Let's define "Church"
I hate it when I see signs on church properties that say Church.
I hate it when someone invites me to their church.
I hate it when I get postcard invitations to events at church.
I hate it when people ask me where I go to church.
I hate it when buildings and places are called church.
I hate it when the pastor welcomes us to church.
I hate the church --the location...
I love the Church the people -- the Bride of Christ....
Now the whole world thinks church is a location. How in the world did we get this wrong? And, then we know we are conveying the wrong thing and we still use the word wrongly. Isn't that stupid!
posted by Bob Carder @ 4:03 PM
52 comments
52 Comments:
You really hate that? That post just has cut me through. And it really hurts, Uncle Bob. My church and pastor (I think you know him) do all those things, except maybe the postcard thing.
You really hate the location that Christians gather to worship God?
All that the signs on lawns mean is that this is where Christians meet and where anyone is welcome.
All that the invitations mean is that someone cares enough and loves you enough to invite you to be a part of their family.
All people want to know about where you go to church is with what particular Christian community you associate with, where you worship.
Buildings are called "church" because that is where the Church goes to have fellowship and be in corporate worship with their brothers and sisters.
You honestly hate it when a pastor welcomes you to the community of believers? This one cut me the most. Can you honestly look the well meaning pastor in the eye and say "do not welcome me to CHURCH!!"?? How can his expression of love be turned down? He is happy that you came to worship with other beleivers. He is truly happy to see you.
The church building is a symbol of the cummunity of believers. The communion of saints. It should be revered for that purpose. Christianity is full of wonderful symbols that remind us of God and his redeeming love for us. The church can be such a symbol. Just as the Jews longed for their temple when in Persia and built synagogues, so too is the church building that constant reminder of the strength and majesty of the beautiful bride of Christ.
Yeppers, I hate that the church -the location. I despise what we have done to the church. I say we - because I have been part of the problem myself.
Now define the church.
We need to invite them to Christ before they can be in the Body of Christ - the family. This is what's important you know.
Bob,
You have narrowed your ministry focus so far that you have gone off the deep end. As I read your stuff there is one way, your way. I think that you are making a big mistake being so narrow.
Chris
Bob, you have taken the "church" word way to serious. Most all know that the "church" is not a building etc. Your bitterness towards the church is glowing through in such a very sad way. May God help to convict you.
Phil and Chris...thanks for your honesty...you nailed it!
I'm looking for a definition here and no one seems to be able to give one. Why can't anyone see this. Perhaps its because in the definition we have the answer we really need.
My focus is on making disciples who make disciples not disciples who invite people to sit in a pew and call that obedience.
I'm not sure I'm more narrow, perhaps I'm more focussed than you. I don't have to plan sermons, programs, build buildings, organize attraction events, I get to simply relate Jesus to people everywhere I go. Living Jesus in the world is really cool.
Our disciples make disciples who make disciples and then they invite those disciples to gather to worship. How is that falling off the deep end. It seems Biblical. Now I'm narrow and off the deep end for being Biblical. Hmmm.
By the way, I'm not doing anything Jesus didn't tell me to do.
If I come across bitter it's because I am speaking out prophetically against the disobedience of the American Church to personally make disciples.
May God convict those in the Church for not making disciples and for not taking the Great Commission seriously.
Now can we get back to the issue of giving a definition of the church or Church which ever it is.
Remember, I love the Body of Christ, I am part of the body of Christ and I dearly love those in the Body of Christ. I pray blessings on all the people in my last church-the location church. How is that being bitter.
Anony - you haven't even taken the time to speak with me and yet you call me bitter. And then have the nerve to wish God's conviction on me. HMMM!
The one way Chris speaks of is the Jesus way of Matthew 28, we must insist that all Christ followers pick up there mantle and make disciples who make disciples. It's not supposed to be about inviting people to church it's about inviting them enter the Church by accepting Jesus. My so-called focus is that of Jesus.
I LOVE THIS DISCUSSION - I'm excited.
