I’m sorry, but I really need to deconstruct this….

Some people follow sports, some follow reality television, some follow the news and the markets, while others, like myself, have in their quiver of interests more obscure fascinations.  So….I still occasionally observe the going’s on of a growing ecclesiastic franchise  that was fundamental in shaping, both for good and ill, my perspective of the church-scape of America.

Yes, I am again pontificating on the business-driven corporate culture of the megachurch, specifically as represented by NewSpring.

About once or twice a month, I make a point to visit Perry Noble’s blog, just to see which way the wind is blowing at that particular place. Just recently, I found this gem of insight, Two Types of Church Planters, wherein Noble, artificially and self-servingly I think, bifurcates church planters into two groups, those with The Victim Mentality and those with The Victory Mentality, a success-driven framework that would make any C.E.O., or L.Ron Hubbard for that matter, proud.

What I find in Noble’s post is an abject lack of anything resembling grace and humility, but more of an American and business-like ‘just pull yourself up by your own bootstraps,’ attitude that stands in sharp contrast to the Christian ethos of generosity, humility, and mercy. Perry infers that he and his church did it, got successful without outside help or handouts, and it is inferred, so should you. Such attitudes are understandable because you generally do not expect quiet mercy and grace from a measurable-driven corporate entity, and that is exactly the foundation upon which so many American churches set themselves.

My overarching question to Perry is this: Good for you that you never had to humble yourself to ask for ‘hand-outs’ or discounts, but how did your acquire the funds to grow your church and to attend those ubiquitous ‘leadership’ conferences to begin with? I will tell you. You shilled for funds and then people gave you money in the form of tithes and donations. You did not design a product and sell it on the market to make a profit so as to use said profits to fund your excursions. So, how dare you chastise a poor, struggling church plant, essentially call them losers, that dares ask your multimillion dollar church for help. What one finds in Perry’s post is a breath-taking example of hypocrisy and pride. Quite frankly, I think a Divine favor has been set upon a church that they should not be able to attend one of Noble’s business/leadership seminars.

Ultimately, the hyper-focus on business-driven, and often narcissistic, leadership skills and the elevating of tangible measurables as an indicator of success leads a church to a place of arrogance and pride. The counting of ‘salivations’ is ultimately not the job of the church. Such is reserved by God for the angels on the day when wheat and chaff are separated. It may be bold hubris on the part of a church to take that task upon themselves so as to measure the success of their efforts and methods.

Further, the measuring of a persons righteousness by the percentage of their income given to a church is wrong on so many levels that I could exhaust hours on the subject, but so many churches do just that, teaching an errant doctrine of tithing, using inferred condemnation upon the already-redeemed Christian as a manipulative catalyst for giving in order to increase the bottom line of the business. Income is an easy measurable. Ask yourself this, if you attend NewSpring, how many times, in the course of a year, do you hear a message on tithing. When I attended, I would roughly estimate I heard a tithing message at least six times a year.

Sadly, many aspiring and eager church planters, seeing the growth, glamor, and success, seek in good intention to model their churches and methods after NewSpring, Elevation, and fellow travelers. (As an aside, if Elevation’s Code does not make the Christian nervous, make one squirm, over their somewhat cultic proclamations, especially that ‘pastor’s vision’ thing, nothing will. It deserves it’s own polemic post) Quite honestly, these franchises are not always wrong in all they do all the time. I believe you will find many therein who are fervent in their love for the Messiah. That all being said, one cannot give a pass to those who are fundamentally redefining the nature of  the church. I think, on the day of Judgement, there will be some small church in some big city that never grew large numerically but was faithful in their selfless caring for one another, that did not compromise the Gospel, that did not sacrifice orthopraxy on the altar of pragmatism, that will be far more highly exalted in the Kingdom that some multi-campus megachurch video franchise that lost sight of the fact that the Messiah is our faithful Shepherd gently tending after His sheep rather than an example of cooperate American leadership.

In closure, it is so interesting that NewSpring has ‘ownership’ classes rather than membership classes wherein you can speak to other ‘owners’. More disturbing business-speak. I thought Jesus was the ‘owner’ of His bride.

Something other than the floodgates of heaven opened….

