Category Archives: Rage and Rants

What Willow Creek’s ‘Reveal’ study really tells us…

Rage and Rants, Religion

Spec[tac]ular Focus, by BlogRodent (Rich Tatum)

Christianity Today released an article this month titled, Willow Creek’s ‘Huge Shift’. Since a friend asked what I thought about this, I thought I’d share it with you, my faithful readers and random visitors with hope that you will further sharpen my thinking. Or (gasp!) correct me. This is my big-picture view — and not necessarily the right one, at that — So, enjoy! (Then comment!)

The study by Willow Creek was been years in the making but only splashed across the blogosphere with its sensational headlines late last year. (Read: “Mind-Blowing!” – “Painful!” – “Revolutionary!”) I’m not sure why CT is still doing stories on it at this late date except that their publishing schedule is generally 3-6 months out. (I first heard about the Reveal study in October.) [Update: I didn’t read the intro to the article well enough! WC announced they are changing their Sunday service program. –R.] Whatever you think about Willow, mega-churches, or the so-called “Seeker sensitive” model — this report and its conclusions are a must-read if you’re in church leadership of any sort.

More About Reveal
» the blog
» the media
» the podcast
» CT editorial
» Out of Ur blog post
» A sociologist’s review
» Mark Galli’s POV

It’s easy to be critical of Willow for being “seeker sensitive,” and too many who’ve never been exposed to Willow are happy to critique Hybels & Co. But I think it’s important to note that the survey and its findings weren’t focused solely on Willow Creek. At least two dozen other churches (or more) were involved in the study — Willow was just the beginning, and the study continues.

Sadly, the results were consistent across the board. That’s what’s truly interesting about the study’s conclusions.

The main takeaway is this: numeric growth does not equal spiritual growth.

If we’re honest about it, the idea that numeric growth reveals a church’s health and its members’ own spiritual health has infected the American church for decades. The idea is captured in this sillogism:

Healthy organisms grow
Churches are like organisms
Therefore, healthy churches grow

But what this three-step dance of logic fails to take into account is that healthy organisms stop growing when they reach maturity and a size appropriate to their nature. In fact, an organism’s failure to experience a growth plateau is one evidence of sickness.

Too much of a good thing can be a bad thing. (Think: obesity, cancer, acromegaly, gigantism, etc.)

So, why?

I’ve bemoaned this elsewhere (on my blog, on email discussion groups, and at my denomination’s discipleship forum), but in my view the chief problem with most (if not all) of the churches I’ve attended has been a failure to encourage, challenge, and provide for spiritual transformation and discipleship in individual believers within a transformed community. And the failure to do that, I believe rests on a handful of factors — not always present in every circumstance, but often working together.

Churches are filled with members who’ve not become spiritually transformed because:

  • The leadership believes numeric growth is an indicator of success
  • The leadership believes financial growth is an indicator of success
  • The leadership believes the quality of its programming is an indicator of success
  • The leadership believes the members’ level of participation in programming is an indicator of success
  • Transfer growth (from other churches) is as valuable as evangelistic growth
  • Adherence to moral standards of conduct is an indicator of spiritual growth
  • A greater variety of programs will attract more participants and induce spiritual growth

But, in my opinion, the three greatest moves (or cultural shifts) that create the stalled spiritual growth the Willow Creek study analyzes are:

  1. The move from a Word-centered church to a worship- and/or fellowship-centered church,
  2. The move from Word-based exposition from the pulpit to a topical attempt to engage attention, and
  3. The move away from peer- and mentor-based discipleship as part of the church community’s DNA.

If I had to blame anything on these movements away from what has been historically and classically the strength and backbone of the church, I would point to three modern developments that have contributed to our cultural individualism and this failure to connect church community membership and spiritual transformation:

  • The demise of the one-room schoolhouse,
  • The ubiquity of the automobile and widely flung pseudo-communities, and
  • The ubiquity of private immersive entertainment (starting with the portable radio, the television, and now the Internet).

Seriously, these things contribute. Let me briefly opine how (and, again, I welcome our comments and criticism). And let me say at the outset that just because these may be contributing factors, that doesn’t make them bad. More likely, it just means they’ve been poorly used.

The Demise of the One-Room Schoolhouse

When children were taught in the context of a community and in the dynamic mentoring relationship of a one-room schoolhouse, we didn’t have to talk about mentoring younger people: it happened naturally. The teacher could focus on teaching the older, more capable students as well as the young, but the older students would tutor and mentor the younger children at the same time. Brothers helped their little sisters. Big sisters helped their little brothers. All under the watchful eye of the teacher. If you spent 12 years in this kind of relationally-driven learning environment, it would influence your every approach to teaching, training, and learning. Why don’t more careers have journeymen and apprentices? Because our culture no longer acts as though careers or skills are best transferred in relationship. Instead, pedagogy rules, books liberate, and “information wants to be free.”

Information may be free, but discipleship is costly.

The Automobile and Pseudo-Communities

With the automobile came a renewed pioneer spirit. Not only could we “Go West!” once we were emancipated from the rule of our father’s house, many of us saw it as our imperative to get as many state lines between our parent’s and inlaw’s homes and our own domicile – whether that meant college out-of-state or marrying and accepting jobs in some far-flung corner of the country, few people now live in the same neighborhood as their parents. And fewer still invite their parents to live with them in their retirement. Yet this wasn’t uncommon at the turn of the century. People might move across the city, or to a neighboring town, but it took strong motivation to pack up and move completely out of the community one knew growing up. But the automobile made it possible to live as far away as one or two states over and still allow a comfortable commute to visit over the weekends and holidays. Now, families are content if they see each other only a few times a year. And with the car came the possibility of choosing a church community a half an hour to an hour away from one’s home. I’ve frequently attended churches that were 20-30 miles from my home, passing by perfectly good faith communities along the way. Which, of course, cater to similarly far flung “pseudo communties” of members whose domiciles may be spread out over thousands of square miles. When my closest church neighbor lives 10 miles away, am I truly living in community?

Going Solo

With the advent of solo entertainment devices, we completed the cocooning cycle that Faith Popcorn predicted nearly two decades ago. We can live virtually our entire day bubbled in a safe cocoon and we now get to take our cocoons with us in the form of internet-enabled, blue-tooth capable cars complete with AM/FM Radio, CDs, XM-Radio, built-in DVD players, and Internet capable telephony. From the cocoon of our home to the cocoon of or car, to the cocoon-like cubicle at work, many of us can honestly say we haven’t had more than an hour’s conversation with a close friend in weeks. If we have a close friend.

So…

Nothing can be done about these cultural shifts, but something can be done at our churches. We can resist the siren call to greater size, more numbers, bigger budgets and insist, instead, on reproducing ourselves. We can plant more churches, reach our to our local communities, talk to our neighbors, and focus on truly relational discipleship (which really needs to start with the leadership). We can scale back on the number and size of our programs and focus instead on building relationships, discipling our converts, being accountable and actually preaching the Word from the pulpit. We can focus on worship, not entertainment, on prayer and praise, not showmanship, on truly walking together in love and grace rather than small group exercises in futility.

Too often we leave our faith at the door when we climb into our SUVs for the drive home. How can we help it? It’s all we know, it’s all we’ve seen, it’s what our pastors do. Our churches inherit the DNA and style of their leadership.

If our members haven’t gotten the message that they need to pick up the spoon and feed themselves, as Bill Hybels laments at the RevealNow website, it’s not because they don’t know that’s their responsibility: it’s because they haven’t seen anybody doing it and growing from it to value it themselves. They’re not hungry for it, else they would belly up and feed from the trough of the Biblical buffet.

Further, even if the people are feeding themselves, church leaders are not absolved from the responsibility to lead just because a believer is now “on the path” to spiritual maturity. Just as parents still must provide guidance and proper nutrition for their hungry children well past their infancy, so much the shepherds of the local flock continue to provide good content to direct their charge’s attention and spiritual formation. Though Timothy was the Apostle Paul’s appointed delegate and personal representative (a sign of great trust, leadership, and maturity), Paul continued to minister to him with instruction, doctrine, guidance, and wisdom — even from prison while nearing his own death. (See both 1 Timothy and 2 Timothy.)

We must preach the Word, not opinions. We must disciple, not merely teach. We must walk in relationship and community, not simply attend church in proximity. This, I believe, is what the modern church needs most.

Well, that’s my $0.02 worth. Now, go and write likewise!

Rich

[tags]BlogRodent, Bill-Hybels, Willow-Creek, Willow-Creek-Association, seeker-sensitive, mega-church, discipleship, mentoring, spiritual-formation, preaching, Reveal, Greg-Hawkins, statistics, survey, evangelical, pentecostal, education, homiletics, spiritual-transformation, transformation, CTI, Christianity-Today, criticism, critique, culture, technology, integrity, worship, faith, Christianity, Evangelical, God, Bible, growth, church-growth, megachurch[/tags]

Moral Outrage: Folsom Street Sinnage … er … Signage

Rage and Rants, Random Miscellany, Religion

Wherein I opine on the culture war between Christianity and those of homosexual persuasion, and their supporters.

So, breaking news, San Fransisco is a gay-friendly town. Oh, more breaking news: Chrisitanity is anathema to a sinful lifestyle. And it’s an easy target for sinners.

So the 24th annual hedonistic fetish event, San Fransisco’s Folsom Street Fair (wiki definition), created a poster playing off da Vinci’s “Last Supper.” Instead of tableware, there are sex toys. Instead of Jesus and his disciples, there was “Sister Roma” and ” “half-naked homosexual sadomasochists” (WND). And, of course, there were sponsor logos.

The fair is scheduled for September 30, three days from now.

Predictably, the Christian community at-large has recoiled in disgust and lashed back with angry diatribes and calls for apologies. The poster, itself, has been labeled an “unprovoked attack against Christ and His followers” (WND, again).

Ironically enough, the Miller Brewing Company has responded to the pressure from my fellow believers and is removing its logo from the promotional poster.

Huh. Fancy that. One of the last companies you’d expect to worry about losing customers, a “likker” company, has bowed to Christian pressure. The sarcastic part of me wants to quip, “Jesus approves, gentleman, and hoists a tankard in a comradely toast.” But, for fear of reprisal from the people who didn’t like my “Church vs. Bar” post, I’ll refrain.

I get it. Really, I do. I understand why my peers in the faith would react in anger against the poster. And I, too, find the poster heartachingly distasteful and viscerally provocative as well. Though I must admit — the ornery side of me still finds this all a bit humorous.

I mean, really, what’s worse here? A sarcastic and cunning spin of a da Vinci masterpiece (a long-standing meme, actually)? Or … sin? Does anybody in their right mind really believe that the poster is going to do more damage to the cause of Christ than failing to reach out in witness to those gripped by the sins of the flesh? Meanwhile, we just gave the event plenty of free publicity. :: sigh ::

I sense much laughter in Hell. Wormwood is proud.

This is a battle I, personally, would have recommended avoiding. Perhaps anger limits our creativity here, but surely there are better ways to respond to the real issues than attacking a poster.

Posters, after all, don’t send people to Hell. Sin does.

Where’s the moral outrage over that?

Rich

(PS: “Bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you“, right? And “Blessed are the peacemakers” as well as “Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness.” I guess the Sermon on the Mount is still as hard to live up to today as it was 2,000 years ago.)