We need Church reformation in America not church continuance business as usual. The stakes are too high to keep doing what we've always done.
The people that call you "off the deep end" need to explain themselves. Not biblical to make those accusations publicly and against an elder. They violate Scripture themselves.
It appears that many on this blog define the church as everyone who attends/shows up to their building on a set day of the week and then blast you for being bitter towards "that" church.
The Bible defines the Church - the Bride of Christ - as being only those who have their names written in the book of Life.
Wake up people - you don't get to redefine it!
Now if the way you play church makes it tough for you to define who is the church and who is not - then the problem is clearly in how you do church. God defines - you align - get with the program before the reapers start dividing the wheat from the tares.
Finally answers my request. Thanks anony!
In a follow up to the anonymous comment posted at 10:06am, since I made the "off the deep end comment", here are a few more of my thoughts.
(1) The public accusations against and elder is amusing. Last I knew Bob and I were peers. Both are license and ordained pastors in the Missionary Church. Bob publicly says some pretty interesting things that stand in contradiction to the ways that I see them. Therefore I have the right to publicly state my opinion of his thinking. I had the ability to do this anonymously, but chose to do so with my full/real name in order to be authentic in my feelings.
(2) I want to challenge the "Body of Christ" concept that I see used here quite a bit. As I see it, the way you use "the body of Christ" is held in high esteem. However is see that the "Church" is treated with great angst. I will credit you that there are times that you back off from an all inclusive position that says the church is terrible, but more often than not you make the case that Church = Bad. As I see it through the lens of "the body of Christ", your position is the hand shooting the foot. You are attacking your own team. It doesn't make sense to me why there can not be multiple effective ways for making disciples for the body of Christ! I just don't get it, but I am sure of this, one of your angry disciples is about to explain it to me. I will await a highly intellectual response from an anonymous author...
You shoot low, Chris.
Define the Church. That's all I'm asking here. Why are you accusatory?
Let's admit it, some of things we "the Church - the people" do are not Scriptural nor do they aide in teaching all believers to make disciples. Many/some things we do aide in disobedience. This is not a personal attack and never has been. It's a reality check. I'm with you if you expect every believer to make disciples who make disciples. That is not what I see int he American Church. I often see disobedience to this supreme command.
I love the Body of Christ in her purest definition. I dislike what the American Church organization is doing to her.
I find it interesting that you accuse one of my disciples of being angry just because he disagrees with you.
You still have not answered the post. How would you define the Church? Or have you answered?
I apologize for the shooting low, as I looked around I was under the impression that this is how we do things around here.
Your Quote: "Now the whole world thinks church is a location. How in the world did we get this wrong? And, then we know we are conveying the wrong thing and we still use the word wrongly. Isn't that stupid!"
My Response: I don't believe that the whole world sees the church as a location.
My Answer to the Question that you rant about: The Church = The world-wide association of believers in Christ.
My Question to you: Can a segment of this group (Church) come together regularly for fellowship, discipleship, encouragement, care AND be evangelistic at the same time? I would challenge the thought that the only time people in Acts came to the saving knowledge of Christ was through a one-to-one disciple making mission. I believe that there were times that group evangelism (Attractional) happened as well. When Jesus, Paul, Peter were preaching, there were believers and non-believers together in a group.
---------------------------------
Here is where we agree...
I believe that the "church" needs change.
Here is where we disagree...
Instead of smashing her and leaving her, I believe that she can be transitioned back to what God has called her to be. I have chosen to take on this mission. I feel that you look down on me for tackling such a task.
I don't look down on you, I just do not believe the old wine skin will handle the new wine.
Have I ever told you I look down on you?
You can shoot anywhere on this blog. We like gunslingers here.
The old and the new need to exist. There is no middle ground. You are either in the old or in the new wine skin. We get to choose but blending the two is not an option. God will work in both camps. God is able to work exponentially in the new wineskin. That's all.
I'm called out of the church as a location and into the church as a Body. The ways of doing ministry greatly differs and often conflicts from camp one -the old wine skin to camp two -the new wine skin.
