring our unbelieving friends & neighbors to hear the gospel. Our friends & neighbors are supposed to hear the gospel from US, not the pastor. The pastors and elders have the responsibility to equip the saints FOR the work of ministry. Too many believers are not exercising their spiritual muscles by actually using the equipping they’ve received. We’ve allowed those muscles to become spiritually atrophied.

3. Content: What we say – This is obviously tied in to the previous element. I am not a big fan of the “seeker-sensitive” movement. If the purpose of the church coming together is to equip them for the work of ministry, then why do we design services so that they are easy on the ears? When we have to dumb-down the Word of God delivered through the message of the morning, we do everyone a disservice. We almost certainly miss in our delivery of what God wants the church members to do today based on what they hear. If the goal of the sermon is to
“attract”, then we’re doomed. We are told in Scripture that the world will reject the message – and the world will not even be able to understand or comprehend it – apart from the working of the Holy Spirit. If a non-believer is sitting in the pew some Sunday morning and the Holy Spirit wants that person to understand to the point of salvation, then, dog-gone-it, He’ll make that happen – apart from how simple the message is.

Where is the equipping? Does our congregation even sense the need for a life that is spiritually demanding? Where are the sermons covering topics like:

1. I’ve been bought with a price, I am no longer my own. (1 Corinthians 6:20)

2. I have been transferred from the dominion of darkness into the kingdom of God’s beloved Son. (Colossians 1:13)

3. Those whom God loves, He reproves and disciplines; therefore be zealous and repent. (Rev 3:19)

4. Work out your salvation with fear and trembling. (Philippians 2:12)

5. And so on…

Let me be clear in something: we can worship alone or with others. We can pray alone or with others. We can sing to God alone or with others. We can study the Word alone or with others. The church can do all of these things as well when we come together. The difference is that the equipping occurs when the church comes together.

4. Activities: What we do – People “go” to church, right? Obviously not true, but we all say it from time to time. The problem is that we too often see activities AS church, or even the church AS an activity. I believe that the problem we’re seeing in the modern church is that we’ve lost our way. We’ve lost our focus. We’ve lost our vision.

If the purpose of the time together as the church is to equip the saints for works of ministry, then that ought to refocus our energies to that end. Everything we do when together as the Body of Christ ought to be for that one, solitary purpose.

So, my heart is burdened and I am passionate about equipping for works of ministry – especially the ministry of reconciliation.

As Diane & I were talking last night, I was trying to figure out why I am becoming MORE impassioned about these things. Is it that I’m just getting older and time is slipping away? Is it that I am dissatisfied with my current church and they way that we “do” church? I don’t know. Pray for me that the Holy Spirit will make things clearer for me and that I will follow God more readily and influence those near me more effectively.

For What It’s Worth…

Thu, 08 Feb 2007 07:56:10 GMT

Just an update post more than anything. I've been part of a Bible study for the past couple of months and I gotta tell ya, it has been refreshing.

My greatest fear in my life is that I would die a spiritually withered man because I stopped growing in ways that please God. That somehow I would just attend church and teach based on the years of academic Bible study that I had completed. I had actually reached a certain level of this spiritual malaise while attending seminary. In the one place on earth where I should be challenged to grow in my personal walk with my God, I found myself existing in a spiritual desert. My life suffered then on so many levels: with my wife, my activities at my church, and most importantly, my heart for God.

When I finished school, I determined that I had read thousands upon thousands of pages of information about God but they were merely words. I did not read another book for seven years. Fortunately, a member of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit, was still working in me and softening my heart again. I am often reminded of Philippians 1:6 where Paul wrote, "For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus." I am so thankful that it is GOD who not only began the work but also is continuing to work in me. If it would have been left to me I would have spiritually wandered in that desert I had made for myself. I am so thankful for God's faithfulness to me. Undeserved, but I am so grateful.

As my wife can attest, I have always enjoyed long conversations with my Dad and brothers about spiritual matters. Not for the purpose of mere discussion, but rather a true, open conversation about all things spiritual. We never discuss just for discussion-sake. We are truly practical theologians in that setting.

I am encouraged by our recent Bible studies as men who are really looking to know God deeper. I believe that we have a unique opportunity to be men – men who love God – men who love God and each other – men who aren't afraid to allow the Spirit to work in our lives. While I may not have shared this with the group upfront, I hope that what happens on these Saturday mornings will begin – shall I say – a revival of sorts. A revival of individuals in our relationships with God which then spills over into all aspects of our lives. And then, and only then, that the Spirit will allow us to be mirrors of God's light to our local church body.