[tags]art, beattitudes, BlogRodent, boycott, church, culture war, culture wars, da vinci, evangelical, evangelism, fetishism, Folsom Street, gay, glbt, homosexual, homosexuality, last supper, leonardo da vinci, lesbian, miller brewing company, moral outrage, outreach, religion, san fransisco, sermon on the mount, signs, sin, transgendered[/tags]

What’s Different? Church vs. Bar

Rage and Rants, Religion

photo: ukdenners

Overheard recently: “I’m wondering what’s the difference between church and the bar?”

In church you pray for the Spirit. In a bar you pay for the spirits? (Sorry, couldn’t resist!)

Anyways…

Everybody knows your name…

When Jennifer and I lived in Springfield, MO, and worked at the Assemblies of God headquarters, our friendly pagan neighbors invited us to join them at a neighborhood bar for lunch. We were on our way back home from church where we had invited them, so we figured a little tit for tat was probably in order.

Continue reading What’s Different? Church vs. Bar →

Carlton Pearson: The closest to God you’ll probably ever get

Pentecostal, Rage and Rants, Random Miscellany, Religion

Bishop Carlton PearsonThe Carlton Pearson curiosity continues.

Over the last few weeks I’ve noticed the amount of search engine queries landing on this site have shot heavenward for Carlton Pearson. The searchers have typed:

  • carlton pearson goes bad
  • carlton pearson has cancer
  • carlton pearson has lost his mind
  • is carlton pearson gay?
  • did carlton pearson get a divorce?

photo: Scott Griessel

As far as I can tell, Carlton Pearson’s “badness” quotient has gotten no worse than when I wrote my semi-definitive exploration of his doctrine of inclusion back in early 2006: “Carlton D. Pearson: The Charismatic Bishop of Heresy.” I’ve read that around 2005 Pearson had been diagnosed with prostate cancer but, according to last night’s 20/20 program (read the segment: ‘Nobody Goes to Hell’: Minister Labeled a Heretic), it is now in remission and might avoid urology surgery. Pearson appears to enjoy full possession of his faculties, as far as the TV demonstrates (though he did once hear revelatory voices from God), he has not publicly admitted to any homosexual inclinations that I know of (or can find), and nobody anywhere has reported a divorce.

But Pearson did publish a book recently, and I figure that caused some of the alarm. God Is Not a Christian defends his views, answers his critics, and, according to the sole reviewer “he also throws in a lot of ideas about God, the divinity of man, and why he views Scripture as flawed in places. This will bother some of his conservative Christian readers.”

Indeed.

If there are any.

Pearson’s book currently ranks #829,524 on Amazon.com (as of Saturday, July 14, 2007). It’s no Mere Christianity-style instant classic to be sure (which ranks at #405), and Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology (ranked at #1,432) must have a marketing genius pushing the tome when compared to Pearson’s sales rate.

But the media love Pearson and I’m sure his sales will pick up well before Hell freezes over. Not that Pearson wants to profit off of Hell. No, he’s done getting paid for Heck-Fire:

“If I say everybody’s going to heaven, then I can’t raise money from you to get me to keep people out of hell.” (20/20, “‘Nobody Goes to Hell’: Minister Labeled a Heretic“)

Problem is, once you’ve done away with Hell, why stop there? Since, in Pearson’s view, the doctrine of Hell rests on man-made documents about a man-made myth, then the doctrine of Heaven itself is on shaky grounds.

The flipside of Pearson’s hell-doubting theology, however, is that he sounds awfully skeptical about the existence of heaven. “We don’t know what happens after this life,” he says. “But we presume something good happens. So we’ve come up with these thrones and gates and virgins … But the closest to God you’ll probably ever get is you.” (Reuters, “Checking in with Carlton Pearson – who doesn’t believe in hell – in Tulsa“)

Not a quote I’d want to enter Eternity with, for sure.

•  •  •

I watched Bill Weir’s 20/20 documentary on Hell last night, but after Tivoing the program, I must have run out of disk space. I only captured 33 minutes of the program. Sadly, the show cut off before the commercial break leading into Pearson’s segment. Otherwise, I would have shown you a clip. But if you hurry, you might be able to catch it streaming off of the ABC.com website.

Rich

(Pearson photo by Scott Griessel via Flickr.)

[tags]2020, abc, afterlife, bill-weir, bishop-carlton-d.-pearson, bishop-pearson, blogrodent, calrton-pearson, carlton, carlton-d-pearson, carlton-pearson, death, documentary, eternity, gehenna, gospel, gospel-of-inclusion, heaven, heaven-and-hell, hell, heresy, heretic, inclusion, pearson, rich-tatum, salvation, universalism[/tags]

Sexual Conversion: Gender dysphoria, the UMC and the transgendered minister

Assembly of God, Bible and Theology, Pentecostal, Rage and Rants, Religion

Gender Dysphoria I recently wrote about the relatively unremarked issue of gender dysphoria and believers opting for gender reassignment. I wrote that I had communicated with Assemblies of God leadership about this issue some years ago, and that I believed a position paper is in order — now, not at some later date when it becomes a “real” issue.

And it has begun. I’d say the issue is now real.

While it hasn’t surfaced within the Assemblies of God yet, I suspect it will within the next few years. Meanwhile, The Church Report Online released a special report in its May 2007 issue, titled: “Identity Crisis: A Transgender Minister Reappointed to Lead Church.” MinistryToday magazine’s weblog quickly picked up on the story. And the story threatens to go national now that a CBS affiliate has featured the item (includes video).

On May 25, at a previously unheralded United Methodist Church in Baltimore, the Reverend Ann Gordon announced her gender reassignment and consequent name change to the Reverend Drew Phoenix. And while the UMC has rules of discipline regarding “sexually active gay clergy,” there’s nothing on the books about transgendered clergy. So, for now, for the next year at least, Phoenix remains pastor.

(It is no coincidence that the timing of the announcement syncs with Pentecost Sunday, when we celebrate the founding of the Church and the empowerment of the Spirit for ministry.)

Meanwhile his more clear-headed colleagues from the Baltimore-Washington Conference are calling for a review of the decision. Good luck with that. And a conservative UMC group, UMAction, is petitioning the UMC General Conference to come up with a position paper. Good luck with that, too.

As Ann Gordon/Drew Phoenix said, “I want to be the face for an issue.” Phoenix will get his wish. And the issue is going to steam-roll the United Methodist church. If anybody thought that the Gay and Lesbian clerical issues were difficult to resolve (and largely remain unresolved), wait’ll this hits the debate floor.

Here, for your consideration, are the comments I posted to the Ministry Today blog, which asked: “How should the Methodist Church respond to this situation? What would you say?”

Yikes.

I’ve blogged about this nascent issue on my own weblog. Churches simply aren’t prepared for this. And the mainline churches who gave up the struggle on ordaining homosexual ministers will probably have to roll over on the issue if they’re going to be consistent in their rejection of orthodox Biblical values.

While the Bible does not directly speak to sexual dysphoria or sexual identity issues, I believe there is a Biblical foundation for rejecting the claims of the transgendered proponents.

The creation account clearly depicts the inception of two sexes: male and female — not some admixture of the two. And as God created man in his image, clearly expressed gender identity is very likely a part of that imago dei. Any confusion regarding one’s innate gender would, therefore, be a result of the Fall, sin, and its many effects. To surrender to the dysphoria and adopt a new sexual identity does not clarify the chaos, rather, it cements it.

The Apostle Paul makes it clear that our identity in Christ is not tied to our “meat space” identity. He encouraged the Corinthian believers not to waste their energy in changing their social or psychological circumstances:

“Nevertheless, each one should retain the place in life that the Lord assigned to him and to which God has called him. This is the rule I lay down in all the churches. … Each one should remain in the situation which he was in when God called him.” (See 1 Corinthians 7)

I’m sympathetic to circumstances where gender dysphoria arise from true hermaphroditism (having both male and female sexual characteristics) or where sexual genitalia are opposite one’s genetic endowments. In such circumstances, I believe acting out a sexuality or gender that is at odds with one’s innate physical genitalia creates a self-contradictory gender image — and this does violence to the “image of God” within.

Our denominations will have to wake up to this issue, like it or not. I’ve called for my own Fellowship to respond to this — years ago, and it hasn’t happened yet. But the trend is inexorable and we must respond now.

Regards,
Rich

Notes from around the Blogosphere and Web

  • The Albert Mohler Radio Program: “Gender Identity Disorder In The Pulpit” (with MP3)
    “When the former Rev. Ann Gordon returned to her congregation at St. John’s United Methodist Church as Rev. Drew Phoenix, the regional leadership of the United Methodist Church was faced with something of a dilemma. Their decision to reappoint Gordon/Phoenix has ignited a firestorm of controversy and we’re joined by Mark Tooley, of The Institute on Religion and Democracy, to analyze the issues involved in the case.”
  • Teflon at MoltenThought says, “We are created with the proper gender, and those afflictions of body, mind, and soul not self-inflicted do not excuse us from proper behavior. … Is it not more likely that the creature is twisted and the Creator straight and true?”
  • The Baltimore Sun: “Transgender minister is reappointed”
    “In explaining yesterday’s decision to the conference, [Bishop John] Schol said he looked at the Book of Discipline, talked with fellow bishops and other experts and ‘learned that there is nothing in our discipline that speaks to transgendered persons, learned that there is nothing in our policies or guidelines that speaks to transgendered persons.’ According to the Book of Discipline, to be a pastor, ‘the person has to be of good character, and faithful to the church and effective in ministry,’ Schol said in an interview. Phoenix is all of those things, he said.”
  • UMC.org: “Pastor speaks of transgender experience“
    “Phoenix believes his transition is making him “even more effective” as a pastor and said his greatest concern “is that the congregation continues to grow and thrive.””
  • Darrell at Dow Blog in “Post-Modern Gender Confusion” writes: “Is there any doubt that we are living in an era of sexual and gender confusion? In our post-modern mind, we ourselves determine what it means to be man and woman, to be human. The Author of creation is cast aside as the goddess science is enthroned and worshipped, even in the ‘church.'”
  • MBT at Right Pundits in “Transgender Methodist Minister Is Reappointed” comments: “I wonder if a pastor with a conservative bent would even get ordained anymore in the Methodist church, let alone become Bishop?”
  • And more…

[tags]1-Corinthians, Albert-Mohler, Ann-Gordon, Assemblies-of-God, Assembly-of-God, Baltimore, Baltimore-Sun, Baltimore-Washington-Conference, Biblical-values, Bishop-John-Schol, Bishop-Schol, BlogRodent, body-image, Book-of-Discipline, charismatic, Church, Church-Report, clergy, controversy, creation, deviance, DNA, Drew-Phoenix, dysfunction, dysphoria, ethics, female, Gay, gay-clergy, gay-minister, gender, Gender-Confusion, gender-dysphoria, gender-identity, Gender-Identity-Disorder, gender-reassignment, General-Conference, genitalia, GLBT, hermaphrodite, hermaphroditism, identity, Identity-Crisis, identity-in-Christ, imago-dei, John-Schol, Lesbian, mainline-church, male, male-and-female, Mark-Tooley, Maryland, Methodist, minister, ministry, MinistryToday, Pentecost, Pentecostal, perversion, Phoenix, position-paper, Protestant, psychology, Reconciling-Ministries-Network, Religion, Reverend-Phoenix, sex, sexual-identity, sexuality, sin, The-Church-Report, The-Fall, The-Institute-on-Religion-and-Democracy, theology, Transgender, transgendered-clergy, UMAction, UMC, United-Methodist, United-Methodist-Church[/tags]

Hollywood: The modern Areopagus

Bible and Theology, Rage and Rants, Religion

Spider-Man 3: Bad SpideyRecently, I posted my Spider-Man Bible Study / Discussion Guide. Simultaneously, I dropped a few comments on some blogs that referenced a different Spider-Man Bible Study produced by Fuller Theological Seminary’s professor Craig Detweiler.

