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.

If it were laid upon me….

I sat on this post for awhile due to the issues described  here,  internally debating whether or not I should post it. After all, how could I authentically speak to issues of ecclesiology if I struggled with doubts of even belonging to the church militant?  Without regards to such issues, I decided to unveil my thoughts, anyway.

If I ever were to pastor a church, which would only happen if God has a great sense of irony and loves to use the weak, the foolish, those prone to sin and despises it, and those with no leadership or interpersonal skills, these are some things I would insist upon:

• Sundays would not be a polished affair with state-of-the-art audio and visual accouterments. Musical instruments would probably be in the back of the church. Focus is to be on the Word unfolded so as to feed the sheep, not on a musical performance.  I would refuse to play any music that was programmed to draw in people who would not otherwise go to church.

• I would never, never, never, ever lay the burden of the  tithe, an unbiblical practice as taught by the contemporary church,  upon the sheep. I will not pastor over the church of Galatia. There would be relatively few sermons or speeches on financial stewardship. Though important, you don’t need Jesus to teach you to balance your checkbook and save for a rainy day. Plus…I am not so good with money, myself. It just does not mean that much to me as it does others.

• I would probably be bi-vocational.

• There would be no sermons with seven steps to this or five keys to that. Legalism lite leads to Jesus lite. Legalism is a path that leads to Hell

• I would do my best to talk a lot about Christ using few if any personal anecdotes. I want you to learn about the Messiah, not about me. If I cannot teach redemptive Biblical history, the historical and true story of Christ alone, by faith alone, by grace alone, by the authority of the Bible alone, to the glory of God alone without telling stories about me and my life experience (boring thought it would be), I do not need to claim to be a pastor. If I ever become a pastor, which is highly unlikely,  I will not be there to entertain you. When I die, I would just as soon be forgotten then be remembered as having been a charismatic leader.

• I would not ask for your personal testimonies, though you are certainly free to share – but, foremost, tell me Christ’s story in church, not yours. Your changed life, though I am happy for you, is not necessarily the Gospel. Paxil changes lives, AA changes lives, art changes lives, Mormonism has changed lives for the better. The Gospel story is what breaths life into rotten corpses. The apostle Peter probably had many interesting stories, but he told Christ’s story every time, all the time.

• There would never, never, ever be any altar call nor any other crass emotional manipulation of the flock. If Jesus and the apostles did not need them, then neither do I need that extra-biblical and rather recent and often detrimental appendage to the Gospel call. No. Sappy. Music. In. Church. Ever. Too, why do I need to close my eyes and bow my head during altar calls? Seriously….

• I would seek to heal you with the Gospel rather the Law. Too many preachers wield the Law like an anvil against the sheep when a salve of grace is called for.

• Preaching would be mostly expostional. Exceptions to expostional preaching might entail, for example, teaching about the lives and doctrines of the early church fathers and martyrs. I would also like to learn and teach on church history. Doing a class on systematic theology in the evenings would be cool, too. Theology is a fundamental part of the church. If I ever pastored a church, it would be lovingly doctrinal. Doctrine is the spine and immune system of the church.

• I would strongly discourage the turning of hobbies into ministries. You like to golf, hunt, and ride motorcycles. Such is fine with me; just don’t baptize them. Let me know when you want to go for a ride though. It would be fun to join with you.

• The crippled, the poor, the mentally ill and emotionally scarred, those not so articulate would welcomed and embraced.   Along the same lines, introverts are welcome and loved. I understand because I am an introvert, too. If you are uncomfortable in certain social circumstances, we can fellowship, you and me, over a cup of coffee or can of beer where ever you are most comfortable. I personally like sweet tea. Occasionally, a shot or two of Evan Williams is fine. Church is not easy, sometimes, for introverts.

• I would insist that the elders and teachers hold the the Doctrines of Grace. If not, you can be a part of the church, cherished and loved deeply, but never teach.

• No. Skits. Ever. No drama teams, either. You want drama, entertainment, go to a theater. The Word, being potent in and of itself, does not need our help. Drama merely adds extraneous layers. As an aside, it amazes me that people can feel comfortable playing the role of Christ in musical dramas and plays. I recall Peter requesting his body to be crucified upside down because he deemed himself to be unworthy to be crucified in the fashion of the Messiah.

• I would not make too big a deal about secondary issues such as eschatology, though they would not be ignored.