I love the group DC Talk. My favorite song has a phrase from an old hymn:

Day by day, day by day
Day by day, day by day
Oh dear Lord, three things I pray
To see Thee more clearly
To love Thee more dearly
To follow Thee more nearly
Day by day

Three things. That's my prayer now. Didn't used to be, but it seems that I've been resurrected…

The Gender Gap: Roles & Responsibilities in the Church

Fri, 10 Nov 2006 21:39:18 GMT

I have dealt with this issue in a few settings, but specifically within the past few months as it applies to our local church body. This is one of the most potentially volatile issues of our time - because the world and the Bible seem to have a starkly contrasted view of gender roles and responsibilities. I have given quite a bit of thought to this topic and have finally found another writer who seems to echo my understanding of some key portions of Scripture. Not that I'm looking for someone to back me up, but it's nice to see someone else handle the text as I have.

James M. Hamilton Jr. is an Assistant Professor of Biblical Studies at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. He presented a document to the Wheaton Theology Conference titled, WHAT WOMEN CAN DO IN MINISTRY: FULL PARTICIPATION WITHIN BIBLICAL BOUNDARIES." You can find the article here, or I have attached it to this blog and can be found on under my BOOK LIST.

I especially want to draw your attention to page 17 of the document where James handles the discussion on 1 Timothy 2:13-15. He handles the topic extremely well from a scholarly standpoint, but more than that, he handles it Biblically. An excellent review of a difficult topic.

Have at it.

Christocentric Applied Theology

Thu, 28 Sep 2006 04:51:24 GMT

Wow, I think that I'm going to get quite the raised eyebrows from whomever reads this blog. I am going to develop a line of thought a little more than I did in an earlier entry. Be patient with the unfolding of the concept until the end and then judge it for what it is.

My theses for this entry is this: I believe that the modern Church has moved from a theocentric view of God to a Christocentric one. We have changed the view of God from the Father to the Son. I think that this shift in focus is incorrect and needs to be addressed immediately. I believe that in some ways, we have "fallen away" from true Biblical truth and are accepting a borderline heresy regarding the primacy of the Father.

Before I continue, let me reiterate that I believe 100% in the divinity of Jesus Christ and 100% in the divinity of the Holy Spirit. My point in this exercise is to merely highlight the roles and responsibilities which the members of the Godhead have and to make a clear line of demarcation – based on Biblical evidence – that these lines do exist and that the members of the Godhead interact with each other with these thoughts in mind.

As I have stated before, we will not find a Scriptural reference to the direct, personal worship of the Holy Spirit. Nor will we find one regarding Christ, with the exception of Revelation and Philippians 2 where the reference made there is to a future event where the FATHER has exalted the Son, has bestowed on Him the name that is above every name, and that all will bow before Him. But is THAT the focal point, or is it the next phrase: to the glory of God the Father?

Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Philippians 2:5-11

When we examine Christ’s life, we see repeatedly that the Son directs His worship to the Father. We see in the Gospels that when Christ deals particularly with the area of worship, He is pointed in His direction of worship – to the Father. Here is God incarnate stating that HE was not the subject of worship – the Father was. Read the passage:

Jesus said to her, "Woman, believe Me, an hour is coming when neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. "You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. "But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers. "God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth."

John 4:21-24

Now, a quick side-point: Is the Father spirit? Is Jesus spirit? The answer to the first one is yes, the answer to the second one is no. Jesus Christ maintains a physical body for all of eternity. Based on what is revealed in Scripture, He will not give up a physical body again. So, Jesus Christ is not spirit. So, when Christ tells this woman that God is spirit and those who worship Him must do so in spirit and truth, can there be any doubt that He was declaring that the focal point of worship is the Father? There is no way to refute this statement.

Back to the main theme.

My purpose is not to focus on worship of the Father, but rather to correct a misstep which we have made in the whole realm of Christocentric applications. We have mixed up the roles & responsibilities of the Godhead and blurred the lines of obvious separation.

Let’s look at a passage in Colossians.

For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

Colossians 1:13-14

The ACTOR in this passage is the Father. The AGENT is the Son. (declaration: I do not believe that Christ was merely a passive participant in these types of passages as some may suggest. I believe that He was at times an active participant, but not the ACTOR in terms of the design or application in regards to salvation). Who rescued you from the domain of darkness? Who transferred you to a new kingdom? The Father (He acted on our behalf). We have redemption and forgiveness of sin IN (positionally and applicationally) the Son as the agent.

Here’s another one. A very familiar passage, but one in which we lose track of who is responsible for what, shall we say.

For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith.

Romans 3:23-26

So, it’s God’s glory that we fall short of. It’s God’s gift of justification. It’s God’s grace. It’s the redemption which is IN Christ Jesus. Christ is publically displayed (agent) by God (actor) as the propitiation in Christ’s blood.

Another example:

Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we exult in hope of the glory of God.

Romans 5:1-2

We have peace WITH God, through (agent) Christ. Through Christ (agent) we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace, to the glory of God.