I have been going to a local gigachurch for the last few months, and they sure do preach quite a bit about tithing. Since I didn’t want God to curse me like the preacher said God would do if I did not tithe, I studied up on this tithe thing a little bit and decided to give it a go. Also, and perhaps more importantly, I wanted to see if God would bless me with stuff, overflowing and such, if I did tithe.

On a recent Sunday, during one of the afternoon services, me and my boys, Malachi, Jebediah, Jeremiah, Obadiah, Ebenezer, and Bruce culled the best of our herd of cattle, and some of the other critters from the farm, too, and loaded them up into the cattle trailer. When we got to the church Sunday afternoon, we commenced to unload the cattle and sheep and chickens while sending young Obadiah off to find the churches’ preacher to check out our tithes for flaws like the priests did in the Old Testament. I sent out Ebenezer, the elder son, to look for the storehouse where they keep the tithes, but he could not find it. None of the volunteers that helped us park in the guest parking area knew anything about a storehouse for our tithes. Soon, church security showed up. I thought they were there to help us round up our tithe and help herd them to that hard to find storehouse as they, the cattle and such, were getting restless. I believe church security was a bit unsettled when they arrived at the scene of the tithe, too.

Given the amount of time that had passed since arriving at church and unloading our tithe, the parking lot was getting a bit messy, too, what with the 96°F temperature and the hot asphalt. ‘Nuff said about that, if you know what I mean. Needless to say and cutting to the chase, things did not go as well as I planned, and we still haven’t rounded up Helga, our best milk cow. What I do not understand is this, if some churches are so big on tithing, how come they are so inept​?

Jesus Christ erased all our sins and shouldered all our sorrows

I found the following quote from Harold Senkbeil embedded in a blog post titled We Are Seasoned Do-It-Yourselfers by Tullian Tchividjian (pronounced cha-vi-jin) and thought it noteworthy.

Our Heavenly Father attaches no strings to His love. His love for us doesn’t depend on our love for others. Our relationship with the Father was established long ago, in the body and blood of His Son. Jesus Christ erased all our sins and shouldered all our sorrows. Already now we have a solid relationship with our heavenly Father; there’s no need to fret about it. That relationship doesn’t depend on our love for Him, but on His love for us. It hinges on the Gospel of God, not the Law of God…Again, the Old Adam betrays us. Our sinful nature would much rather hear Law than Gospel. The sinful nature is a seasoned do-it-yourselfer. We’d rather know what we should do, yet God insists on telling us who we are. The best way to tell you what to do as a Christian is to tell you who you are in Christ. The sinful nature likes to think it can earn (and keep) God’s favor. Our Old Adam prefers to base security with God the Father on His Law rather than His Gospel.

What a fragrant balm to the soul, what sweet rest one finds in the Gospel. I compare the aforementioned quote to what I listened to yesterday, a podcast from Fighting for the Faith that featured a guest pastor from a megachurch in Texas named Robert Morris who spoke at NewSpring Church on May 15  in Anderson, SC, my hometown.  If you listen to this ‘sermon‘, you find soon after 1:07,  Morris stating that by your tithing, the curse on your finances is removed. What a confusion of Law and Gospel.  My heart grieves for those swayed by such manipulative messages.

A Narcissistic Bride

On the often misplaced focus of much of the attractional church

To state the obvious, words matter. They give shape and substance to ideas, and ideas, when put into play, often have far-ranging influence. As an observer of the ecclesiastic landscape of the American church, I find myself grieved and dismayed by the subtly misplaced focus of many in the latest iteration of entrepreneurial church leaders. I think that the root of the problem may be found in the phraseology used to describe those they are attempting to attract. The particular term I have in mind is ‘unchurched.’ In reading the prominent leaders in church growth circles, one finds admirable evangelical admonitions to reach the community, but those that need reaching are most often described as the ‘unchurched’. The clear inference by the terminology, maybe intentional, but maybe not, is that the solution to being unchurched is to get people ‘churched,’ terminology not found in the Bible.