• Communion would be a real meal, I think, not a piece of bread or a plastic shot glass of grape juice. Wine would be available if desired. I also am not wed to the amount of water used in baptisms. Sprinkle or dunk, I can accommodate either. No major problems with either paedo and credo-baptism. I see valid Biblical arguments for either, though I lean towards credo-baptism.

• I would never say, as many do from the stage and pulpit, that I would not sacrifice my family for of the church, though I would hope I would never face such circumstances. Such statements, though common, seem strange and present a hopefully false dichotomy. I would die a thousand times for the church of the Christ. If my wife or children are not with me on this, then they turn their backs on the bride and body of Christ. I would not.

• I will not be a Christian culture warrior, ever. I will not try to dress unregenerate corpses up with the Law when they need the Gospel. You want a moral nation above all, have Utah succeed and move there. They are nice, family-friendly, moral people even without the Gospel delivered by the apostles. I would never preach pure moralism. It is the anti-thesis of grace.

• Children will not have to go to kids church when big people church starts if the family wants their children to be with them. Distractions are OK, to a degree, and a part of life, and a part of the body, a part of families. You hear me on this one Furtick and Noble​? I will not force families to split up when the preaching starts. Shame on you, Furtick, for removing Christ from your service for being a distraction to your show…..as you do the the least of these……

• I would probably not let my church grow much beyond 200 people if I had such control. Should it do so, and this would be a great thing, we split into two sister churches, each with trained and approved elders and pastors. If a pastor cannot at least recognize his sheep, he needs to have others step up to help feed, lead and shelter the flock. Move half of them to another pasture.  Keep growing the flock, and then splitting off to new pastures.

• Naive on my part, perhaps, but I would hope the hypothetical church I fed would not be success oriented with tangible metrics. Leave that for businesses. I would not count salivations. That is no ones job but the Holy Spirits; no one else is qualified to separate wheat from chaff. I would hope we would have an orientation of humility. If the seats are filled, fine. If not, fine. It will be Christ who grows His church, not me.

• I would literally die to protect my sheep from wolves, from bad theology. You will not see Wild At Heart or The Shack as recommended reading the churches library. I would never endorse heretics like TD Jakes as have many nominally orthodox pastors.

• I would never, ever have a fund raiser. If someone is in deep financial need, I would sell my possessions, give up vacations, and work overtime to help you. I hope the flock would do the same. Saddest thing I have seen in a long time is a large, evidently wealthy church holding a bake sale fund raiser for a child needing surgery.

• If you want to volunteer to help in the church, that is great. If not, that is fine with me, too. I know your probably work hard to support your family and need no extra burdens. Quite frankly, when you get rid of all the extraneous parking teams, media teams, creative teams, hospitality teams, volunteer coordination team volunteers, you find you do not need volunteers so much.

• Small groups, meh. I have seen them too often be pools of ignorance to which, not so long ago, I helped make even more deeply ignorant. If we do small groups, it will be elder led and Word focused. They are what you make of them.

• If you want a God of second chances, go to where the Gospel is light and cheap. I will give you a Gospel for dead men and women who float hopeless in the dark waters. They don’t need second chances. I, and they, would mess up the second chance, and the third, and the forth. I will point you to a Savior, to paraphrase Paul Capon, if memory serves, who dives into deep water to breath life into sin infused, rotten corpses, dies in the process, and later appears on the shore alive and waits for you having defeated death and sin.

Enough of my orthopraxic utopianism…

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​?

Trite expressions and counterfeit Gospels…

Being a bit curmudgeonly at times, I allow some things to really get under my skin, one of which is trite expressions of faith and errant ‘Gospels’. Here is one example of an errant Gospel of which I have previously written:

Listened to a podcast a few weeks ago wherein a megachurch pastor named Robert Morris, guest speaker at the local multi-site gigachurch, make an absolute mess of the topic of tithing. The ‘sermon’ delivered was, quite frankly, a train wreak of epic proportions. He ends his confusion of Law and Gospel with a somewhat inverted invitation to salvation. Given that he just put Christians under the bondage and curse of the Law (the apostle Paul would have told Morris to emasculate himself) with his take on tithing, he then asks the non-Christians in the audience to give to God an even more epic and extravagant gift than the tithe to God, their hearts.