Now, in light of what was read above in Colossians (the Father rescued you from the domain of darkness, the Father transferred you into the kingdom of his Son), read this passage:

Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which has been kept secret for long ages past, but now is manifested, and by the Scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the eternal God, has been made known to all the nations, leading to obedience of faith; to the only wise God, through Jesus Christ, be the glory forever. Amen.

Romans 16:25-27

See, it is the glory TO God, THROUGH Christ. This is how Scripture declares the relationship between the Father and us – it is THROUGH Christ. But the Father is always the focal point of all worship is the Father – universally the case.

I believe that a beginning of this shift to a Christocentric theology can be traced to the Jesus People in the 60’s & 70’s. There was an adjustment to how we addressed God – Jesus was positioned as the “friendly” face of God. He was a man, like us. He was a great teacher. He was God. The problem is that the shift in thought affected some things that I don’t think that we recognized at the time. Let me explain…

Let me start by asking a question: If you had to explain the gospel in a single sentence, how would you define it? Based on the personal examples which my business partner and I have observed, the gospel is generally defined something like this: You can have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

There are a number of red flags that pop into my mind with this definition:

1. Nowhere in Scripture is a “relationship” with Jesus Christ defined. The gospel is not about a relationship with Jesus Christ, it is about a relationship with the Father. Review the passages above (and any others that pop into your mind) and remember the roles of actor and agent. The relationship was purchased by Christ’s blood, but the reconciliation is with the Father. THAT’S the relationship. THAT’S the gospel, the “good news”.

2. By making the good news merely a relationship issue, we’ve dumbed down the real gospel which is salvation from sin. Is it any wonder that the world doesn’t believe in Satan anymore? Does it surprise you that “hell” is merely a fairy tale in even the Christians’ mind? Where is the TRUE gospel? Where is the confrontation of the truth of salvation? That we turned our backs on God? That mankind is going to hell? That the world needs saving? What about God becoming man, dying for our sin and rising again? What about that dunamis being offered to us?

3. The focus becomes one of option. What’s the real difference between a rabbi Jesus and a wise man name Confucius, or Buddha, or Allah? Sure, we can SAY that Jesus is special, but if He is the agent, what about the holy Actor?

4. What about transformation? We look at the Colossian passage and focus on verses 15 on, but we forget verses 13-14: The FATHER rescued us. The FATHER rescued us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of His Son.

5. And, worst of all – in my ever so humble opinion – we are robbing the Father of the glory and worship He is due. If Christ ALWAYS pointed the worship to His Father, how can we focus our worship on the Son and not the Father? When we sing the song, “I’m coming back to the heart of worship, and it’s all about You, all about You, Jesus”, I do not believe that we really ARE coming back to the HEART of worship! If we paid attention to the teaching in Scripture by Christ and the apostles, I believe that the case has been made soundly that worship belongs to the Father alone. If we REALLY viewed Scripture as soli Scripturi, Instead of a song written by someone who has not studied Scripture thoroughly enough, how would our “worship” services change? How would the remembrance of the true concept of the good news affect our interaction in the world? How would that impact people going to hell?

What say you?

COMMUNITY

Thu, 01 Jun 2006 02:52:19 GMT

I started this train of thought a few weeks ago but ended up putting it on paper during an e-mail conversation with one of my pastors, John Baker. I’ve been teaching Sunday mornings at my church for years now and truly enjoy the interaction with those who come to learn along with me in whatever topic we’re going through. Those of you who know me best know that I do not use any pre-established “curriculum” when I develop my teaching notes. I did that early in my teaching experience, but I have found that forcing myself to deal with the issue head on is the most effective way for me to not only grasp the concept at play, but also to communicate that truth with more zeal and conviction because what I’ve learned has changed me first. I must first state that the following notes are in no way an attack on those folks that I love at GFBC. It is merely an attempt to communicate the frustrations I have come to know when trying to determine the best course of action for leading the local church. As an elder, I wholeheartedly believe that I must be at the forefront of driving our folks because that’s what leaders are called to do. But, I oftentimes feel like this video (Herding Cats)

I’ve really struggled over the years with the Sunday School thing. GFBC is the first church I’ve ever attended where the people just doesn’t see the need for good teaching during that time on Sunday mornings. I’ve been involved in churches before where people would show up for the Sunday School teaching and then go home without attending the service itself! It baffles my mind trying to figure out GFBC on this issue.

I think at the core is the issue that the folks here have been inbred in a lot of ways. Prior to Sunridge merging with GFBC, the environment at GFBC was very familial in nature – MANY of the folks that attended were part of large, extended families which had attended for years and had grown up in this church. Sunridge mixed that up a little and then the departure of Tom Schaive mixed it up even more. But the core attendees haven’t really changed much. I can go through a list in my mind of folks who have attended for years that do not attend any type of Sunday School class. They just don’t see the need.