There was at time, not so very long ago, when biblical language was used to describe those to whom the Gospel was to be sent. Those not redeemed by Christ, people who had not heard the good news of a resurrected Savior, were described as lost, as pagans, as a field where the Gospel seed needed to be sowed. Today, the rhetoric is much softer, much less offensive. The ones needing the Gospel are often described as being ‘far from God’ with the inferred task of the Church being that of a guide tasked to lead those far from God near to Him. The biblical language, however, never mirrors the inoffensive language of contemporary evangelism. Rather than being described as far from God, the unregenerate are described as being spiritually dead, as being lost in sins and trespass. Rather than being described as seekers, they are described in the Bible as being rebels, as being hostile the God of the Bible. They may be seeking a god, but the god they look for is not the Triune God revealed in the text of the Old and New Testament. The so-called unchurched do not need church, they need a risen Savior. The redeemed in Christ are the church. The Sunday gatherings are for the redeemed to be fed from the word by an under-shepherd, a pastor.

The world wants to hear what it needs to do to approach a god and what that god will do for them – in the here and now – in return. However, the offense of the Gospel is that you are helpless, that you can do nothing, that it all has been done for you, that it had to be done for you. The offense is that you cannot even choose God if left to your own devices. Unfortunately, in seeking to avoid unnecessary offense, there is an over-reaching that leads to a place where the real and cutting edge of the Gospel is often dulled to make it often impotently palatable to the so-called unchurched.

Further issues seep to the top of this linguistic morass. The very nature of the Church, the bride of Christ is redefined in this evangelical linguistic sleight of hand. If the problem is that many of the community are unchurched, then the solution to the problem, as aforementioned, is to get them involved in church life, to get them churched. To get the unchurched into church requires clever marketing and content relevant to meeting the felt needs of the unchurched, a tactic that may often lead to the eradication of the true offense of the Gospel. The real and present danger is that the church may become, without intention, the de facto savior. The church helps you fix your money problems. The church helps you fix your relational problems. The church helps you overcome your addictions. Jesus is mentioned, but sometimes, and I think without intent, only as one attraction among others. When you listen to video testimonies recorded by many churches, you so often hear people speak of how they found their meaning, their help, their restoration at their church…and Jesus saved them, too. From what they are saved from is not often made clear in these testimonies. I have even heard testimonies where the ones sharing their story actually proclaim that their church saved them.

Rather than preaching, rather than expositing the text of the Bible and tending to the flock as did pastors from the birth of the church, the new breed focuses on their leadership skills, often at the expense of their Biblically mandated pastoral duties. Rather than partaking of a rich biblical meal served up by a scholar/pastor, everyone is exhorted by the CEO/leader to shape up and get with the program. If you expect to get fed by him, shame on you. You need to quit being selfish. You need to get busy and volunteer for this, volunteer for that, get out and shill for the church. Fill up those seats. Get people in the door by giving away prizes, by putting on cheap knock-offs of television shows like ‘Deal Or No Deal’ during the sermon. Start the service by having the band play some twenty year old hair band heavy metal song or some honky-tonk drinking song. I have seen all these antics first hand. With great and unintentional irony, those who wish for more substance in the preaching, who hunger for something beyond the constant rotation of sermons on money and relationships, on how to reach their full potential, are the ones disparaging labeled as consumers. Sometimes sheep are starved and goats are entertained.

As a not so subtle segueway from the previous statement, the interesting thing is that these methods and messages seem work at their intended task of getting people outside the church inside the church. What happens once inside and embedded in this church culture is that you become worker in an organization more than a member of a family. I have heard some in this cadre of leadership state that Jesus has saved you, but the rest is up to you, so get busy! I have also heard these leaders state that their leadership is more important than their preachership, and that is a true statement in context with the newly and errantly redefined church. Rather than sheep that need shepherding, the church attendees are seen as a potential pool of free labor, volunteers that need leadership to enable them to perform efficiently. The internal structure of the organization is not unlike that of any number of successful secular businesses. Too, as a business, these churches are successful. Many have, in leveraging technology to grow multi-site video campuses, become franchises. They market their brand, their pastor, with great acumen. The metrics are easily understood and tracked. It is a game of numbers, both in bodies and money. If both grow, then success is evident. If both do not grow, then the leader tweaks the organizational machine, firing or hiring, so that the output increases. It all becomes performance driven rather than grace driven.

At the end, where does it all lead? I think the answer is found in this post from the influential pastor/CEO Perry Noble of NewSpring Church which ends with this question: “Here comes the BRIDE…is your focus on her?”