Now, we have some profound problems here. First, who does the giving in the true transaction of the Gospel, the Christ or the unregenerate? Second,  biblically, how is the unregenerate heart described? Well, I can tell you extravagant is not one of the adjectives. Deceitful is perhaps a better description. Below is an excerpt from the aforementioned NewSpring podcast.

Digging up bones

I am the king of hyper-focus. I latch on to something the intrigues me, that concerns me, and I cannot let go. Eventually though, I will bury a certain bone in the backyard of my mind, pick up a new bone and gnaw on it for awhile, but eventually something will happen or something will be said that draws me back to that long buried bone.

The bone I am going to dig up is a particularly odious one. It is an attitude found in the written and spoken thoughts of the luminaries of the church growth movement, and their influence is found in those lesser lights that seek to mirror the attitudes and methodologies of these success-driven church growth experts. You hear it in the ubiquitous leadership conferences, you read it in blogs, you hear it in ‘sermons.’

This metaphorical bone is the conceit that it is not the post-modern, seeker-sensitive, purpose-driven  pastors job to feed the sheep. I have written on this subject ad nausea in the past, but in the last couple of weeks, I have heard sermons that absolutely infuriated and grieved me.

Before I continue, let me give you a bit of a back-story, more of which can be found here. I used to attend Perry Nobles gigachurch, NewSpring Community Church, and over the three of four years I spent there, it seems that Perry often mentioned, in an often sarcastic and demeaning fashion, that sheep complaining of  not being fed are lazy and contemptible. I initially did did not give the aforementioned attitude much thought, other than thinking that he was a bit snarky and perhaps unique in his attitude, but I came to see the fruit of this attitude in a more personal way. I was becoming a bit hungry for something above and beyond the constant rotation of sermons on financial stewardship and tithing, on dating, marriage and relationships, and finding my purpose and plan in life. There were other issues as well, and in wanting to meet with someone from the leadership of the church to discuss my desires and concerns, I was grudgingly allowed a phone conversation with an associate pastor.

In naively mentioning that I wanted to hear more about the Jesus that the first Jewish and Gentiles were willing to die for rather than recant their faith as contrasted to the life coaching I was used to hearing (and I was gracious in my request and concern), I was politely told that essentially I was just being selfish in wanting to be fed more than the ‘meals’ that were being served. Quite frankly, to be told by a church that I had poured myself into that I was selfish for wanting to be taught more about Jesus absolutely crushed me. So, you see I have a first hand experience and vested interest in not letting this bone remain buried.

Now, I understand the need for Christians to read the Bible. I also understand Paul’s admonition found in 1 Corinthians 3:1-2. What is interesting with the text is that Paul is not saying that it is not his job to feed his charges meat, indeed he wants to, but that they are developmentally delayed and not yet ready for the spiritual meat that he desires to serve to them.

What is most striking in these declarations of  pastoral abdication of Christ-appointed responsibility to feed the sheep is the sheer arrogance, sneering meanness, and demeaning caricatures in their portrait of starving sheep.

Here is one example featuring Steven Furtick, friend and I suppose ‘student’ of Perry Noble :

If you go to this Fighting for The Faith podcast, from 53 minutes to about 1:07 hours in the podcast, you will here similar attitudes and content from Mark Beeson, lead pastor a Granger Community Church, one the the flagships of the seeker-driven ecclesiastical methodology. What is so sad is the laughter of the audience in both Steven and Mark’s tirade.

The question I have to ask of such ‘pastors’ is this: if it is your Christ-ordained responsibility to be the under-shepherd to the flock, to feed them, and starving sheep come to you for meat as they tire of cotton candy and milk, is it your job to mock them or to feed them something more substantive? I suspect that most of these pastors harbor such an attitude towards starving sheep because they may be incapable of serving a rich, Christ-centric, Word-focused meal. It takes them out of their comfort zone of ‘vision-casting’ and serving their rotation of topical bait-and-switch life-coaching pablum and exposes their weakness and inabilities to deeply, carefully, and contextually exposit the text of the Bible. It exposes the lack of understanding or care for the deeper things of Christ as they often serve a graceless, legalism-lite Moses dressed in a Jesus costume. More could be said on this sad subject, but for now, let me leave you with the following verses:

1 Cor 3:1-2

And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men of flesh, as to infants in Christ. 2 I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are not yet able.