My deepest concern is that if the only place they are receiving Biblical truth is from the pulpit on Sunday mornings, we are all in a world of hurt. I was just talking to Rick Connelly on Sunday about a similar topic and I kind of have a defeatist attitude right now about the current generation in our church. In some ways I almost think that we should – like God did to the Israelites – write off the current generation and let them “wander in the wilderness” until they die off. The problem is, I don’t think that the NEXT generation gets it either. Having high school kids right now, I think that they have a distorted view of what the church is supposed to be like. It is an event for them – a social activity – where they show up and interact on a social level first and foremost. The idea of opening the Word of God and studying it for all it is worth is beyond their comprehension in the church setting.

I had, what I believe in hindsight to be, a transformational situation in my life when I was in high school. My dad was the Music Pastor at Arcade Baptist Church in Sacramento under Lee Toms. The high school group had around 500 kids in it and it was an event more than anything – Son City. I didn’t know any better, though. My dad decided to accept a senior pastoral position at a small church in the Sierra Nevada foothills in Northern California when I was around 16. It was a very small church that met at a middle school auditorium. There was no “youth group” as we think of that term today. There were kids and there were folks in our church that helped the youth. There was such a natural relationship between ALL members of that church that when we met together, the kids didn’t group together, nor the adults. When we had potlucks, I was just as likely to sit next to Bernie & Jean Horne (in their 70’s) or Pete & Betty VanDePol (in their 50’s) as I was to sit next to another high-school friend. And the same was true for the older folks. Pete and Betty taught our high school Sunday School class. I have to tell you, I am SO looking forward to seeing them in heaven again someday – they are truly precious in my sight. Pioneer Baptist Church was so natural in terms of relationships, striving to study God’s word, and it was the purest example of what we call today “community” that I have every been blessed to see. I’m not sure that I will ever see that picture of the church again – and that is so sad.

The expectation today in the youth group is that there MUST be a youth pastor and that there MUST be a separate program that meets their “needs.” Which, then in turn, means that the adults must have their Primetime, Belayer, etc. We are so segregated that we don’t interact. How is “community” really supposed to be developed if all of our “programs” separate the congregation? What is a high school graduate supposed to do when they leave the high school group? They are certainly not sticking around GFBC to find out. The high school group is an END unto itself. There is no progression into what should be viewed as the a greater opportunity to serve God. There is no exit strategy for them when leaving the high school group. A program has been developed for that age group and it segregates them as their own class of existence. Let me ask you: would the youth benefit from a study of doctrine like we’re doing downstairs right now? I know that they have studied some doctrine, but what benefits would there be by meeting with the rest of the congregation?

“Community” is established and developed
They have an opportunity to hear their parents interact with the Word of God and others
The adults get to hear where their kids are “at” in terms of understanding Biblical truth
Adults will be much more accepting of kids in ministry opportunities (I have personally always been critical of the separation of the “worship band” and the “youth band” and how that has played out. The youth used to be involved - prior to about three years ago - I can tell you from direct interaction with my daughter, she is very reluctant to be involved in the “worship band” right now – very unfortunate)
Kids will more naturally transition through the phases of their lives within the church because of the community already established between them and the rest of the body
The church will recognize the developing leaders and will be more apt to encourage those young men and women to choose ministry options for their future goals
The kids will be more apt to understand the ministries of the whole church, not just their part of it (case in point: I asked my kids at dinner the other night to name a missionary that our church supports. To my discredit, they couldn’t name one. Now, I am ultimately responsible to be bringing those names up to my kids which I have obviously failed in, but the fact that the youth don’t talk about missionaries by name or have the missionaries join them on certain Sundays to have teach or interact with is disturbing. We wonder why kids aren’t choosing the larger mission field for their life goal…)

I have never seen another church like Pioneer Baptist and, from what I hear, that church has diminished in those special ways as the years have passed. It was not a perfect church (as my dad can attest!), but it was the closest thing I have ever seen to being that. At its hey-day it was probably 150 folks or so – ½ of what GFBC has, but oh, what a great picture of community.

I write these things not as a criticism of the staff, nor the elders, nor…

I write these things because we are all missing out on what could be because no one can even envision something different. Well, I CAN envision something different and because I have tasted that fruit, it tears me up not being able to taste that fruit again. People at GFBC just can’t understand something they’ve never experienced.

I didn’t go to Bible college or seminary because my dad was a pastor. I went to Bible schools because the members of the community at Pioneer Baptist Church recognized something in me and challenged me and prayed for me through the years to pursue something greater than the carpenter I had become. It was that community that stuck that cattle prod into my backside to do something great for God and I literally weep that I am in a church that doesn’t grasp the concept of what could be.