If you can, Christian, tell me what is wrong with that question. I will tell you as to where the focus should be: the Bridegroom. Let your mind linger for a while on this image of a bride fascinated with her own beauty as the Bridegroom waits for his bride to tear herself away from the mirror. Behold, He is standing at the door knocking as she becomes lost in her thoughts of finding innovative ways to to market herself to the world.

Addendum 9/18/10
I stumbled upon this video  at FBC Jax Watchdog that validates some of assertions made in this post, especially in the member vs. owner language.  Here you find a mix of core truth and  egregious error.   Much more could be said, but for now, watch and weep…

Grace seems to have taken a holiday from the church…

Addendum….

This post, written upon leaving NewSpring, may be of interest…

Do they regard Jesus to be mistaken when He Spoke to Peter?

Following are some quotes from pastors and church planters, some of whom are quite influential, some who’s star is on the rise, some who will probably continue their pastorate in relative anonymity. Almost without exception, all belong to the attactional, marketing driven, ‘seeker-sensitive church’ movement. Before we continue, you may wonder about my motivation behind this post; I have to honestly examine and question myself a bit on that point, too. Am I desiring the hurt these pastors? Do I have some destructive vendetta against their respective churches? Do I infer that those being quoted are always wrong in all they do and say and that they always operate from less than honorable motivations? The answers are thus: No, I do not want to hurt these pastors, and no, I do not operate from some desire to carry out a vendetta. I have attended a couple of the churches and know that they have good intentions. As an aside, I am, however, getting to the point where I no longer care about the intentions of individuals in positions of pastoral leadership within the visible church when matters of truth and error regarding the fundamental nature of the church, of the historic nature of the faith, is involved. We are not talking about what type of music is to played in the church or what color carpet is to be purchased for the church office. We are talking about the core responsibilities of a pastor.

Why then do I post these thoughts? First and foremost, this increasing common attitude towards pastoral responsibility represented by the following quotes grieves me to my core. Beyond these handful of quotes, I have also listened to sermons that carry the same message of disdain for the spiritually hungry, that proclaim the pastors abdication of his responsibility to feed the flock.

I struggled with the question of if I should publish this post (I feel as if I have already beat this subject to death). I also struggled with the question of providing links within the following quotes. While there is always the question of a quote being taken out of context on my part, I do not feel very comfortable bringing this post to a personal level; I prefer anonymity for those referred to because I do not know the men whom I quote though I have either read or listened to most of them. However, their words are already in the public domain for all the world to read, and any who should peruse through this post will have the context available. My concerns are more in regard to the methodology that breeds such attitudes rather the character of the individuals who hold to such attitudes and methodologies. That being said, here are their words with a few more of my thoughts on the other side of this post.

#3 – The “Feed Me” Person I have never been able to keep one of these people around…ever! You know the drill…they always come from another church (they weren’t being fed there either) and they want you to know that they are sincerely seeking a church that teaches the Bible (and they will stay as long as you teach THEIR VERSION of the Bible.) But, if they become displeased with the sermon direction…or dissatisfied with your particular view on a theological issue…or convicted of not doing what they know they should be doing-they will say you are not feeding them and leave. Pastor, being honest here…I’ve NEVER encountered a person who claimed they weren’t being fed that also had a dynamic personal walk with Jesus. If that were true then they would show up to the church FULL and not need to latch on to the breast! It’s not our job to feed-but to lead to places where food can be found. (Emphasis mine. Perhaps church is the a biblically ordained place where food should be found and served.)


I hope my point that this abdication of pastoral responsibility is not as unique or odd as one might think. So many churches are unbiblically redefining the nature of church. No longer is church for those in the faith, those redeemed by the blood of the Christ, but rather it is more for those who, as more than one pastor has inferred, want to kick the tires of this Christianity thing.

As a follower of Jesus Christ WE have the responsibility to fill our tanks. It bothers me when a Christian makes a comment about a church and says, “I wasn’t getting fed there…” News flash-it’s not the churches job to feed you !!! Let me explain…

I’ve heard it…you have too… “Christians” saying, “I just want to be fed!” It blows my mind! This would be equal to you and I going to an all you can eat restaurant and crying because no one would bring us any food. Food is all around in this environment…but if the person is lazy and self centered, wanting to be waited on hand and foot, then they could possibly starve to death when food is merely a few feet away.