Ezekiel 34:2

“Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel; prophesy, and say to them, even to the shepherds, Thus says the Lord GOD: Ah, shepherds of Israel who have been feeding yourselves! Should not shepherds feed the sheep?
John 21:15-17

(Thinking about all those aforementioned and ubiquitous leadership conferences where the leaders feed leaders meals of secular business methods on how to use the sheep most efficiently)

15When 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.” 16Again Jesus said, “Simon son of John, do you truly love me?” He answered, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Take care of my sheep.” 17The third time he said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love me?” Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” He said, “Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Feed my sheep.

Nehemiah 8:5-8

5Ezra opened the book in the sight of all the people for he was standing above all the people; and when he opened it, all the people stood up. 6Then Ezra blessed the LORD the great God. And all the people answered, “Amen, Amen!” while lifting up their hands; then they bowed low and worshiped the LORD with their faces to the ground. 7Also Jeshua, Bani, Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkub, Shabbethai, Hodiah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah, Jozabad, Hanan, Pelaiah, the Levites, explained the law to the people while the people remained in their place. 8They read from the book, from the law of God, translating to give the sense so that they understood the reading.

February 28, Part Two

I know I am probably beating this subject to death and will be a bit repetitive with this post, but I am absolutely infuriated by the often errant implications and the scripture twisting that are fellow travelers with this doctrine. It is not an issue of money for me. It is not an issue of obedience for me. It is not an issue of stewardship. It is, ultimately, an issue of Law and Gospel, or more specifically, a confusion of the two. I am, again, talking about tithing.

Here is, verbatim, part of a sermon on money, on tithing, I recently watched. The sermon by Perry Noble is found here and the quoted section starts at approximately one hour and two minutes into the sermon.

In exodus 13, God says the firstborn is mine, and then the passover took place, and the people that did not put the blood over the door frame and said I’m not going to consecrate my son to you, what happened to the son in that house? He got killed. Your either gonna give your 10 percent to God or He’s gonna take it. The Bible says God will not be mocked. For some of you, there’s a reason your car keeps breaking down. There’s a reason you cant keep your kid out of the doctors office. There’s a reason you cant keep a job. You’re trying to mock god.

Such is, unfortunately, not a unique approach to the subject. I have heard similar sentiments from other pastors, and I spoke on it just recently here. My first and overarching thought on the above quote is thus: The pastor portrays a grievous and confused understanding of Law and Gospel.

Let me say it one more time just so that I am not misunderstood: He Does Not Really Understand Grace. And it’s not just him. Again, I have heard the same sentiment from other stages and pulpits, and I would say the same thing about others who infer that God acts like a mobster running a protecting racket on His own children. What we find in this sermon is essentially a quid pro quo Gospel. Christ did this, so you gotta do that.

What I see from the aforementioned sermon are verses ripped out of context and used as proof-text to prop up an errant pretext. But, as this pastor graciously and humbly mentions at one hour into the video, you must be stupid and Biblically illiterate if you disagree with him on this subject. Be that as it may…

Going off a bit tangentially, I think the overarching issues is one of methodology. Some preachers are topical teachers, speaking often to the felt needs of the audience. Others are expositional teachers. Topical preachers tend to hover over the Scripture and pick verses, often out of context, to communicate some point, often a favorite subject of the pastor.  They, by their methodology, become lord over the text. Expositional preaching, where the pastor goes through a book of the Bible verse by verse, is bound to the Word and it forces the preacher to open the word, in context, to the congregation. The text is lord over the pastor.

I want to be clear that I am not so much anti-tithe, but more anti-how the tithe is often taught. I know of Christians who give their ten percent as a holy act of worship. Personally, I do not think the percentage is as important as the condition of one’s hearts.

Speaking of how the tithe is taught, here is a video that might be of  interest:

Christian, you do not have to tithe to ‘earn’ God’s favor. There is no condemnation for those in Christ Jesus. You are not blessed because of your obedience to the Law, you are justified by grace alone, by faith alone, by Christ alone.

This is not healthy truth:

Radical Grace is Life!

Addendum:

Just uploaded the section of the sermon to which I refer to YouTube. So much error and mishandling of scripture. I honestly fear for Perry. Here is the video:

I Timothy 1:7 – “They want to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm.

 

For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.” Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for “The righteous shall live by faith.” But the law is not of faith, rather “The one who does them shall live by them.” Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree”— so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith. (Galatians 3:10-14 ESV)

God will get your tithe one way or another…

It truly and honestly grieves me the way some pastors approach giving. It breaks my heart to see Malachi 3 twisted, perverted, and used, out of context, by pastors to manipulate and beat the sheep of their flock into forking over 10 percent of their income to avoid being cursed by God.