I have been prodded to have “community” time during the classes I teach. I believe that “community” is not an event – it is something that happens naturally when we open the Word together and study what God has for us. “Community” is not a feeling, it is a state of mind when the study of God’s Word along with the interaction with God’s people supersede time and space for that moment in time. I once tasted that “community” and I have to tell you, I am starving to death in that aspect of my spiritual being.

CONVERGENCE

Thu, 01 Jun 2006 02:49:45 GMT

Convergence. It is a word that can be defined in any number of ways, but the way I mean it is the way that the NWCBA has defined it. I'm not positive that the word exactly fits the idea of what they are attempting to relate, but it is a thinking-man's word...

WordNet defines it as follows:

convergence

n 1: the occurrence of two or more things coming together 2: the approach of an infinite series to a finite limit [syn: convergency] [ant: divergence] 3: a representation of common ground between theories or phenomena; "there was no overlap between their proposals" [syn: overlap, intersection] 4: the act of converging (coming closer)

So, the basic thought is that it is the purposeful focusing inward of two or more potentially divergent ideas. That is what, I believe, the NWCBA is striving to attain. This statement is pulled directly from their website:

CB Northwest is committed to the idea that our churches will not only identify but also raise up and train the next generation of pastors. Consequently we are doing all that we can to bring a “new” way of thinking to this endeavor.

The goal of Convergence is to establish an institute for the development of church leaders specifically within the context of the local church. We are committed to producing next generation pastors who are able to shepherd Christ’s church in the 21st century. We desire to embed a training process deep within the heart of churches, creating the opportunity for a truly transformational movement within participating churches.

We must have a revolutionary approach to discovering, training, and retraining pastors. Convergence will, in the context of the local church, and under craftsmen level Senior Pastors, prepare next generation pastors. Convergence will not only focus on biblical and theological development of the apprentice, but also on their personal transformation, ministry skills and strategies, thereby helping local churches develop these apprentices into journeyman pastors. This local church-based development process has tremendous potential for creating a movement of multiplication of churches. It will also create a new standard of Senior Pastors who reproduce pastors and churches that reproduce churches.

There is great need for pastors who know themselves, their God and their world. Convergence is primarily focused on the shepherds of local churches; we believe healthy shepherds lead healthy churches. Many of today’s pastors do not have the training or equipping to lead their churches in missional or strategic outreach. Combined with the lack of a truly transformational lifestyle, our present ministers are often found to be in great need of development and retraining. Convergence gives us a proactive way to aid churches in pastoral development and intern training.

This will allow us to build for the future and address the dysfunctions of the present. We look forward to the day when the evangelical community of the Northwest moves from a plateaued and declining assemblage of churches into a vibrant, actively growing interdependent body of churches. We believe that the success of Convergence will give us a highly effective way of training interns and a steady supply of quality pastors for decades to come.

So, a fairly lengthy synopsis. What I find strangely missing, though, is the direct interaction of fellow believers within the stated congregations. Sure, I know that the congregations would choose these folks from their midst and approve them for this opportunity, but there is another side of this that I want to explore here with you.

I was raised in the church - almost exclusively CB churches. I, personally, have been a member of CB churches for my entire adult life. Not because they are flawless in their attempt at making "church" right, but they certainly at least try to hit the mark. But there is one CB church which I belonged to that changed my life forever - Pioneer Baptist Church, in Pioneer, CA.

It was most certainly NOT perfect, but the community of believers there was truly unique. As I reflect on the faces of the fellow believers there in that time and space I am reminded again of the importance of community – which is what causes convergence to occur. Convergence does not occur in a vacuum – it is not an end unto itself. It is merely a result of healthy church life. I guess that is my biggest concern when reading the above statements attempting to define convergence. It’s not the goal. It’s not the point to which our efforts much be pressed into service for. It is merely a result – one that must be intentional because it won’t happen without prodding – but not an end to itself.

So, as is often the case, I can come across as critical of something without something positive to say. Let me correct that here…

I believe that the NW CBA is trying desperately to provide the leadership that the churches in their care truly need. I appreciate Mark Hoeffner’s heart is looking for the right things. The Conservative Baptists, nationally-speaking, are in a world of hurt right now. The association is fractured and needs mending from the inside out. I know that Mark is working fervently to try to help that situation in any way he can – starting with the churches in his direct care.

Conservative Baptist leadership has a special place in my heart because of my personal involvement with the association. I attended CB churches from childhood. I attended a CB Bible college. I attended a CB seminary. I serve as an elder in a CB church. So, my loyalties run deep.