Some GodBloggers have been critical of the whole “movie-based Bible study” enterprise. Not surprising, really: using Hollywood movies to teach Biblical truth is a little like using dance to teach worship, or wine to serve Communion. There may be a place for it, but it’s going to generate controversy somewhere.

I’ve been asked before to justify how I could write a Bible study with a movie as its context. After all, if I’m writing a Bible study, how can I presume to use a movie to develop themes? And if I’m so big on biblical theology, hermeneutics, exegesis, and expository preaching, then why would I water down the message of the Bible or jeopardize the faith of weaker brothers and sisters by endorsing a movie? After all, this is Hollywood we’re talking about and nothing good comes from there. Right?

So, I will clarify: any Bible study or discussion guide I write that uses a movie to illuminate and illustrate biblical themes is not an endorsement of that film.

The Debate

So, when Andy at Heart for the Lost posted a blog critical of Detweiler’s Spider-Man study, I offered up my own version and asked for commentary. (To be fair, Andy was re-posting an item from A Little Leaven.)

Instead of actually reading the study (or my study, at least) it seems Andy’s audience is ready to reject the idea outright, for the usual notions of avoiding “fellowship” with “the world.” But, in my view, writing a critical Bible study using a film as its thematic base is not about being unholy or about sullying the Word. It’s about reaching a culture steeped in godless ideology, and subversively redeeming secular entertainment for evangelistic and edifying purposes.

One commenter, Leonard, asked:

How can you feel right about joining God’s Word to us with such an anti-Christian gnostic film?

I feel like Leonard hasn’t actually read my Matrix study before judging it, or possibly even the Spider-Man study. I suppose, though, if Leonard is morally opposed to mixing film and theology in any way, he might be concerned that reading my study would be a sin, that it might jeopardize his eternal future. Its hard to say. But it’s clear he believes I’m engaging in a sinful enterprise.

My position and answer to this question follows. But first a word from John Calvin:

“From this passage we may infer that those persons are superstitious who do not venture to borrow anything from heathen authors. All truth is from God; and consequently, if wicked men have said anything that is true and just, we ought not to reject it; for it has come from God. Besides, all things are of God; and, therefore, why should it not be lawful to dedicate to his glory everything that can properly be employed for such a purpose?”

 —John Calvin, Commentaries on the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, Trans. by William Pringle (Grand Rapids: Christian Classics Ethereal Library). [Calvin makes this statement in commentary on Titus 1:12. — Rich]

There is no truth that is not ultimately God’s truth.

And there is no man perfect and without a hint of sin or untruth in us. If it is acceptable for a rank and vile sinner like Leonard or me to teach the perfect Word of God, and if it was appropriate for the apostle Paul to quote pagan philosophers to teach God’s truth (see sidebar), and if it was appropriate for apostle Paul to stand in a pagan worship center in Athens and use their heathen altar to teach God’s truth, then I don’t see how using a story written by pagans to also teach God’s truth is a sin.

Paul’s nod toward pagan truth:

  • 1 Corinthians 15:33:
    “Bad company corrupts good morals.” (Greek playwright Menander, from a comedy, Thais)
  • Acts 17:28:
    “in him we live, move, and have our being” (Sixth century Cretan poet Epimenides)
  • Acts 17:28:
    “We are his offspring” (3rd century Cilician Stoic philosopher Aratus, from Phaenomena)
  • Titus 1:12-13:
    “Even one of their own prophets has said, ‘Cretans are always liars, evil brutes, lazy gluttons.’ This testimony is true.” (Sixth century Cretan poet Epimenides)
  • 1 Corinthians 5:1:
    “There is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that does not occur even among pagans.” (Sadly, pagans sometimes have better morals than churchgoers do.)

More interesting sources of truth:

  • Jude 1:9, Jude 1:14-15:
    Jude cites from the Pseudepigrapha (the Assumption of Moses and 1 Enoch 1:9)
  • Numbers 22, Numbers 23, Numbers 24:
    Pagan prophet Balaam used by God to prophesy the truth
  • Numbers 22:28:
    A dumb animal speaks the truth: “Then the LORD opened the donkey’s mouth, and she said to Balaam, “What have I done to you to make you beat me these three times?”

I suppose my critics might be of the mindset such that when they preach or teach they only use quotes from the Bible, they only use illustrations from the Bible, they only use the text of the Bible in their presentations, and they only ever refer to events in the Bible to make points. If that is one’s philosophy, it would be difficult to say anything other than to simply quote a Bible text and sit down because otherwise we’d be adding to the Scripture and invariably marrying God’s holy Word with sinful ideologies.

“But there’s sin in them flicks!”

Interestingly, though, one major plank of my critics is that secular films portray blasphemers, adulterers, and rank sinners. But I am painfully aware that for all its faults, the heathen Hollywood elite end up painting a more accurate picture of life than the lily-pure world of Christian movies and books where nobody cusses, chews or dates the girls who do. The Christian entertainment industry with few exceptions simply doesn’t reflect the mud, grit, and sin-laden pain of stories from the Bible itself where men rape women, soldiers raze villages, adulterers murder husbands, men sleep with their father’s wives, and friends betray the Messiah.

If there’s one thing I’ve learned from all the sin recounted in my R-Rated Bible it’s this: Sin and error don’t have to be applauded or endorsed to be useful for edification and instruction. Life’s most instructive moments are often found in the errata.

And while Hollywood is not good at showing us the path to purity and perfection, it excels at showing us the myriad ways fallen men fail. What Hollywood glamorizes in film and New York immortalizes in print can be redeemed with the light of the Word. If we would but pay attention.

What are they thinking about?

You see, if you’re going teach others what God wants us to know about how to love him, serve him, worship him and live holy lives, we should spend some time connecting those sacred truths with what people are actually thinking about. Sometimes they’re reflecting on tragedies like the recent massacre at Virginia Tech. Should we also not refer to that event because it was planned, perpetrated, and promoted by a media-savvy godless murderer? Sometimes folks are pondering the most recent Spider-Man or Matrix movie, the latest Ridley Pearson novel, or the latest New Yorker cartoon. If my critics were consistent, we should never mention those things except to denounce them because every word and deed therein are damnable lies.

Perhaps, in my critics world, we should simply pile those things up and toss a match.

Credibility begone! Hello folly…

But you know what happens when we simply denounce everything that isn’t “churchy” and fail to engage? The people listening to us snicker. Because they’ve seen the movies, read the books, and enjoyed the cartoons. And they know that while there are significant problems with them, not every word is a lie. When we superstitiously presume otherwise, we not only lose credibility, we make ourselves look foolish.

Only foolish Christians think they have the only truth. Only foolish Christians think everybody else is ignorant of even the slightest glimmering of light. Only foolish Christians would be so blind.

Please note, I’m not saying Leonard or my critics are foolish. I do think they’re sensitive to the perils of encouraging believers to consume what Hollywood produces uncritically. I commend Leonard and his friends for their care and concern for the mental and spiritual health of believers. Because, really, there is danger in consuming what Hollywood produces uncritically. But these films already shape how people think. It’s up to us to redirect those thoughts, to train people to think critically about the claims made in these films, and ultimately to help them reject the message.

Stop hanging out with sinners!

Leonard continued:

Maybe it is time we remember that as the Body of Christ, we don’t join ourselves to the world. We are in it, not of it. We do not fellowship with the world. Our only real relationship with the world should be one of ministry.

Au contraire, mon frere! Paul encouraged us to disfellowship ourselves from believers who are charlatans. He did not discourage fellowship with pagans, rather, see 1 Corinthians 5.

I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people — not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.

If we ever hope to have anything relevant to say to pagans and seekers, if we hope to do the ministry you speak of, we need to not only know what sinners are thinking about, we need to enter their thought-space and know what we’re talking about

We, like Paul, should spend some time in the Areopagus of this world pointing at the altars to the unknown gods, saying, “Hey! Look! This thing you built in ignorance actually points to God. Look at it this way with me for a moment.…”

Trivial persuasion

After a few more words, Leonard concludes:

Maybe instead of trying to link the Bible with such things as the matrix movies, we should tell the Body of Christ that they should steer clear of such things and run to God. Trivializing God’s Word for the sake of itching ears is wrong.

I can only assume Leonard hasn’t read my studies, else I don’t know why he’s saying I’m trivializing the Word of God. I don’t believe I am. Otherwise, please point out how, exactly, I am trivializing the Word? Because, frankly, that sounds rather insulting. But perhaps I am misunderstanding Leonard.

I invite you, my faithful readers, to set me straight.

Teaching the Word of God is an awesome and frightful task. (In one sense, the mere act of attempting to deliver the message trivializes it immediately. How can you or I or any sinful man or woman hope to adequately explain an convey all the truth contained in even one verse of the divinely inspired Word?

We cannot. Our very presumption to attempt it is trivializing in itself. Further, by our very sinfulness we soil the Word any time we lay hands on it or attempt to interpret it.

But that cannot be our concern because we have been given the task of not only studying the Word, but teaching it, conveying it, preaching it, and delivering it. That is not only our honor, but it is our duty. It’s our mandate.

So let us leave aside these concerns about somehow gutting the Scriptures by presuming to highlight was is good and what is not good about a film in a discussion guide. I suspect God has the power to preserve his Word and I won’t be single-handedly tearing it down in my lifetime.

In reality, the greater danger is not to the Word itself, but to the films we discuss. My hope is that the moral and philosophical framework behind these secular fables will be redeemed, not that God’s Word will somehow be destroyed.

[tags]blogrodent, spider-man, spider-man-3, spider-man-3-bible-study, spider-man-bible-study, spider-man-discussion-guide, spiderman, spiderman3, bible, bible-study, bible-study, biblical-theology, biblical-truth, 1-corinthians-15:33, 1-corinthians-5, 1-corinthians-5:1, 1-enoch-1:9, a-little-leaven, acts, acts-17:28, aratus, areopagus, assumption-of-moses, balaam, belief, christ, christian, christian-classics-ethereal-library, christianity, church, corinthians, craig-detweiler, discuss, devotional, discussion-guide, epimenides, evangelical, evangelism, evil, exegesis, expository-preaching, faith, film, film-and-theology, fuller-theological-seminary, god’s-word, god’s-word, group-study, heart-for-the-lost, heathen, hermeneutics, hollywood, homiletics, ideology, john-calvin, jude, jude-1:14-15, jude-1:9, menander, ministry, movie-based-bible-study, movies, new-yorker, numbers, numbers-22, numbers-22:28, numbers-23, numbers-24, paganism, pentecostal, philosophy, preaching, pseudepigrapha, religion, ridley-pearson, scripture, sin, small-group, spidey, sunday-school, teaching, the-matrix, theology, theology-and-film, titus, titus-1:12, titus-1:12-13, tragedy, venom, virginia-tech, word-of-god, worldview[/tags]

Should Ministry Leaders Blog?

Blogging, Rage and Rants, Random Miscellany

Hat tip to Michael Davis for alerting me to this question posed over at Total Leadership: “Should Ministry Leaders Blog?” Here are my thoughts…

A blogger with a “why” beats one with only a “how”

KeyboardBlogging can be a waste of a leader’s time if he doesn’t know what he’s doing or why he’s doing it. (Especially why.)