The mission is not to feed – but to train.

We all know that one of top 3 reasons people leave churches is the (infamous) claim:“I wasn’t getting fed there. ” Maybe you weren’t. Or maybe the church set the table, presented the bread of life, and you were too stinking lazy to bring it back to your mouth, chew it, swallow, and digest it, like a big boy. (emphasis mine)

What people say “I just want some deeper teaching.” Alternate version:”I want the meat.” Alternate version #2: “I need to be fed.” What that usually means Don’t preach practical stuff to me. I would actually have to do something about it.

“Waaaaa. I’m Not Getting Fed” (Part 1) I thought I’d share a few thoughts on the battle cry of my least favorite people, the church hoppers, shoppers, floppers, and stoppers … “I’m not getting fed.”

And so … stop giving me your “I’m not getting fed” crap and go home and spend lots of time face-to-face with God, and you WILL grow in intimacy with Him. And then you’ll realize that there’s something far better than knowing about God, and it’s knowing God. (Sorry, I lost it there for a minute.)

Erwin McManus, pastor of Mosaic: “Christians are bolemic (sic): they starve themselves all week and expect to gorge each Sunday. My goal is not to feed the sheep; but to make them hungry and teach them to feed themselves.” (Erwin is also perhaps more an emergent than a seeker-sensitive though both camps sometimes refer to him. Also, I have found this quote on numerous sites and blogs)

From JDGreear.com reflecting on a meeting with McManus at North Carolina Baptist State Evangelism Conference wherein he quotes McManus: “Christians who have followed God for several years who are still asking to be discipled are factory defects (emphasis mine). The dough isn’t rising. Spend your time with a more profitable audience.” (As an aside, the previous quote is in no way intended as a reflection or commentary on JDGreear.com.)

#3 Preach short sermons
Howard Hendricks used to say, “Keep them longing, not loathing.” I buy into that philosophy. I try to speak anywhere between 21 and 26 minutes max. That drives church hoppers nuts because they want to “be fed.” I’m not interested in “feeding people” unless they are in the early stages of their spiritual journey.

Here is what I mean. On Sundays, when I speak. My goal is to create more questions and show my church where to find the answers.

To do that, Bill (Hybles) continued, we need to help people “right-size” what they should expect from the church. The reason that the seasoned believers are more dissatisfied is because they still expect the church to be feeding them . They haven’t been taught to feed themselves. (As an aside, Bill impresses me as being a humble servant. From what I gather, I believe he may be having a change of heart, a change of mind, regarding some issues of church methodology.)

John 21:15

When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon son of John, do you truly love me more than these?” “Yes, Lord,” he said, “you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Feed my lambs.”

 

I would love for some of the men quoted above to tell me again how it is not their responsibility to feed the sheep and then tell me how much they really love Jesus. Those difficult and hungry sheep, how do you react to them? With arrogance and disdain or with patience, grace, and love….and discipline when necessary? What is more an antithesis to Christ-likeness than arrogance? How, to what extent, has the Christ poured His graced upon you? What, then, do you feed the flock – milk, candy, and all to often, a thinly veiled performance-driven legalism lite followed by some vague exhortation to make Jesus famous? How do you teach them about dying to self, a daily taking up of one’s cross, when the church all to often resorts to doing back flips to entertain those who enter through the door? How can you teach the flock – with any shred of integrity – patience, mercy, and love when you hold hungry, imperfect, sheep in contempt? I absolutely affirm and understand the need to spend time in the Bible and in prayer and to live out our faith, but under-shepherds are, without any ambiguity whatsoever, charged to protect and feed the flock. Too many fall short at both because they pitch their tents to close to culture. Too many pastors use numbers (membership, baptisms, conversions) as the sole, and unbiblical, benchmark for ‘success.’ Too many pastors lean on secular business practices and marketing skills to build the kingdom. Too many pastors and laity have an unbiblical disdain for doctrine, lack of biblical understanding, and therein perhaps lies the rotting root of problem.