I have heard pastors say that the reason your car breaks down, the reason your health is failing, the reason your marriage is suffering is because you have not tithed.  God, they say, will get His ten percent one way or another.

Let me ask you this – if your adopted son or daughter whom you love very much and paid a great price to go through the adoption process, gets a job but does not pay you a certain percent of their paycheck, will you curse them?

Matthew 17:24-27 (English Standard Version)

The Temple Tax

24(A) When they came to Capernaum, the collectors of(B) the two-drachma tax went up to Peter and said, “Does your teacher not pay the tax?” 25He said, “Yes.” And when he came into the house, Jesus spoke to him first, saying, (C) “What do you think, Simon? From whom do kings of the earth take toll or(D) tax? From their sons or from others?” 26And when he said, “From others,” Jesus said to him, “Then the sons are free. 27However, not to give offense to them, go to the sea and cast a hook and take the first fish that comes up, and when you open its mouth you will find a shekel.[a] Take that and give it to them for me and for yourself.”

Galatians 4:7  So you are no longer a slave, but a son, and if a son, then an heir through God.

So many things are wrong with the idea that God will curse His redeemed for not following an Old Testament prescriptive that relates specifically to the Levites.  So many things are wrong with the idea that your misfortunes are due to the fact that you do not tithe. Many non-Christians enjoy great health, great financial security, and have wonderful marriages and have never gave a dime to a church or charity. Many faithful Christians who dearly love the triune God and give sacrificially of their money, time, and talents to those in need, to the local church, to charities, suffer from illness, joblessness, and failed relationships.  Even so, those who give out of a cheerful heart will be blessed in ways sometimes tangible and financial and sometimes in ways not so immediate and tangible.

To say, though, that the reason a Christian suffers in this world is because they do not tithe runs the risk of making God seem like a mobster who runs a protection racket, a monster. Further, the way tithing is often taught turns the theology of giving into an act that borders on the heretical, that turns the act of joyful giving into a ‘health, wealth, and prosperity‘ scheme that encourages giving to increase oneself.

What I do not want to do is encourage Christians not to give.  For some, to give ten percent, be it from the gross or the net, would be an insurmountable difficulty and would be unwise.  God expects you to take care of your family.  For others, ten percent would not be a difficult commitment at all, and perhaps one could give even more.

Though I could give many valid reasons why I think the tithe is not for the church, and perhaps I may do so later, the bottom is line is this: Jesus is not so much into percentages as He is into the state of our heart. What we do with our money, much like the words that come out of our mouth or end up on our blogs, reveal the state of our heart, and if you and I are honest, we all need more than a bit of grace in that area.

2 Corinthians 9:7

English Standard Version (©2001)

Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.

Cutting to the chase, when someone beats you up with Malachi 3, go to Romans 8:1 and then read the book of Galatians with tithing in mind. As I have said before, if redeemed by the Law, give by the Law. If redeemed by Grace, then give by grace.

Remember, too, that there were three tithes in the Old Testament that equaled 23.3 percent, so if you insist on being bound to the Law, do it right. Also, since money, personal income was rarely tithed by Israel, would not bringing your livestock and produce to church as an offering be an interesting spectacle?

As I was looking for some media to ‘spice up’ this post, I found the following video. While I did not have this man in mind, he is only turning the volume to 11 where your typical mega-church pastor may only leave the volume at 6, metaphorically speaking. Watch and weep over this video by the appropriately named Creflo Dollar:

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…

More than a pet peeve

I return briefly to the predominate theme that I often pursued on this blog, and I will allow to go dormant again.

I listen, when time allows, to sermons from different churches, different pastors.  Many are quite edifying and Christ exalting.  Others, I sadly find less so.  I come away with some overarching  observations, some quite disturbing, based not so much on any one individual sermon, but more on an overarching methodology that gives birth to some common themes.

I recently listened to a substantial portion of a sermon by Perry Noble wherein he stated repeatedly that “God is trying…” and that “God tries….”  In the context of this particular sermon, this rhetoric was used to describe God’s ‘attempts’ to get peoples attention, specifically Herod’s in the case of the aforementioned sermon, so as to draw them to Himself.  I appreciate and applaud the evangelical zeal found in the sermon (even though the pastor did not correctly interpret the text and read his own ideas into it), but I have extreme reservations over a pastor, or anyone for that matter, saying ‘God tries’ .