I would never suggest a leader start blogging (or podcasting) unless they’ve already been reading some choice blogs and are starting to get some idea of what value a blog can bring to a ministry or to one’s life. Rushing into blogging without first experiencing it is like convincing someone to preach who’s never heard a sermon in their life. Sure, it might be comical or even refreshing — once.

A few blogging bennies…

For some, blogging can be a kind of spiritual discipline, helping hone thoughts and to dig past the sometimes surface thoughts of hurried Saturday-night sermon prep. It provides a database of sermon themes related to your deeper concerns. It aids writing — requiring clarity and concision. It keeps you in touch with other influential people, and exposes you to criticism and commentary, sometimes kudos. Leaders need all of that.

Too few leaders have opportunities for strangers or even friends to comment and speak into their lives or provide feedback. Blogs with comments enabled are a great way to help provide that. It brings the leader out of the ivory tower. Blogging can be truly incarnational. Leaders need this, too, but it’s frightening because they’ve never had it.

I like to think of Paul the Apostle as the original proto-blogger. His missives dealt with current events, addressed failings in the Church, provided solutions, commented on trends and dangerous ideas. He “blogged” from prison, he blogged on the road, he blogged with the help of a peripheral writing device: an amanuensis.

And his words have become a significant part of our thought-life today many, many years later. Talk about the “long tail!”

If you are a leader and you are intentionally not blogging, you are ignoring one of the most influential media currently available to you.

Banking your thoughts

Blogging, in some ways, is like an interest-bearing savings account. As long as your ideas are only spoken, they’re being spent as soon as you generate them — just like spending your entire paycheck the very week you get it. But if you can “bank” some of those thoughts, they’ll go to work for you on your behalf, influencing more than just the handful within earshot. And like money in the bank, your blog-published ideas compound their influence week after week after week.

Do you have what it takes?

On the other hand, maybe not every leader should blog. After all, it does require a specific set of skills that many of our leaders simply don’t have: the ability to write clearly, the ability to engage an audience, the ability to be consistent, to provide something worthwhile and interesting with regularity, the ability to take criticism and respond irenically, the ability to respond to current events in the real-world, the ability to be transparent, and the ability to turn on a computer and use it.

But some of those guys aren’t leading. They just happen to be standing where the crowd’s facing.

If you’re a ministry leader and you’ve intentionally ignored using Internet technology to augment your message and vision, please ask yourself why. You may have very good reasons. And it may not reflect poorly on you at all. For example, I really don’t see Billy Graham picking up the keyboard to blog nowadays, and he’s not diminished one whit by not blogging. And maybe guys like Dallas Willard, Tim Stafford, and Jack Hayford don’t need to blog: publishing houses are already happily killing trees to extend their reach through the printed page. (But I’d sign up for their blogs so fast my keyboard would melt!)

But it’s easier than falling off a pulpit

But if you’re checking out of the “blogging craze” because it’s the domain of teens and Gen-Xers, or overwhelmingly nerdy, or seemingly too difficult to master, I invite you to give it another thought. Sign up for an account at WordPress.com and start flailing away. Really, it isn’t hard, and you can start doing it in about five minutes.

Ride the long tail and prosper!

Rich

[tags]amanuensis, billy-graham, blog, blog-tips, blogging, blogging-benefits, blogging-skills, blogging-strategy, blogging-tips, blogrodent, church, dallas-willard, engage-an-audience, jack-hayford, leaders, leadership, leadership-blogs, long-tail, michael-davis, ministry, ministry-blogs, ministry-leader, ministry-leaders, ministry-leadership, paul-the-apostle, podcasting, purpose, rich-tatum, spiritual-discipline, spiritual-disciplines, strategy, technology, tim-stafford, tips, total-leadership, vision, wordpress.com, write-clearly, writing, writing-tips[/tags]

How to get arrested at Central Bible College. Plus: The Unremarked Transgendered Issue

Assembly of God, Bible and Theology, Rage and Rants, Random Miscellany, Religion

I was surprised to read of a recent arrest at Central Bible College when some folks arranged a non-violent protest and an attempt to “dialog” with allegedly “homophobic” school officials over Gay, Lesbian, and Transgendered issues recently:

Central Bible College: Our First Act of Civil Disobedience (via Soulforce)

The blogger, Brandy Daniels from Wheaton, writes:

We arrived to Springfield, Illinois [knowing] at the beginning that it was likely that Central Bible College would not be as pleasant a stop. We relentlessly pursued conversation with the administrators at the school, who told us again and again that our voice was not welcome, that this was a conversation that the school did not need or want.

Arriving at CBC, the protesters found the school ready, with police and security from Evangel, CBC, and the General Concil all around (all hands on deck, apparently). After loitering on the sidewalks just off campus for several hours, silently reading their bibles, Abigail Reikow and Brandy Daniels entered campus through the main gate, walking toward the chapel when they were arrested, frisked, sent downtown and charged with a misdemeanor trespassing violation. The group left around noon. Apparently even non-violent protests give way to lunchtime hunger-pangs.

Prior to this, the Springfield News-Leader quoted campus pastor Ron Bradley:

“We have no difficulty discussing this issue (of homosexuality),” said Bradley. Instead, it is the organization and its method that led to the decision, he said. “Their track record has been ignoble at best. … “Our concern, having studied their patterns … is while their initial contact calls for dialogue, their pattern has been much more combative and on some campuses, deceptive.”

I don’t know what dialog this group hopes to foster, and I’m too pressed for time to research their claims or their theology. However, whatever one believes about sexual “orientation,” I believe it’s clear that Scriptures teach that it’s not the impulse to sin that marks the sinner (we all are tempted) but the behavior itself and the act of entertaining the temptations — nurturing sin in our hearts. Just by analogy, straight men are sexually tempted as well, but it’s not the temptation to have sex that marks the straight man as a sinner or even unregenerate: it is the behavior and the lust that defile.

Thus, I believe it’s possible to be a believer and a disciple while experiencing same-sex attraction — or any-sex attraction. Yet if obedience to Christ is the mark of a disciple, I am not as agnostic about salvation and the practice of gay and lesbian lifestyle choices.

But all that’s been discussed elsewhere and on other fora ad nauseum. If you want to see what the A/G teaches about it, review their extensive ephemera at the ag.org site here.

But the transgendered issue is still a relatively open discussion. There’s virtually nothing about it on the ag.org site, and there’s certainly no position paper on it.

Elsewhere, I own and moderate an email-based A/G discussion group. One of the long-time members of that group was a transgendered (male to female) participant who had not disclosed his/her gender mashup until another enterprising member discovered it and disclosed it publicly on the forum and called for an ousting. This was back in late 2003.

If it were just that a member on the forum were cross-dressing or undergoing gender reassignment, it wouldn’t have been a huge issue for me. We have sinners of all stripes on our message boards. Being an unbeliever, a pagan, or a sinner wasn’t a reason to get kicked off the forum or castigated. What made the ousting a bigger issue, for me, was that the individual involved was involved in lay-ministry at her local Assemblies of God church

Ouch.

So, I found myself struggling with the question: Is it possible to be a post-operative transsexual and remain a Christian?

I wasn’t sure, and still am not entirely certain of my position, but I suspect maybe the answer is similar to this question’s conclusion: Is it possible to divorce and remarry while your first spouse is alive and remain a Christian?

Personal View

My personal view is that the transgendered operation should only be embraced by those who are born hermaphrodites or whose sexual genitalia are opposite their genetic endowments. I do not currently buy the view that being “mentally” or psychologically a woman and “physically” a male (or vice-versa) somehow justifies surgical change. The mental phenomenon may or may not be legitimate, but that’s irrelevant to me. For a believer, I don’t believe the experience justifies the surgery.

By analogy, a mental or genetic predisposition to violence doesn’t justify abuse. Similarly, a mental or genetic predisposition to thinking like the opposite sex, or being attracted to the opposite sex, also doesn’t justify cross- dressing, transsexualism, or homosexuality.

I don’t endorse the view that “God doesn’t make mistakes, therefore, nobody is ever born with homosexual or transsexual desires.” Clearly, children are born with physical defects and abnormalities, as are others are born with mental defects and abnormalities.

Current research, while controversial, seems to deny that there is a “gay gene” or a truly gay “brain shape.” And I am not certain there is such a thing as an opposing-gendered mind trapped in the wrong-gendered body. But, however the research pans out, maybe it’s possible there is a truly homosexual brain formation, or a truly transsexual self-image reflected in deep mental structures. But whether homosexuality or transsexualism does or does not have an ultimate basis in biology is irrelevant to me.

In the first case, I believe the homosexual behavior is sinful, and that would be true regardless of any biological justification. After all, biologists have been telling us for years that males are driven by biology to have sex with as many females as possible. So what? Our values and morals are not founded on biology in a fallen world. Rather, they are based on God’s Word and his nature.

In the second case, I believe that acting out a sexuality or gender that is at odds with one’s physical genitalia creates a self- contradictory gender image — and this does violence to the “image of God” within.

Marriage, by Analogy

Bear with me as I take a slight digression to reveal my thinking here. I believe the fundamental reason divorce is unlawful in God’s eyes is because he created Male and Female to not only bear his Image independently, but also to bear his Image in union — through marriage. The marital union is the only relationship on Earth that mirrors and symbolizes the relationship between God and his Bride, the church.

In the same way that murdering another person violates the image of God within that person, divorce similarly violates the image of God within the marital union. Marriage is sacred, not just because of the vows surrounding the ceremony, but it is sacred because the image of God, and God himself, is present in the marital union in a way that it is not present in any other kind of relationship we know and enjoy.

Gender and the Image of God

But marriage of this kind requires the two genders that God created to be joined as one. God created male and female, from the beginning of time, to not only bear his image independently but to combine to symbolize his relationship to Man.

In light of gender being a fundamental part of God’s design for his creation, and in light of gender being an indispensable part of the marital union and all that is symbolized therein, I therefore believe that to deny one’s gender or to confuse the matter by switching genders, violates God’s design and intention.

Tentative Conclusion

Is it possible to have committed this sin and remain a Christian? Probably. Is it possible to fail to repent of this sin and remain a Christian? I don’t know. I wished I did.

But on the safe side, I follow the example shown in the early Church. If God has poured out his Spirit on and individual and that person bears the evidences the fruit of the Spirit in discipleship — especially obedience and chastity  — then I’ll treat that person like a child of God.

But, meanwhile, I feel it’s necessary to draw the line at ministry leadership. In the same way that divorced and remarried men and women are not allowed to hold ministerial papers in the A/G (I know many here will disagree with this), I would posit that transgendered or cross-dressing men and women also not hold positions of ministry. In my mind, that would include teaching Sunday School, leading outreach ministries, writing devotionals (with a byline), and so on.

This is one of those contemporary issues made possible by advanced medical technology that never faced the early church. Sure, I expect there were homosexuals and even cross-dresses in every age of mankind, but the ability to cross-dress the flesh itself is new. And the Church, by and large, has yet to figure out how to respond to this.

Interestingly, in 2003 and beyond, I know that the executive A/G leadership has been made aware of this issue. And yet, no studies have commenced, no committees formed, and no positional papers issued.

I suspect that’s going to have to change. And soon.

Rich

Read along with me:

[tags]BlogRodent, Gay, Lesbian, Transgendered, Homosexuality, Bisexuality, Theology, Central-Bible-College, CBC, Protest, Non-Violent Protest, Springfield, Springfield-Missouri, Missouri, Soulforce, arrest, civil-disobedience, divorce, remarriage, marriage, ministry, GLBT, Springfield-News-Leader, morality, sin, leadership, Bible-College, Christianity, Religion, Pentecostal, Assemblies-of-God, Assembly-of-God[/tags]

Apostasy: Rejecting Ideas

Rage and Rants, Random Miscellany, Religion

In some cultures and eras, apostates face certain death. In America, it’s the church that’s dying from apostasy.