My word of caution, though, is that we must remember that methodology is not an end. It is merely a tool to get there. Convergence is a great idea, but it is a tool which we use to achieve the end. Focus less on the tool, more on the end. Our churches are wading pools for spiritual growth – not the deep lakes they once were. How can these churches understand convergence if they aren’t equipped to handle it?

Reductionist Theology in SOME Contemporary Christian Music

Mon, 24 Apr 2006 23:52:44 GMT

I believe that the number one point of friction in the church today is in regard to worship styles - particularly, the accompanying instruments. I enjoy all types of instruments within the worship setting: organ, harpsichord, piano, synthesizer, string guitar, drums, rock or rhythm guitar, and the list goes on...

To me, the actual music is a neutral thing. It doesn’t matter if Luther took an old bar song and made a Christian hymn out of it – The words are what drive the matter. It doesn’t matter if Audio Adrenaline or Kutless is wailing on their instruments – if their heart is pure before God and they grasp the theology (you know, the study of God) of what they're singing.

I personally don't think that the style of worship should be getting as much discussion as the content of the worship.

Years ago, the church theologians wrote the words that were put to music and sung. Pick up a hymnal sometime and just read the text…what wonderful words! Those songs may need to be updated for today’s vernacular, but come on…it’s time to at least include the content-rich hymns which have stood the test of time – not because of a catchy tune, but because of the truth of the words.

Theological soundness in our music. That’s what is missing in our churches today. It’s what’s missing in my church and in the churches of friends and family over a large geographical area. It’s not that we’re singing songs which worship Satan, but too much is allowed through the doors of our church in the way of music because we don’t think about what we’re actually singing. I call it theological laziness – we just don’t try.

If our pastors preached from the pulpit what we sing in the pews we’d have him before the Elder Board so fast because of the doctrinal error. Yet we sing along with our deaf ears as we claim to worship our God. Could it be that God is actually offended when we sing to Him in worship? Do you think that He desires us to KNOW Him and to not just slap words with music together without really thinking about what we’re actually saying? Could it be that the musical theologians have been replaced by some group that got saved last night but have a kicking new song that catches on and is popular forcing it into the church so that we stay “current” in our attempts to reach the lost for Christ? How ridiculous does that sound? Unfortunately, I think that it is pretty near the truth of the matter.

As an example, it is easy to take a Psalm and put it to words and sing those words to God.

Create in me a clean heart, O God,
and renew a right spirit within me.
Cast me not away from Thy presence, O Lord
and take not Thy Holy Spirit from me.
Restore unto me the joy of Thy salvation,
and renew a right spirit within me.

True, in the sense that it is in the Bible, but maybe it isn’t really applicable, at least not for the church. A perfect example of this is the song taken directly from Psalm 51 called, “Create in me a Clean Heart”. Yes, it is directly from the Bible. But, the theology of the Holy Spirit is so completely different for David as it is for us that we do the Spirit a disservice by claiming this song for ourselves. How can it be that we have the Holy Spirit DWELLING in us as we are now the TEMPLE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT as well as having a NEW HEART and a NEW COVENENT in Christ, yet we sing this song which begs God to not do something that is an IMPOSSIBILITY for the believer today??? How can I ask God to “create in me a clean heart” when He’s already done that? Would we REALLY sing that to God if we were in heaven before Him and we had just one song to sing to Him? I think not – if we really thought about what we were saying. What would we do if the pastor actually PREACHED this in a sermon on Sunday morning? What would YOU do?

I have an ever-building list of songs just like this. Unfortunately, I have begun to grow increasingly frustrated as Sunday after Sunday passes and I have to really focus on God as I am worshipping and not allow what may be sung to hinder my full attention on the One I love - in spirit AND in truth.

There are some that may find this thinking critical, but I firmly believe that God desires us to know Him correctly, not coming before Him without the forethought of WHO we are addressing. If we believe that the Holy Spirit dwells within us, then we must strive to understand deeper the God who desires to be known.

I found this link which is a very creative variation of my thought here. Well worth looking at: http://hippocampusextensions.com/issues/08/an_essay_on_hymnody.php

Selective Positions in Worship

Fri, 31 Mar 2006 00:53:22 GMT

Well, another rambling on the topic of worship...

I am not a Charismatic in any way, shape or form. I was just not raised around that type of worship and I feel that I can worship my Lord quite freely without performing some type of overtly-external physical demonstration of what my heart realizes. I'm not saying that someone can't worship that way, it's just that I don't have that screaming to get out of me.

When I was in college I visited a couple of far out Charismatic churches just so I could see what kind of things occur there. These churches are way beyond what we would call a normal Charismatic church. One in particular, the Capstone Cathedral in Phoenix, AZ, was pastored by a guy named Neil Frisbee. Let me tell you, the pastor's name only demonstrated the ends to which this guy would go. He literally believed that when Christ returns, He will touch His foot down on the top of the Capstone Cathedral. Also, they had pictures of the Holy Spirit on the back walls of the church. They looked a lot like under and over-developed film to me. The point being, I've seen some extremes.