I am so thankful for the pastors who faithfully exposit the Word of God and look after the flock with tender loving care and humility. I am so thankful for churches, be they reformed, charismatic, free-will, etc that do not conform to the world to make the gospel attractive. Remember that the cross is stumbling block. It is an offense to the church, to the Redeemer, when a pastor removes the offense of the cross to placate the ‘seeker’.

To reiterate,  the root of the problem is not those hungry sheep. The root problem is that the church is being unbiblically redefined. Rather than building up the body of Christ, these pastors use what is to be the gathering of the redeemed to worship as primarily an outreach to the lost. Rather than going out into the the world, the pastor brings the world into the church. Rather than equipping the saints to scatter six days of the week, to go out into the world to evangelize, the are instructed to bring their friends to a church calibrated, more often intentionally or not, to sometimes remove the offense of the cross, a church all to often calibrated to entertain, a personality-driven church where the focus is, without intention, all to often on the pastor and the felt needs of the congregates than the Redeemer. Some will come to heard the Gospel through the noise and repent and believe. Some will have their ears tickled and engage a false assurance. Many will stagnate.

On Protecting the Flock…….

Part of a pastors, an under-shepherd’s responsibility to the flock to protect it from ravenous wolves. If the under-shepherd does not have the ability to discern between a fellow shepherd and a wolf, then the sheep will suffer. Following is a quote from the blog of Perry Noble, pastor of NewSpring Community Church.

“I have a philosophy of ministry that I used to not have-here it is, I can learn something valuable from any ministry that God is blessing-period!
I want to learn from people who do ministry differently than me…and it is amazing to me how stupid and insecure pastors and church leaders are when it comes to this.
For example-anytime I mention TD Jakes or Joel Osteen on this website we have idiots e-mail in with their “concerns” about issues in regards to their theology or teaching style. (As if the person e-mailing is perfect and has it all figured out!)
BUT, I’ve said it before and I will say it again…I have an incredible amount of respect for both of those men. God is blessing their ministries in an incredible way…and I know there are tons of things that I could learn from them. Just because you are trying to learn something from someone doesn’t mean that you believe exactly like them!
(And for those who feel like you can only learn from just like you…please repent to God for being shallow and ridiculous!)
By the way-I’ve had the privilege of meeting Joel…but haven’t gotten to have lunch with Bishop Jakes yet…if anyone can make that connection I would be much obliged!!! (I’m serious!”)

I have some thoughts and questions, mostly rhetorical in nature, on the aforementioned.

• First, as per an earlier post, I am concerned about the ‘deeds, not creeds’ mentality that seems to infect so many churches. Deeds and doctrine go hand in hand. One ignores either at ones peril. The preceding quote seems to be, at least peripherally, an outgrowth of an anti-creedal, or anti-doctrinal, sentiment.

• Second, how does one discern that a ministry is being blessed by God? Is the number of people drawn to a ministry the only litmus test for Divine sanction? Just because a church or ministry is large and may do good works, does that necessarily infer that it is healthy?

• Third, is it appropriate for one to question an under-shepherd’s theology or teaching style? Is theology and teaching style important? Are there biblically sanctioned and biblically prohibited theologies and forms of teaching style and worship? Does the church sometime unwittingly engage strange fire?

• Fourth, how do we approach, as disciples of Christ, those who are in error, be they an under- shepherd or one whom the under-shepherd is charged with protecting? Do we approach an young, immature disciple of Christ who may hold error differently that how we would approach on who teaches, one who shepherds, one who wields great influence over others?

There are surface tensions in scripture about harboring a judgmental attitude verses the call to judge righteously. That being said, the Old and New Testament is absolutely rich with calls to discern, to be Bereans, to be on the watch for false teachers. A young minister, one whom I hold in high esteem, once stated in a sermon that it is not always easy to identify the wolves that prey on the flock. They do not wear name-tags that state they are teachers of error. Their books do not come with warning labels as to which chapters are unbiblical. The ministries of those whose message is questioned may sometimes benefit the poor and needy. They may be of benefit to the community. Can we, or should we, ignore error because the good they do? What is the difference between error and heresy? The interesting thing about most wolves is that they are not always wrong in all the teach all the time. They may actually have an edifying word or two at times. Therein lies the need for the gift of discernment.