Apostate — it’s not exactly a common word. But for those doomed to hear its rare pronouncement, it can mean imminent death or serious eternal consequences.

Like repentance, apostasy implies a rejection or abandonment of a practice, ideal, or belief. And one religion’s penitent is another one’s apostate.

This irony became apparent in the first formal court case involving charges of apostasy in Kuwait. The court found Hussein Qambar Ali guilty for converting from Islam to Christianity in December 1995. Since Shari’ah law in Kuwait (and many other Islamic societies) prescribes the death sentence for apostasy, the court called for Ali’s execution, along with the termination of his marriage and the distribution of his possessions to heirs.

“Apostasy in the Islamic world is serious,” said Ali. “Anyone, even an ordinary person, has the right to kill me without any penalty.”

With religious and government leaders clamoring for his death, Ali fled his ransacked home, living on the run for several weeks. Finally, he left Kuwait to seek religious asylum in a vibrantly Christian nation full of healthy churches: the United States of America.

Unfortunately, the apostate Muslim soon became an apostate Christian. Less than two years after his conversion, Hussein Qambar Ali returned to Kuwait and recited the creedal Islamic statement before an official court: “I witness there is no God but God, and Muhammad is the messenger of God.” The prodigal Muslim had come home.

Fortunately for Ali and others in the evangelized Western world, turning away from Jesus doesn’t equal treason or provoke an immediate “kill clause.” There are no Christian death squads looking for dropout Sunday schoolers and backslidden believers to behead. There’s no hangman’s noose outside the revolving back door of the modern American megachurch.

And yet, it wasn’t always so. The annals of history — and the archives of CT Library — brim with examples of Christian thinkers, leaders, and rebels who rejected contemporary orthodoxy and became martyrs for their presumed heresy. There’s William Tyndale, strangled and burned in 1536 for rejecting the notion that only priests could read the Bible. Or Patrick Hamilton, burned at the stake in 1528 for rejecting Scotland’s ban on Lutheran literature. There’s also Protestant preacher George Wishart, strangled and burned in 1546 for rejecting Catholic doctrine and embracing the Reformation. And John Rogers, burned in 1555 during the reign of Mary I for embracing Protestantism and refusing to not preach it.

Plus, don’t forget the Crusades, the Cathars, the Inquisition, and the Salem witch trials. When severing ties with apostates (legitimate or otherwise), the church has a bloody history.

But dealing with heresy in today’s church isn’t quite as dangerous or thrilling as addressing apostasy under the laws of Islamic societies, the rule of medieval Catholic potentates, or the dictates of colonial Puritans. Sure, Bishop Carlton Pearson recently earned the label of heretic for preaching the “Gospel of Inclusion,” teaching everyone’s already saved and going to heaven. But he still has a church … and his health. Lutheran minister Thorkild Grosboel of Denmark said, “There is no heavenly God, there is no eternal life, there is no resurrection”; and his great punishment was only a suspension.

However, while modern Christian apostasy won’t elicit a death sentence, it’s still dangerous. It still leads to certain eternal death. And it’s bleeding the Western church dry.

“Every year, some 2,765,100 church attenders in Europe and North America cease to be practicing Christians,” notes Books & Culture editor John Wilson, citing the World Christian Encyclopedia. That’s five Christians every minute slipping into practical apostasy. Meanwhile, the church in Africa alone is growing by a net result of three new believers every minute.

So while overseas churches become healthier, the American church seems to be infected. Despite aggressive evangelistic efforts, perhaps something intrinsic to the Western church’s theology, practice, or culture is “un-converting” new believers, driving them to apathy, if not outright apostasy.

Research seems to support this idea. In “Closing the Evangelistic Back Door,” Win and Charles Arn cite a study of three groups’ receptions to evangelistic presentations. One group made commitments and were actively involved in local churches. Another group “dropped out” soon after making commitments. And the third group rejected the presentation outright. Of those who remained committed, seven out of ten received a presentation using “non-manipulative dialog.” In contrast, nine out of ten “dropouts” received a presentation using “manipulative dialog.” And of those who said “no, thanks,” seven out of ten received a fact- and theology-driven presentation.

This study’s results indicate the need to revise evangelistic strategy. The Arns recommend abandoning manipulative coercion and viewing evangelism as a process rather than a one-time gospel presentation. They also believe evangelism should be fundamentally relational and tied closely to the church. For if the church community doesn’t befriend and incorporate believers within the first six months of their spiritual life, the church will likely see new converts become apostate dropouts.

Revolutionizing evangelistic techniques is also a concern of Foursquare pastor Jerry Cook:

Part of our problem is this: we’re trying to do the confronting. We’re trying to convert people. Conversion chases after a person’s beliefs, lifestyle, and relationships saying, “We have the answer.” Then we must inform the person what the question is that he should be asking. The whole process is artificial. …

[Unbelievers] are drawn to a relationship. That’s why “sinners” were drawn to Jesus. He never attacked them. He simply said, “You can be forgiven.” …

Until we come to grips with this, we will always be putting off the non-Christian and patronizing the Christian.

This failure of the Western church begs a sobering question: if Hussein Qambar Ali had fled from Kuwait to perhaps Africa, China, or Brazil, would he ever have abandoned Jesus and returned to Islam?

May God help American Christians reject flawed ideas of evangelism to become better disciples, demonstrating his love in order to make disciples — not converts at risk of becoming apostate ex-believers.

Rich

—

Originally published at CTLibrary on April 11, 2007
Copyright © 2007 Christianity Today International.
Used with permission.

(Note: Most of the articles linked above require paid membership at CTLibrary.com to view, but if you’re the kind of person who enjoys reading Christianity Today, Leadership, Books & Culture, or Christian History & Biography, it may well be worth it. Also, though I was once employed by Christianity Today, I do not personally benefit from any transactions through these sites.)

[tags]apostacy, apostate, BlogRodent, Books-and-Culture, Carlton-Pearson, Cathars, Charles-Arn, Christianity-Today, Christianity-Today-International, church-history, conversion, CTLibrary, discipleship, Evangelical-Church, evangelism, forgiveness, Foursquare, George-Wishart, heresy, Hussein-Qambar-Ali, Inquisition, islam, Islamic, islamic-faith, Jerry-Cook, John-Rogers, John-Wilson, Kuwait, martyrdom, martyrs, Mary-I, muslim, orthodoxy, Patrick-Hamilton, penitant, Reformation, repentance, Robert-Ali, Salem-witch-trials, Shariah, Shariah-law, the-Crusades, theology, Thorkild-Grosboel, William-Tyndale, Win-Arn, witnessing, World-Christian-Encyclopedia[/tags]

Internet Evangelism Thoughts

Rage and Rants, Random Miscellany, Religion

My friend and fellow PneumaBlogger, Frank N. Johnson over at Strategic Digital Outreach, was recently highlighted on GospelCom’s GospelCon blog. In “Flawed Follow-Up or a Flawed Philosophy of Evangelism?” Frank writes:

[T]hose of us involved in Internet evangelism in the West have, in many cases, devalued face-to-face relationships and neglected (or even abandoned) the local aspect of Christian community. … [W]e … are much too quick to assume that virtual community is just as ideal as face-to-face community. …

It is my strong conviction that the unbeliever must be immersed into Christian community prior to conversion in order for the unbeliever to understand that God loves him/her and to understand the purpose of Jesus’ mission on earth (that’s the point, I think, of Jesus’ statements in John 17:21-23). I don’t think that such immersion into Christian community is possible in the worldwide digital realm to the same extent that it is in the local physical realm. …

I tend to think that our basic philosophy of evangelism is flawed. If our approach was to encourage unbelievers to be immersed into Christian community prior to conversion, we would find that our “follow-up” would be much more effective. …

Our goal with the Internet and other digital means should not be primarily to gain new converts, but to facilitate the introduction of unbelievers into local Christian communities, which are the most effective context for outreach.

Touching on issues I’ve blogged about previously (specifically, A/G church growth stats and our discpleship issues), Frank makes a good case for not placing too much value on Internet-based relationships without a face-to-face, meatspace component. In fact, Frank very says that without prior engagement with a local body of believers, conversion and discipleship may not occur at all. And we have our own statistics to demonstrate that without mentoring and discipleship, coverts don’t “stick.”

GospelCon puts a sharper point on it by asking GodBloggers about their online conversion strategy:

[I]f your website or ministry has an evangelistic focus–perhaps even an invitation for visitors to accept Christ and become a Christian–it’s worth asking yourself: what do we do after one of our visitors accepts Christ through our website? Are we equipping them to grow in Christ and plug into a local church community? If it’s not possible to do that (perhaps the convert lives in a country that is hostile to the Gospel), are we doing our best to provide the online equivalent of the community and discipleship that is normally found in a physical church family?

The upshot of all this is really the delicate question that must be asked: do we pursue virtual conversions at the cost of souls?

I’m not a huge fan of online evangelism, just as I’m not a huge fan of bar-evangelism. Solid, healthy decisions to believe in Christ and make him Lord, to follow him in discipleship and obedience, can only be made soberly, with the facts in hand, and in light of the costs of being an apprentice to Jesus.

That said, I’ve witnessed to drunks (“Waiting for the Harvest”). I’ve witnessed in a bar (once responding to the challenge to explain the Gospel in five minutes to a PI who felt he’d never heard a decent Gospel presentation), I’ve witnessed to skeptical co-workers at a housewarming party. I’ve done street-witnessing. I’m a huge fan of witnessing when the opportunity presents itself, but I’m realistic and pragmatic about the call for conversion—sometimes we really only have the opportunity to defend the Gospel, to plant seeds, to call for repentance, to provide aid and comfort, to be hospitable. Every interaction with a seeker doesn’t necessarily have to lead to an altar call. It didn’t for Jesus, and there’s no reason you have to see every opportunity to open your mouth as a call for the Sinner’s Prayer. Being born a second time is a lot like being born the first time: there’s a gestation period, and premature births aren’t always in the new believer’s best interest.

But is it possible to witness online? I mean, is it possible to lead another to Christ online?

Yes. When God orchestrates the encounter.

Let me give you a brief example. In July of 2000 I answered a technical email that had been languishing in a discussion group inbox in my mail client for a few months. I answered it for no better reason than I was compelled to one night before leaving the office— and it was only one call for help out of several hundred emails in my queue. The next day I was stunned to discover that my email had become a direct answer to a prayer uttered by Kathi Sharpe, a fully committed pagan Wiccan. You see, God had been working Kathi over in her dreams, appearing to her, calling her to serve him. When she had enough of it, she asked God to solve this one technical problem that had been plaguing her for months, and that if he would do that, she’d seriously consider his claim on her heart. That next morning, my email was waiting in her inbox. What followed was a year-long series of correspondences and IM chat sessions where Kathi voiced her frustrations, her questions, and her celebrations. She started out a troubled Wiccan, came to faith quickly, and began growing in faith and maturity immediately. Now Kathi leads an online ministry to Wiccans, blogs, and serves faithfully in her local church. (See the transcript log at The Sharpe Logs.)