The point of this specific blog is not to criticize the Charismatic churches, but rather to point to a situation that has appeared in churches that I am familiar with - that I personally attend...

When we're singing songs of worship to God, we will often stand as a way of showing honor and respect to God, or in response to a phrase within a specific song. Case in point: "We Stand, We Stand in Awe of You" seems like a pretty natural song for us to stand up and sing.

The counter point is the issue of this blog, though: when's the last time we bowed or kneeled when we sang, "We Bow Down, and We Worship You Lord"? Why only the raising of hands? Why only the position of standing? When's the last time we responded in worship like Isaiah did when he saw the Lord? I see him cowering in fear before that Lord, not raising hands. There seems to be an allowance for both, but the motivation needs to be based on a holistic view of God, not necessarily the way we choose to see God. If we can just look past our own feelings in worship, we may find that the object of our worship supersedes our feelings 100% of the time.

Who knows, maybe the next time I'm worshipping, I'll be kneeling as I consider WHOM I'm worshipping...

Come, let us worship and bow down, let us kneel before the LORD our Maker. For He is our God, and we are the people of His pasture and the sheep of His hand.

Psalm 95:6-7

Worship...Who do we direct our worship to?

Tue, 14 Mar 2006 08:05:52 GMT

Ah, yet another rambling of an odd soul...

Worship...

...what comes to your mind when you see that word? Is it music? Is it an experience? Is it the natural flow of your personal study of God, like the theologian (that I can't remember) said, the greatest experience in worship was when he was studying the Word and an aspect of theology he was so moved by caused the expansion of his view of God that it caused him to worship God.

A question that I've been rolling over in my mind for a number of years is, "Who do we worship?" I mean, do we worship God the Father, God the Son, God the Spirit, or all three?

Stealing from my earlier blog, I know this sounds nit-picky, but I think that our theology in prayer belies a theological laziness - a situation where we say something just because - not because it is necessarily true. I believe that this may be another example of that thesis.

Once again, if we look at worship in the Old Testament it is obvious that GOD was the focus of that worship. I'm not really sure what the level of understanding of the Trinity there was then. I mean, you can see the Trinity reflected in certain passages (Genesis 1:26 - Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness.") but did they understand that the Messiah was going to BE the Son of God? They understood something of the Holy Spirit (Psalm 51:11 - Do not cast me away from Your presence And do not take Your Holy Spirit from me.) but did they actually separate the idea into a trinitarian understanding of God?

When we get to the New Testament, things are cleared up for us nicely. We hear Christ say that He and the Father are one. We hear Christ say that unless He leaves, the promised Comforter can't come. I guess that this line of thought helps clarify the idea that, as in prayer, the Godhead has specific roles that the three Persons fulfill. Christ declared that there were certain things that only the Father knows (Matthew 24:36 "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone."); Paul states that Christ existed in the form of God and then became flesh (Philippians 2:6). Two seemingly comparative statements. Both are true, but Christ has certain roles that He fulfills - not ALL of the roles of the Godhead.

The same is true of the Holy Spirit. He couldn't come unless Christ was with the Father (John 16:7 "But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you.).

There are so many different names given to the three Persons of the Godhead - individual names which point to individual roles. When we read Scripture, we are able to discern Who certain roles are assigned to based on the responsibility of that Party. We would never say that the Holy Spirit died on the cross - that was the Son's responsibility. We DO say, incorrectly I would add, that Jesus is present with us (meaning, His physical presence). Ask yourself, "Where is Christ right now?" Does He have a physical body (albeit glorified)? Yes, He does. Where is Christ? He is sitting at the right hand of the Father. Christ, the only-begotten of the Father will for all of eternity have a physical body! You know - the one we will see with the scars in the hands and feet and side! He has fulfilled the role of Sacrificial Lamb for our behalf. He has other roles which He will complete, but He has specific roles.

Now, this has been a long loop in the road to get back to this thesis: Should we direct our worship to Jesus Christ? It sounds sacrilegious to say NO, doesn't it? But what I see in Scripture is that Christ always directs HIS praise to the Father - not to the Spirit or even to Himself.

Listen to Christ's own words:

Then Jesus said to him, "Go, Satan! For it is written, 'YOU SHALL WORSHIP THE LORD YOUR GOD, AND SERVE HIM ONLY.'" Matthew 4:10

The "Father" is the focus of worship. Even the Son of God acknowledges that fact.

So, what does all of this talk lead to?

Well, I believe that it actually elevates all three Persons of the Trinity in the area of worship, and here's why...