In speaking to the questions raised in the preceding paragraph, perhaps a word or two is in order specifically concerning T.D Jakes and Joel Osteen, the two men mentioned in the blog quote at the start of this post. There are many who strongly suspect that T.D. Jakes rejects the orthodox understanding of the Trinity. Rather, he seems to adopt a modalist view wherein that God sometimes acts as Father, sometimes acts as Son, and sometimes acts as Holy Spirit, the doctrinal position of the Oneness Pentecostal Church to which Jakes has been affiliated. His recent views seems, to me, at very best, to equivocate a bit on this subject. Is the doctrine of the Trinity important? The Gospel looses coherency without this Biblical doctrine. Historically, the church calls those who reject the fundamental doctrine of the Trinity heretics. Beyond Jake’s beliefs of the Trinitarian nature being called into question, Jake also seems to flirt strongly with the prosperity gospel and preaches a psychology driven human-centric message. More could be said on Jakes, but for the sake of brevity, I will move on the Joel Osteen.

Before I proceed, understand without doubt that I am not questioning Osteen’s (or Jakes), status as a true Christian. It is not my job to make that judgment. However, I strongly and without any reservation whatsoever question Osteen’s and Jake’s overarching message. Also, I have listened to Osteen’s messages as well as read the thoughts of others on Osteen. I have also listened to a bit to Jakes as well as reading what others have to say about him. That all being said, Osteen preaches another Gospel; he preaches an ear tickling human-centric message. He seems to reckon sin to be merely a falling short of our God-given potential. He has, on more than on occasion and on national television, at best waffled, and at worst, denied that Christ is the only way to the Father. The pastor of what may be the largest congregation in the world fails absolutely to present the clear message of the Gospel on national television. He, too, embraces a health, wealth, and prosperity Gospel. His God, his Creator, seems to exist to serve and bless the created rather than the other way around. His is the gospel of Anthony Roberts baptized with an occasional Bible verse. Again, for the sake of brevity (so much more could be said), I will conclude articulating my thoughts on Jakes and Osteen.

The pastor whom I quote at the beginning of this post has on multiple occasions, both on his blog and from the stage of his church, expressed disdain for those who want to ‘go deeper’. Pastors influence. Pastors with a big stage, with a big congregation, with a big budget, exert a substantial influence. There is horrific danger to the church when the under-shepherd points his flock to the wolves and say to his flock, “I want to embrace and learn from the wolves!” Such an attitude implies that heresy is benign. Such a pastor, one who calls those in his flock who have questions about a false teacher idiots, will not ultimately answer to the flock or the wolves but to the Great Shepherd of the sheep. With great influence comes great accountability.

\Rant mode off.

Here are a couple of links from IX Marks that may be of interests:

On Joel Osteen

On T.D. Jakes

Another for Joel

In closing, discernment is not so much as being able to tell right from wrong, but more right from almost right.

An Ecclesiastical Journey

Chapter One: Into the Seeker Sensitive Wilderness

I have experienced, over the years and to varying degree, almost the whole gamut of American ecclesiology, of American church culture. I have attended a liberal, main-line Protestant church and have visited, on a few occasions, Baptist, Methodist, and Pentecostal churches.  I have also spent much time in a seeker-sensitive mega-church. Within all these churches,  one can find Christians being progressively conformed to the image of our Savior, Christ Jesus.

Also, within our unity as Christians, I find doctrinal disagreements, most of which are quite peripheral and hardly worthy of note. I sometimes find profound variation in doctrine, especially within the liberal currents of ecclesiology.

However, of all the aforementioned experiences, I have come to see that the seeker-sensitive church of the 21st century, while outwardly proclaiming orthodoxy and acting within the best of intentions, is a potentially dangerous and subtly heterodox perversion of biblical ecclesiology. While liberal churches often deny the basic doctrines of Christianity, they are, for the most part, forthright in their proclamations, and they are consistent with, and able to clearly articulate, their theology. Those who align themselves with liberal theology also comprise a very small percentage of overall church attendance, and, with no insult intended, have increasingly little influence over the affairs of culture. I also find an ironic commonality between the liberal branch of contemporary Christianity and the seeker-sensitive movement. Both are quite human-centric. Therein one finds egregious error.