In this case, Kathi had a local church resource she could turn to immediately after coming to faith, and at several points in our dialog I deflected her questions to her pastor, who could ultimately provide better counsel. In many ways this anecdote only demonstrates the wisdom of Frank’s charge: Successful conversions require (or at least are vastly improved by) a local community of believers for fellowship, instruction, and growth. But in some other ways it also demonstrates that online conversions and discipleship are possible when the seeker initiates the dialog.

I agree with Frank that witnessing and evangelism are inherently relational. I would not recommend that a church just post the sinners prayer online hoping that this will lead to conversions and discipleship. Yes, this practice has a long and colorful history rooted in the covert placement of nifty evangelism tracts on park benches and doctor’s waiting rooms. And, yes, such impersonal presentations of the Gospel can and do have an impact of sorts. But sometimes the impact is negative, and it really is important for people new to the faith to find a local church and get involved. And the person least likely to know this is exactly the person you’re trying to reach.

Rather than doing online evangelism, I suggest we simply focus on being faithful in everything we do, whether it’s online, offline, in-line at Starbucks, or as we recline at home. Our faithfulness and our own personal discipleship will help assure a ready response when a query comes in over the email transom or in the comments section of our blog. It’s not about doing evangelism, but being disciples and making disciples. And, frankly, web pages do not disciples make.

Rich

[tags]BlogRodent, born-again, Christianity, conversion, faith, frank-johnson, gospelcom, gospelcon, internet-evangelism, online-evangelism, pentecostal, strategic-digital-outreach, witnessing, witnessing online[/tags]

Prayer Request: Collection agency came calling

Rage and Rants, Random Miscellany

Toyota TercelThis morning we were woken by a collection agency that wants $2,000 from us immediately.

Back in November 2005,I wrecked my little beat-up Toyota in a traffic pile-up caused by a driver in the wrong lane. The car was totaled, towed to a lot, and I signed the paperwork agreeing to give the title to the lot owner if I didn’t return to pick it up in 30 days.

I never went back for it, the title passed into the lot owner’s hands. We were notified of the title transfer. All was fine.

Continue reading Prayer Request: Collection agency came calling →

Jesus Camp and BlogRodent on Word-FM

Bible and Theology, Pentecostal, Podcast/Media, Rage and Rants, Religion

john and stephanie
Last year, on October 3, I did a live interview with John Hall and Stephanie Fraschetti from Word-FM about the “Jesus Camp” documentary that was then the height of Evangelical fear-mongering (start here if you don’t know what I’m talking about: “Jesus Camp: Brainwashed in the Blood — or Is it Spin?“). At least that was before the Ted Haggard fracas blew up.

Not long before this interview took place, I had also been interviewed by MSNBC for its program, “The Most.” (If you’re interested, see “Jesus Camp and BlogRodent on MSNBC.”). It was interesting experiencing these two interview formats back-to-back. I enjoyed being on “The Most” as a floating-head talker, but I really enjoyed chatting with John and Stephanie for their afternoon show.

Like many talk-show hosts and afternoon drive entertainers, John and Stephanie have an energetic rapport that they effortlessly extend to their guests. It was clear from my time on the phone with them that both John and Stephanie had actually read-up on their subject matter before speaking with me, and they’d even gone so far as to actually wade through my lengthy treatise on the matter. Their questions and asides were intelligent, on target, and designed to let me shine.

jesus camp — click to view larger

word-fm

Friends at work who heard me give the interview were nicely complimentary afterward. Of course, none of them could hear the program live, so, they had no idea what was being said between my pauses, but I am now here to rectify that for one, and all. And that includes you.

John Hall has gone the extra mile to graciously send me a CD copy of the bulk of my interview. I’m including it here as a downloadable podcast and playable audio file so that you can enjoy my ums and ahs in all their monaural splendor. At the very least, I can say that I only stuck my foot in my mouth two or three times.

As usual, there are things I wish I’d said and things I wish I hadn’t — or at least wish I’d clarified better. For example, I make it sound like all Methodists are liberals and not “born again.” Not true. So, not true. So, before I get hate mail, please understand: that is not what I meant to imply.

Enjoy. And if you have any comments, please leave them. I’d like to know what you thought of the interview and its subject matter.

[audio:https://tatumweb.com/blog/wp-content/mp3/jesus-camp-word-fm.mp3]

[Or download here.]

Regards,

rich


[tags]Air America, Baptism in the Spirit, Becky Fischer, BlogRodent, brainwashing, charismania, charismatic, Christianity, Christianity Today, Devils Lake, documentary, Evangelical, Evangelicalism, Evangelicals, film review, Heidi Ewing, Hollywood, indoctrination, interview, Jesus Camp, Jesus Camp review, John Hall, kids camp, Lakewood Park Bible Camp, liberalism, Magnolia Pictures, Mike Papantonio, movie, movie review, Pentecost, Pentecostal, Pentecostalism, Pittsburgh, Rachel Grady, radio interview, rage and rants, religion, religious radio, Stephanie Fraschetti, summer camp, tongues, Word of Faith, Word-FM[/tags]

Imminent post on the Ted Haggard debacle

Pentecostal, Rage and Rants, Religion

Ted Haggard on the outsI have been silent on the outing of Ted Haggard, not because I have nothing to say, but I needed to know more of the story before writing anything. And I needed time for my heart to break.

Now that most of the relevant data are in, I will do my usual thorough job of reviewing most of what has been written and produced on the matter so I can serve up a concise lengthy treatise.

Stay tuned.

Rich

[tags]BlogRodent, ted-haggard, new-life-church, homosexuality, drugs, methamphetamine, charismatic, pentecostal, national-association-of-evangelicals, nae, colorado-springs, colorado, sexual-sin, sin, moral-failure[/tags]

On Blogging: A Challenge to Pentecostals

Blogging, Rage and Rants, Random Miscellany

KeyboardI want to say a few words about the power of blogging on a personal level. And I want to challenge my fellow quiet Pentecostals and Charismatics to pick up the keyboard and begin writing.

Words have Consequences
A friend on an email message group recently asked me about the effectiveness of ministering through a blog. So I’d been thinking about that when a couple things landed in my inbox that encouraged me and seem to illustrate the answer to his question. Writing in a public forum — whether blogging, managing a web page, or crafting freelance articles for a newspaper or magazine — can have an effect.

First up, from Amber, who sent me a nice note via my online contact form:

« I just wanted to tell you how much I enjoy your blog.  … Your blog is always honest and open, you don’t shy away from even the hard stuff in your comments. After joining the Assemblies at 16, I soon discovered that opinions and controversy and doubt are all too often a flag for that person needing to “get saved” again.

I have just recently left the Assemblies … but a part of it is still in me, hopefully the good parts. And honestly, I think all of those good parts are what you portray here at your blog.

Thanks for being there and restoring a little of my fragile hope for humanity. »

Continue reading On Blogging: A Challenge to Pentecostals →

Jesus Camp: One Edit Away From Propaganda?

Pentecostal, Rage and Rants, Religion

That two unbelieving directors don’t understand Pentecostals — or Evangelicals — isn’t surprising. That they produced a film rife with ignorance and bias is also unsurprising. But that ordinary people who can normally tie their shoes and avoid bad movies like Gigli don’t see how insufferably biased this documentary is … well, that’s just depressing.

Julie R. NeidlingerNow the admirably snarky and witty artist, Julie R. Neidlinger (a fellow Pentecostal who’s actually been to the A/G campgrounds featured in the film), has blessed us with a post that might help. Julie has been guest-commenting, blogging here and there, and strenuously trading comments, attempting to defuse the snap judgments and shallow rhetoric inspired by the film and its trailer. And, frankly, she’s about fed up.

Continue reading Jesus Camp: One Edit Away From Propaganda? →

Jesus Camp: Brainwashed in the Blood – or Is it Spin?

Pentecostal, Rage and Rants, Random Miscellany, Religion

Jesus Camp — click to view largerJesus Camp, what an experience. Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady’s investigation into the hidden world of one Pentecostal kids’ camp simultaneously delighted me, fascinated me, and embarrassed me. I love this film. I hate this film.

It angers me.

For those who haven’t seen the trailer, by now, the premise is simple: follow three pre-teens from Missouri heading to a summer camp owned by the Assemblies of God in Devils Lake, North Dakota (Lakewood Park Bible Camp). Document their experiences there, and follow up on the aftermath. Simple enough.

But the devil, as they say, is in the details. Or, in this case, the future Evangelical Army of God is in the details. As Ewing and Grady have noted, their initial raw footage had no real drama: “There was absolutely no conflict. … it wasn’t dynamic enough.” So, toss in a conflicted profile of the “Kids on Fire” camp director, Becky Fischer; include a few oddball characters for color and commentary; stir up dissent using Air America radio host Mike Papantonio and his uninformed Greek chorus of callers. Then get a major Charismatic Evangelical to appear in the documentary to give your subtext some heft and legitimacy and tie it all together with a neat little bow called George Bush and the Supreme Court.

Continue reading Jesus Camp: Brainwashed in the Blood – or Is it Spin? →

Jesus Camp review coming soon, my reaction to the trailer

Pentecostal, Rage and Rants, Random Miscellany, Religion

This week, Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady’s indie documentary, Jesus Camp, is set to release, and already the blogosphere is all abuzz about it. I can’t wait. I will be catching a pre-release screening of the film through the auspices of Christianity Today International, my employer, and will write my reactions to it as soon as possible. Of course, I’ll share it with you.

Upon seeing the trailer, linked below, I was shocked and fascinated. Repelled and embarrassed. And angry. You see, I went to these camps as a kid. I witnessed this kind of exuberant excess, only I saw it with the eyes of an insider, both as a teenager and later as a camp counselor. I have seen the pseudo exorcisms (I sincerely doubt any of the exhibitions I saw at the altar were genuine possession) and I’ve seen my peers faint and wooden on the floor, both praising, weeping, and sometimes faking it.

And, looking back, it is a little creepy. But it was also formative.

Continue reading Jesus Camp review coming soon, my reaction to the trailer →

More on Violence In, Violence Out

Rage and Rants

The other day I reposted an article I wrote for CTLibrary.com titled, “Violence In, Violence Out.” A couple responses provided sufficient motivation to write a lengthy response–which I summarily decided should be a blog entry instead. To follow the conversation, check out the original post.

Marc V. (also known under the blogonymn, “Spudlet”) wrote:

I’m wrestling with the statement about people having “a God-given, hardwired aversion to killing another human being”. I think it falls more in the basic survival instinct: if I kill someone, then the same could happen to me.

Hi, Marc, thanks for the comment!

I’m not a student of psychology or Col. David Grossman‘s field, “Killology,” but what he says rings true. I tend to believe the aversion to kill another human is a hardwired part of our natures … after all, it’s the ultimate insult to the imago dei within, and while “instinct” can be explained by evolution, this kind of hard-wiring might be best explained by design rather than some “selfish-gene” theory. (Though, that’s not what you’re getting at, I understand. But Grossman’s theory resonates with me more than your own, is all I’m saying.)

I really enjoyed your post on sin and the imagination, and the quote from Stableford is phenomenal. (Everybody, head on over to read Marc’s post, it’s worth it.)

I disagree with the Stableford character’s hyperbole, though, but not with it’s content, just with its hyperbole. I don’t agree that there would be no enjoyment without sin in our imagination. But I would agree that for most people there would be little enjoyment without sin. Obviously, I believe redemption plays a part in ameliorating this.

And, in the world that Stableford is envisioning–with every waking and non-waking action being scrutinized and analyzed–characters would experience great pressure to repress sinful behavior, stuffing it into the realm of the imagination. Thus, the statement would be much truer in that hypothetical world than in a contemporary world.