My reservations are not a case of putting too fine a point on peripheral or merely illustrative rhetoric.  When we talk about our Redeemer, about God almighty, we need to be careful and accurate about the words we use out of reverence to a Holy God.  We need to thoughtfully weigh our words and thoughts about God in light of Biblical revelation, especially when one is an under-shepherd charged, along with the elders in the church, with guarding and feeding the flock, the body of Christ.

What then is the problem with saying “God tries?” To try infers potential of failure.  To say that God tries is to infer potential of failure in God almighty, that His will may be thwarted.   If such were true, then His will could be stunted and I can have no absolute confidence in that God.  That truncated God, a God who tries, (and apparently failed in Herod’s case in the context of the sermon) is not the sovereign God of Biblical revelation.

Again, I make specific reference to a particular sermon, but I have heard this same rhetoric, this – I hope unintended – reference to a limited God, on other occasions and by various individuals.   Where does this conceit come from, this idea that God is somehow limited by our choices?  It goes back to a humanistic theology, a strain of Christianity that permeates much of the landscape of American ecclesiology.  Beyond the errant inferred limitations placed on God, I find sometimes a subtle redefinition of the Gospel.  Before I continue, I want to make something perfectly clear.  I am not calling into question motivations or authenticity of faith of any particular personality.  I am not going to bash any particular individual.  However, I will not shy away from bringing the hammer down on what I strongly believe is theologically dangerous methodology.

What of this subtle distortion of the Gospel I mentioned? It is a distortion that comes on the heels of a confusion between felt needs and true spiritual need. It is a blurring of two aspects, the simple proclamation of the faith delivered by the apostles, repent and believe in Christ for the forgiveness of sin and the perceived benefits of salvation which is the meeting of the felt need for significance, the felt need for purpose, the felt need for happiness. I could go on, but I think the point is clear that there are many felt needs we all would want to write in on the sign-up sheet for salvation. The danger in pandering to felt needs is this: our felt needs are not necessarily reflective of our true need before a holy and righteous God. We may, based upon certain evangelical exhortations, approach God and request transformation so that our felt needs for self-esteem, security, and significance are met, for example, but quite miss the real need for forgiveness of sin. So many evangelical calls offer forgiveness along with the thinly veiled and inferred promise that God will fix all your problems and meet all the felt needs of an unregenerate heart, but often what is missing is a clearly defined call to repentance.

What also I find at times offered is a devalued grace, a devalued Gospel.  A friend  told me of an evangelical outreach to which he was invited to participate.  This outreach was aimed at sharing the Gospel with disadvantaged kids.  It involved taking these kids hunting and then sharing the Gospel with them afterwords.  I appreciate and applaud the hearts desire to share the Gospel.  However, one of the things  these kids were told was that Christianity was the easiest club in the world to join.  Further, I have heard on numerous occasions that I need to try Jesus because He is the best deal going .  I have heard Christ offered as a sixty day challenge.   The lost, the unregenerate, are apparently invited to try this Gospel thing out, kick the tires and take it around the block a few times.  If it doesn’t work for you, you can drop it off where you found it.  The Gospel has been reduced to a product that is marketed to consumers.  I have read time and time again people in ministry, church planters and pastors,  affirm that the church has the best product in the world, but we just are not marketing it as effectively as Disney markets their product.  Quite frankly and without regard to the good intent of those who engage it, that methodology, that reduction of the Gospel to a product to be marketed, to a pill freely dispensed, makes me want to vomit.   What is missing from these bold, creative evangelical marketing ploys and vision casting is a robust theology of the Cross.  The cost of the Cross is rarely given it’s due.  Showing clips from The Passion of the Christ or Braveheart from huge screens suspended over an enthralled audience is not a replacement for faithfully proclaiming the Gospel of repent and believe.  What kind of Gospel are people being drawn to when the church feels it needs to compete with Hollywood to make the Cross attractive?  The Cross is not, nor has ever been, a pill easy to swallow.  But you know what, God in His mercy and grace, and in spite of well-intentioned, but often confused methodologies, will draw the lost, the unregenerate to Himself and redeem them by His blood that all glory, all honor, and all praise be to Him.  Christ will build His church.

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.