The Father - If we truly strive to understand this Father of ours we will see a God who is so balanced in His attributes, character and being that it leaves me stunned and speechless when I contemplate on Him. What an amazing, surpassing Father we have that loved us so much that He created us to know Him; that loved us so much that even though we turned to sin, He already had planned a way of escape for us; that loved us so much that He gave up His only Son for our behalf; that loved us so much that He killed His own Son (think about that...

All of us like sheep have gone astray, Each of us has turned to his own way; But the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all To fall on Him. Isaiah 53:6

But the LORD was pleased To crush Him, putting Him to grief. Isaiah 53:10

He loved us THAT much! That He would CRUSH His very own Son for you, for me.

The Son - Who willingly gave Himself up for us. The same Isaiah passage closes with the following verses:

As a result of the anguish of His soul, He will see it and be satisfied; By His knowledge the Righteous One, My Servant, will justify the many, As He will bear their iniquities. Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great, And He will divide the booty with the strong; Because He poured out Himself to death, And was numbered with the transgressors; Yet He Himself bore the sin of many, And interceded for the transgressors. Isaiah 53:11-12

Oh my. What are my thoughts of Christ now? What has He done for me? Suddenly my hopes of a big-screen plasma TV seem to vanish. What incomparable love, grace, mercy... But I didn't deserve it. That is the most moving thing in my mind in regard to the TULIP of Calvinism: My total depravity matched against God's unmerited mercy. Ah, worship...

What a tremendous Savior. One who knew fully His role of submission to His Father. THAT, my friends, is the attitude that Paul was trying to pound into our heads in the Philippians passage above. Have this same exact attitude... An attitude that declares, "I am in submission to you, Father." Everything I do from this day forward will be in complete harmony to Your will. Jesus WAS God, and yet He submitted to the Father. What are we compared to Christ??? We are certainly NOT God. And yet here is the picture of God willingly submitting to God. THAT is the Savior that bought us. Not a cheap Savior, that's for sure.

The Spirit - This "Gift" that we have been given... This Spirit that literally lives within us. We, the Temple of the Holy Spirit. This Spirit that we quench and grieve. How would we view "worship" if we really thought about this Gift within us - DWELLING in us all the time - not coming and going like David of old. Worship then no longer becomes something we do on Sunday morning alone, right? Worship is something that we do all the time. It's not something that is an event, it is like breathing. I love Steven Curtis Chapman's song, Let Us Pray, because of a certain phrase in that song - "Like breathing out and breathing in, let us pray." Why is it so hard for us to worship this way? Why do we make such an event out of it?

If I understand the roles of the three Persons of the Trinity, then I must focus my "worship" toward the Father. I come to Him in worship based on that atoning sacrifice of His Son and the peace WITH God and the peace OF God that His death provided. I come to Him in Worship because of this Spirit that allows that relationship to remain open - based on the GIFT that Christ ensured we would receive when He Returned to the Father.

Once again, please check me…

Prayer...Who do we pray to???

Tue, 14 Mar 2006 00:56:00 GMT

Here's one that will stir a discussion at a party: Which person in the Trinity do you pray to? Sure, take the easy way out and say "God," but I believe that answer falls short.

I think that In the Old Testament the people of Israel prayed to the God they knew, YAHWEH. When it comes to the New Testament, though, there seems to be a muddying of the waters, at least in some circles. When my children were small, I found myself praying to Jesus. You know, "Dear Jesus, thank you for my mommy...," but I can't find a passage in Scripture that says anything about praying to Jesus, or to the Holy Spirit either. What I DO see in the New Testament is Christ giving examples as to how we should pray ("Our Father, which art in heaven...) and the gospels, epistles and the rest stating that we are to pray to the Father, in the name of the Son, in the power of the Spirit.

I know this sounds nit-picky, but I think that our theology in prayer belies a theological laziness - a situation where we say something just because - not because it is necessarily true.

Another example of this, I believe, is in Romans 8:26 which states, "In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words." There is nothing here directing us to pray TO the Holy Spirit, but rather that the Holy Spirit intercedes for us when we don't know how to pray.

This may ring a bell...

Something similar is said of Christ in 1Timothy 2:5 which states, "For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." So, in prayer, the Spirit's role is as an intercessor, Christ's role is as the mediator, and the Father is the focal point of both of those activities.

So, am I out to lunch???

Book List: Book List

Fri, 10 Nov 2006 22:28:51 GMT

Warren Smith: Deceived On Purpose
An interesting review of the infiltration of the New Age terminology and growing influences in the church today. The writer presents a farly strong case for a deep connection between Robert Schuller and Rick Warren & others. Worth reading.
James M. Hamilton Jr.: What Women Can Do In Ministry: Full Participation Within Biblical Boundaries
An excellent treatise on an issue missed in our modern churches - That there really are gender differences with roles and responsibilities.