That said, I flog my article once again, “Integrity on the Internet.” In the opening of my presentation, I wrote:

C. S. Lewis’ idea that All mortals tend to turn into the thing they are pretending to be acknowledges that character begins in the heart and mind. In the same way, goodness and sin begin in the mind.

A principle I once discovered and taped on my workspace cubicle read: You will never do what you never imagine doing. The opposite of that is also true: Imagination always precedes action.

Studies I’ve read about have shown that imagination can be as effective a tool for learning as actual practice. You can find the residue of these studies under search times like:

  • “mental rehearsal”
  • “symbolic rehearsal”
  • “imaginary practice”
  • “mental practice”
  • “covert rehearsal”

    [Search for these terms here…]

The classic example, dating back to 1958, was first publicized by L. Verdelle Clark in his thesis for Wayne State University as “The effect of mental practice on the development of a certain motor skill” (and again when published in Research Quarterly, volume 31, in 1960 [pp. 560-569]). One account of Clark’s research reads:

“At the University of Chicago,” reported Dr. Blaslotto, “a study was conducted to determine the effects of visualization on the free-throw performance of basketball players.”

“First, the athletes were tested to determine their free-throw proficiency. They were then randomly assigned to one of three experimental groups. The first went to the gym every day for one hour and practiced throwing free throws.

“The second [group] also went to the gym, but instead of physically practicing, they lay down and simply visualized themselves successfully shooting.

“The third group did nothing. In fact, they were instructed to forget about basketball: ‘Don’t touch a basketball—don’t even think about it!’

“At the end of 30 days, the three groups were again tested to determine their free-throw proficiency.

“The players who hadn’t practiced at all showed no improvement in performance; many in that group actually exhibited a drop. Those who had physically practiced one hour each day showed a performance increase of 24 percent.

“Here’s the clincher: the visualization group, by merely imagining themselves successfully shooting free throws, improved 23 percent!”

[Excerpted from: “How visualization improves physical performance — May 27, 2003“]

The upshot of all this is that what we think about, and especially what we mentally rehearse, has consequences. Apparently, to the mind, rehearsing action in the imagination has nearly the same reinforcing and training effect as actually taking action. This is why the Scripture is rife with instruction to meditate on the Word, on God, his nature, his qualities, his blessings, and to have a disciplined thought life: keep your heart pure.

See, especially:

  • Deuteronomy 6:5: “Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength.”
  • Proverbs 2:1-6: “My son, if you accept my words and store up my commands within you,  turning your ear to wisdom and applying your heart to understanding,  and if you call out for insight and cry aloud for understanding, and  if you look for it as for silver and search for it as for hidden  treasure, then you will understand the fear of the LORD and find the  knowledge of God. For the LORD gives wisdom, and from his mouth come knowledge and understanding.”
  • Proverbs 4:23: “Above all else, guard your heart, for it is the wellspring of life.”
  • Matthew 15:18-19: “But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man ‘unclean.’ For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander.”
  • Matthew 22:37: “Jesus replied: ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'”
  • Mark 7:1-23: (excerpt) “‘Don’t you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him “unclean”? For it doesn’t go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body…. What comes out of a man is what makes him “unclean.” For from within, out of men’s hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these evils come from inside and make a man “unclean.”‘”
  • Luke 10:27: “[Jesus] answered: ‘”Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind” and, “Love your neighbor as yourself.”‘”
  • Romans 12:1-2: Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God—this is your spiritual act of worship. Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.
  • Romans 8:5-6: “Those who live according to the sinful nature have their minds set on what that nature desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace.”
  • 1 Corinthians 2:11-12: “For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man’s spirit within him? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us.”
  • 1 Corinthians 2:15-16: “The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man’s judgment: ‘For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him?’ But we have the mind of Christ.”
  • Ephesians 4:22-23: “You were taught, with regard to your former way of life, to put off your old self, which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires; to be made new in the attitude of your minds.”
  • Philippians 4:4-9: “Rejoice in the Lord always. I will say it again: Rejoice! Let your gentleness be evident to all. The Lord is near. Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus. Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things. Whatever you have learned or received or heard from me, or seen in me—put it into practice. And the God of peace will be with you.”
  • Colossians 3:2: “Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things.”
  • 1 Peter 1:13-16: “Therefore, prepare your minds for action; be self-controlled; set your hope fully on the grace to be given you when Jesus Christ is revealed. As obedient children, do not conform to the evil desires you had when you lived in ignorance. But just as he who called you is holy, so be holy in all you do; for it is written: ‘Be holy, because I am holy.'”

Steven F. then called for some clarification in my writing, noting:

I assume when you reference “violence”, you were referring to the Mortal Kombat style violence? If not, and you mean any form of violence… we may need to start censoring our Bibles.

Thanks for joining the conversation, Steve, and “Howdy!”, by the way, it’s good to hear from you again!

You’re right, my terms deserve a little clarification. In the context of video games, by using the term “violent,” I am primarily thinking of actions taken by a gamer causing intentional harm to a “humanoid” opponent.

I could make an argument that “violence” could also include intentional harm to the game’s virtual “environment” but that is not my principle concern–though it might be for some. I restrict the scope of the term to “humanoid” opponents because I don’t think that firing missiles at an animated starship, or moving virtual armies into strategic position qualify as the sort of mental rehearsal that is most damaging. By analogy, I think it’s more harmful to play “House of the Dead” where characters fire a light-gun at zombified humans and other creatures than it is to play a simple target practice game–or even go to a firing range with live rounds. It’s not the action of targeting and shooting that erodes one’s resistance to violence in this case, it’s the virtual acting-out of violence against other human-like game characters. That doesn’t mean I give a pass to games featuring sexual innuendo and felonious pursuits aren’t also dangerous–they are, but that falls under a different concern of moral and mental health that violence in itself.

(Though I will admit that “Typing of the Dead” does confuse my moral categories–it’s just as dark and violent as its progenitor, but it rehearses skills more useful in the office than on the firing range!)

I’ve run the usual course of teenage and young-adult gaming addictions like many my age and younger. I started out with Atari, of course, in middle school. Then I discovered Dungeons & Dragons (not a video game, but morally debilitating in its own way) and finally dropped it after realizing what it was doing to my thinking. I plunked hundreds of dollars of quarters down the arcade mouths through high school gorging myself on the relatively tame Asteroids, Galaga, and PacMan brood and when the light gun games came out, I wore blisters on my fingers shooting dead zombies, terrorists, and radiation-bathed mutants. I spent sleepless nights playing various real-time-strategy games and living virtual lives as a developing tycoon with SimCity and variants. Today, I own an aging PlayStation2 but, honestly, I cannot bring myself to buy truly violent games to play. I don’t like what it does to my thinking. Instead, I’m happy mastering the course on a virtual all-terrain-vehicle or skiing the slopes in SSX.

But even with my tame, un-hip games, I’m all too aware of how conflict against another virtual human in the game makes it all the more addictive. Even in these games there is the temptation (even the necessity) of doing violence against the other characters in order to win. To be sure, this is a weaker class of violence than the outright removal of a pulsing virtual heart, but what does it do to our souls to play these games to such an extent that we bring a “gamers” mentality to the rest of our lives? Where does winning at any cost fit into the gospel? When the thrill of victory while sitting in my easy chair sets my heart to pumping–and I seek it out every night–what room have I left for the thrill of service, the joy of generosity, the delight of giving comfort and aid to the lonely and hurting?

Video games of almost all stripes fill a void in our over-fed, middle-class lives. And I suspect it’s a hole better filled with a life in the Spirit than a life on screen.

Regards,

Rich.
BlogRodent

[tags]BlogRodent, video-games, gaming, violence, violence-in-the-media, morality, mental-rehearsing, visualization, imagination, killology, david-grossman, mortal-kombat, media, addiction[/tags]

Video Games: Violence In, Violence Out?

Links, Rage and Rants, Religion

This is a repost of a recent article for CTLibrary.com. Enjoy, and please post your reactions. (For a related post, see, “Violence and Entertainment.”)

Is mounting teen violence evidence of the effects of violent video games?
CHRISTIANITY TODAY LIBRARY | RICHARD TATUM | JULY 31, 2006

On Tuesday, March 24, 1998, two cousins, aged 13 and 11, soldiered up. Donning camouflage and armed with handguns and rifles, they hid in the trees near Westside Middle School in Jonesboro, Arkansas, while an accomplice set off the school’s fire alarm. The ambush came off with military perfection: firing only 27 shots, the juvenile commandos killed 4 middle-school girls, 1 teacher, and wounded 11 others fleeing the building.

While most planned acts of violence in school are probably foiled, many attempts have been successful in recent years, including several well-publicized events. Beyond the immediate tragedy and bloody aftermath, one troubling aspect of these events is the lack of a profile for children prone to violence. Apparently, children “snap” into violence, and there’s simply no predicting the fracture.

But something is clearly causing a “tipping point,” driving children to violence in increasing numbers. The catalyst, many say, is violent media — specifically, gory video games that desensitize players to violence, train them in deadly shooting skills, and reward killing without consequences.

Continue reading Video Games: Violence In, Violence Out? →

Half of all Christian men hooked on porn? Oh, come on…

Rage and Rants, Religion

Okay, this is just irresponsible.

ChristiaNet, billing itself as “the world’s most visited Christian website” recently offered a web-based survey asking visitors to answer “eleven questions about their personal sexual conduct.” A press release from ChistiaNet trumpeted the results.

After receiving 1,000 results, ChristaNet asked Second Glance Ministries to help evaluate the responses:

“The poll results indicate that 50% of all Christian men and 20% of all Christian women are addicted to pornography.”

Further:

  • 60% of the women have significant struggles with lust
  • 40% of the women committed sexual sin in the past year
  • 20% of church-going women struggle with looking at pornography on an ongoing basis

This is nuts. These survey results are not scientific data. I don’t believe for a second that one of every two Christian men are addicted to porn, and I certainly don’t buy the assertion that one of every five Christian women are hooked either.

What you have here is a Christian website using the flaky results of an online poll to trumpet their domain name via a press release with controversial data, and thereby smearing Christians and Christianity in the process. Here’s one the thing you have to know about any online poll: the respondents are self-selecting.

Take a large sample of randomly selected people and I’d be more likely to admit the results are useful and worth interpreting. But when you offer up a sexual survey to website visitors (who may or may not be Christian–however you define the term) you have no control over your sample selection. Randomness disappears and you wind up having data not about Christians in general, but about the kind of people who would fill out a sexuality survey online.

George Barna would be livid.

Speaking of Barna, how about some data from a real sociologist who conducts surveys with scientific precision. Note the following:

“People’s views on morally acceptable behavior are deeply impacted by their worldview. Upon comparing the perspectives of those who have a biblical worldview with those who do not … less than one-half of one percent of those with a biblical worldview said voluntary exposure to pornography was morally acceptable (compared to 39% of other adults).” [Source: “A Biblical Worldview Has a Radical Effect on a Person’s Life“]

“One of the key indicators of the changing values of Americans relates to the nation’s comfort with pornography. Half of all adults stated that watching a movie with explicit sexual behavior is morally acceptable. That view was shared by three out of ten born again adults. In like fashion, more than four out of ten adults (43%) claimed that reading magazines with explicit sexual pictures and nudity is morally acceptable. Half as many of the born again adults embraced that perspective (21%).” [Source: “Practical Outcomes Replace Biblical Principles As the Moral Standard“]

Watching a movie with explicit sexual behavior is morally acceptable

     49%: all adults
     44%: mainline
     33%: not-mainline
     33%: regularly attend church
     29%: born again

Reading a magazine with nudity or explicit sexual pictures is morally acceptable

     43%: all adults
     42%: mainline
     25%: not-mainline
     26%: regularly attend church
     21%: born again

 [Source: “Practical Outcomes Replace Biblical Principles As the Moral Standard“]

Now, I’ll be among the first in line to say that the Church is not what she should be, and that there are probably many attending church to whom Christ will say, “Depart from me, I do not know you.” I’ll grant that pornography usage and sexual sin is a going concern in any church. But I simply cannot square Barna’s findings with ChristiaNet’s. To me, it simply looks like ChristiaNet asked some salacious questions and is using the results for press without really questioning the nature of the survey sample.

Sorry for the rant. I just hate it when stats and numbers are bent with agendas, or when they’re not presented with a fuller context.

Rich.

[tags]BlogRodent, Christianity, religion, Evangelical, porn, pornography, lust, sin, demographics, statistics, survey, poll, bad-statistics, integrity, integrity-on-the-internet[/tags]

The Apprentice: Ten Leadership Lessons I Learned

Links, Rage and Rants, Random Miscellany

The DonaldI’ve been watching NBC’s Trumpfest, The Apprentice, since it began four seasons ago. At first I watched because it was a Burnett production, and my wife and I were enjoying Survivor. So, we figured since Mark Burnett was the wunderkind of unReality TV, it would be worth a watch. Now in its fifth season, my wife has stopped watching, but I still catch it on Tivo.

I’m not a particular fan of Donald Trump, conspicuous consumption, materialism, the almighty dollar, cut-throat business dealings, white-collar back-stabbing, greed, jealousy, petty rivalries, or getting fired. Its not entirely schadenfreude—the joy of watching others experience pain—it’s more like the fascination of seeing justice served when incompetent workers get axed mixed with cheers for the scrappy underdog I want to win. Whatever the source of my fascination, I’m surprised my date with Donald has lasted into the fifth season. But it’s not about Donald. Not for me. I couldn’t care less how financially successful he is: his opulent lifestyle alternately bores and sickens me. And I just don’t “get” the awe these Trump-ites hold for him. No, it’s not Trump. I watch each episode with horror thinking, How can the head of any corporation possibly think these knuckle-draggers have what it takes to run a food pantry, much less a major enterprise? Each week is another slow, sweaty train-wreck, and I can’t look away.

I think, of all the seasons so far, the only one where I really cared about the finale and who won, was last Randall Pinkett, Apprentice winneryear, when the scary-smart, charming, Southern Baptist, Randal Pinkett, was chosen to be the apprentice. I had been pulling for him the entire season, seeing in him a young man with great emotional intelligence matched with good practical intelligence as well. That he was charming, handsome, affable, and a natural leader with clear integrity were all pluses. I thought he might be a believer, and when it was confirmed I was intrigued. What would motivate a brilliant young Christian to follow after a materialistic, ego-driven, business superstar? I rooted for him, but I also admired his finale competitor Rebecca Jarvis. In the end, Trump hired Randal—and when Randal was given the unique opportunity to bring Rebecca on-board as well, he balked. “This isn’t The Apprenti.” Apparently, there can be only one, in Randal’s book—despite his three predecessors. My respect for him took a temporary nosedive, and I was confused (but see Randal’s blog entry). So were others.

Values are a tricky thing and it’s hard to judge, from a distance, through the lens of selectively edited video, anything that was going on there. But, strangely, it’s no easier figuring out what’s going on in my own office. Working with normal, everyday people is fraught with misunderstandings, presumptions, biased conclusions, and misperceptions.

Throughout the five seasons I have watched each episode, taking mental notes. Note to self: don’t bad-mouth coworkers; I never know when they’re going to turn out to be an ally, a friend, or a motivated enemy, and it’s just plain mean. Or, Note to self: life doesn’t always come in binary yes-and-no, “hired” or “fired” dichotomies. Sometimes everybody wins. Sometimes everybody loses. Sometimes it’s hard to tell the two apart. In each season I saw a microcosm of the workaday world, with rivalries, jealousies, pettiness, and ego writ large. For me, The Apprentice is a little more than a reality game-show … it’s also a weekly lesson on what makes good leadership.

To that end, I offer ten lessons I’ve learned, in no particular order. These are not the only observations I’ve had, but I gotta draw the line somewhere. So these are the ten you get.

Continue reading The Apprentice: Ten Leadership Lessons I Learned →

Fatal Sincerity: Our complicit silence when heresy speaks

Assembly of God, Pentecostal, Rage and Rants, Religion

Recently, on an A/G forum I participate in, somebody raised a question about Paula White, and several folks jumped in to offer their opinions. Some way through the discussion, we received this contribution from a long-time member of the group who is a seasoned minister in the Assemblies of God. He begins with a very brief critique of Paula White in response to the questioner, but then expands on some ideas about what Paula White and her colleagues represent as a trend in the Pentecostal and charismatic tradition.

I thought it was too good and on-point a post to share. Not because it slams the A/G … Mark loves the A/G and is a faithful minister within our Fellowship. But this is a timely and critical warning. I think Mark speaks the truth, and we should heed it. This is why we have the Carlton D. Pearson’s of the Church promoting heresy and unusual doctrine.

Read on.

Continue reading Fatal Sincerity: Our complicit silence when heresy speaks →

Eichenwald blasts bloggers. Is that a fact or is he reporting again?

Blogging, Rage and Rants, Random Miscellany

Kurt EichenwaldYou may remember how New York Times reporter Kurt Eichenwald discovered the seedy world of teenage webcam porn, and how his investigation became personal when he encouraged the subject he was interviewing—Justin Berry—to give up his sordid life, turn State’s evidence, and kick drugs. Eichenwald has since been in the hot seat for violating traditional journalistic ethics in that he became part of the story. Some claim he lost his objectivity and tarnished his legitimacy as a reporter not a story-maker by becoming personally involved and influencing the story. Eichenwald’s response is straightforward and direct: journalism doesn’t mean “we are required to check our humanity at the door.”

So, being in the eye of the ethical storm he can, presumably, objectively report on the conditions there. He recently gave an ethics lecture at Marquette University, titled, “A Delicate Balance: Objective Journalist, Engaged Citizen.”

Apparently, at some point, Eichenwald spun a riff about the difference between blogging and journalism:

Eichenwald said that while he was involved in Berry’s case, his writing has always been objective. He began his lecture by saying that journalists should keep their thoughts and their opinions out of their published work.

“When I’m talking about the difference between facts and truth, facts and knowledge, it’s the difference between a journalist and a blogger,” Eichenwald said. “A journalist is dealing in facts. Bloggers deal in their own truths, which may or may not be based on facts.”

Okay. Eichenwald’s a bright guy. I respect him, think he’s a fine writer, and a brilliant investigator. And while opinion and commentary do not a journalist make, he’s got his head in the proverbial sand if he thinks journalism doesn’t by nature convey opinion.

Every journalist, every writer, every blogger, diarist, podcaster, speech-writer, novelist, essayist, and every five-year-old with finger-paint-stained digits brings to his or her work a point of view that is unique to that person. No matter how objective one tries to be, it is impossible to escape the subjectivity of one’s own point of view. The selection of a story, alone, betrays objectivity. When a train crashes one reporter focuses on the engineer’s safety record while another focuses on maintenance records. Both reporters may actually dig up objective facts, but the very selection of which facts pursue imply an opinion and point of view. Then there’s the relative weighting of various facts against the other, the decisions over what information to leave out, what to put back in, what to open with, bury in the middle, or close with. Which third-party quotes to use—and let’s not forget how quotes can be inadvertently or intentionally skewed by the attitude and eloquence of the interviewer.

I could recite more here, besides. But consider an example recently cited in GetReligion.org, “But she was wearing a short skirt…”

“Rahman, 40, has become the poster boy for the Christian right and for religious freedom. Closer up, however, the picture painted by the local police who arrested him shows a candidate not quite ready for family values. Rather, a portrait emerges of a deadbeat dad with psychological problems who couldn’t hold down a job, abused his daughters and parents and didn’t pay child support.”

The quote comes from Rachel Morarjee, writing for Time magazine “Abdul Rahman’s Family Values.” GetReligion writer Mollie Ziegler questions the slant of the piece, revealing how just “reporting the facts” doesn’t avoid bias, spin, and opinion:

First, what is this “poster boy for the Christian right” business? Does the Christian left not care about Rahman’s fate? Or, if it does, does it get to be camped in the religious freedom camp? Why, then, does the Christian right get its own nonreligious freedom category?

Second, for all we know, these scandalous accusations against Rahman could be true. For all we know, for that matter, Rahman could have tortured small animals, robbed dying widows and taunted disabled children. But last time I checked, Rahman was not facing a death sentence for being unemployed, etc. He was facing a death sentence for converting from Islam. Printing the allegations, which have nothing to do with the international outrage his plight has caused, is about as appropriate as printing the sexual history of a rape victim.

No one was arguing that Rahman should live because he was a good person. Instead, people were arguing that Rahman should not be killed for converting from Islam. While more information about Rahman is needed and desirable, I’m not sure statements from the police reports that led to his life-threatening situation are the best character witnesses. What’s more, the reporter never speaks with anyone who may find the police statements questionable. She also never speaks with anyone who thinks the allegations are irrelevant to the Muslim apostasy problem. It bears repeating that this issue is not going away just because the Italian government provided Rahman with sanctuary.

Let’s face reality, Kurt, and own up to the truth: News is not objective. Now, say it with me, “News is not objective.” Repeat it … once more … “News is not objective!”

Now, admittedly, that’s only my opinion. I could be wrong. But since I’m just a blogger, all I need is “my own truth.”

Links:

[tags]Abdul-Rahman, bloggers, blogging, BlogRodent, commentary, ethics, GetReligion.org, journalism, Kurt-Eichenwald, Mollie-Ziegler, Time-magazine[/tags]

Cheap Grace: Pimp my gospel!

Bible and Theology, Rage and Rants, Random Miscellany, Religion

The editors of Leadership journal have posted another incisive commentary on the state of the Church today in their Out of Ur weblog. It’s about how we (in the Western church) have turned the gospel into a pimping enterprise. There’s nothing really new here, it’s the same complaint Bonhoeffer had about “cheap grace.” But the language is, well, provocative. From church planter Jonathan Yarboro:

Continue reading Cheap Grace: Pimp my gospel! →

Latest on Golden Murder

Assembly of God, Pentecostal, Rage and Rants, Religion

Previously:

On Wednesday, February 15, WSAV News reported that Eric Brian Golden, the 35–year-old Southside Assembly of God youth pastor who killed his wife, was formally indicted on several charges in Chatham County, Georgia (in Savannah). According to the Chatham County Courhouse website, the case was filed on the 15th, and the next event will be a conference hearing on April 20. Hon. Perry Brannen, Jr., is the judge, and Golden is being defended by attorney John P. Sugrue.

I don’t know what is typically accomplished at a conference hearing in Georgia criminal courts, but from what I’ve read about other kinds of conference hearings, it will probably provide an opportunity for the court to do some quick work and avoid a trial and also review and litigate possible appeal issues such as how the arrest and confession were handled, and so fort. Since Brian Golden has confessed, unless his confession is recanted or unless there is some critical need to spend taxpayer’s money for a court case, I suspect there may not be one. However, as you can see, Brian has an attorney now (and he didn’t when he made his initial confession), so, who knows?

Continue reading Latest on Golden Murder →