I'm gathering a growing remnant of those from the old wine skin and into a Holy Spirit birthed and empowered movement of disciples making disciples where all must be obedient to making disciples. No one gets a pass on this.
The Old wineskin gives a pass.
Chris, ask your unsaved neighbors to define church and you will see why I think the whole world thinks the church is what it isn't.
We to not gather to go to Church..
As the Church we gather to go into the world. Huge difference here.
When people ask we about Church I tell them about the Body of Christ and what Jesus does to bring us into that body. I do not tell them about my church program or pastor or other stuff. See what I'm talking about here. The definition brings huge implications here.
I understand what you are attempting to argue.
I just believe that you use far to much assumptive and all-inclusive language.
Example:
You say..."When people ask we about Church I tell them about the Body of Christ and what Jesus does to bring us into that body. I do not tell them about my church program or pastor or other stuff. See what I'm talking about here. The definition brings huge implications here."
I do not tell my unsaved neighbors about "my church programs or pastor or other stuff." I tell them about Christ, there need for Him and invite them to begin a relationship with Him and/or continue the conversation with me.
BUT, why would it wrong of me to invite them to consider the continuation of the conversation at the Bible believing church that I am a pastor at...to find encouragement at...to make friends with people who have walked down the same path as them before...
I believe that you are being far too hard on the Church as a whole. There are pastors in our district and your own district that have showed up to a church (location), (with sign in the yard), who came into that (building), which had a (budget) and (structure) unsaved, and were shown the truth, were discipled and are discipling others today, both inside and outside a (building).
right on Chris... and to prove his point I myself was saved and discipled at a church... and I am now a youth pastor at a church in which I am leading youth to Christ and discipling them as well... all within a building...
Thank you Bob!! You finally say that God can and does work in the structured church! Yet you are still stuck on the "exponential growth thing." It's not about the numbers guy. It's about the quality of the disciples you create.
My definition of "church": the communion of saints, the catholic (universal) Christian community. will that work?
A second definition of church is the place that people gather to worship God corporately. And is that so bad? How can a place where we meet God and meet with friends be so bad?
Another point: How is inviting an unbeliever to church (the location) so bad? Would you not agree that the unbelieving friend can find Christ by watching the believers worship and interact? Isn't this how you came to know Christ? Didn't someone invite you to church one day and you discovered Christ? I know that this is how my dad found Christ...someone invited him to a revival event at the church down the road. Do you know who invited him? It was you Uncle Bob. It was you.
I do not see inviting someone to join the family as being so bad. The purpose is not to fill up the pews as you might think. The purpose is to reach one more soul for Christ.
The American Church (in general) has only lost its focus. My church back home has not. We are healthy there. But for the general church, we do need reform. We need reform, not revolt. Are you more of a reformer or a revolutionary? I hope that you can see yourself more as a reformer. If the church is sick, the cure is not to leave it. You should keep your ties with us, help us out. You can see the good that our programs and events are doing. You can show us how to use them more effectively. People need a heart change, not a wineskin change (I don't even drink wine, nor will I ever). We don't need a new wineskin, we only need to repair the old one. The church has been in the same wineskin since the time of Pentecost. The only changes we have had were from reforming and repairing our wineskin...not by rejecting it and trying to form a new one.
Stick with us here, Bob. Picture the Church as the big ocean liner out on the high seas. You think that the vessel has a little hole in the haul. Your solution as I see it is to separate yourself completely from the big ship and try to survive out on a little inflatable raft. Well, there is a big storm out there, Bob. Your little raft can't handle the waves and walls of water. Soon your raft will capsize. Come back to the big ship. Come back to the strong vessel that has been through thick and thin. Come back and help us fix this hole in our haul. This is the only way to weather the storm. We must reform, not revolt.
God help us all.
How should reformation take place? How has it taken place in the past?
Face it -those opposing Bob on this blog are much more vile and insulting than Bob.
Look at the pragmatic defense of the church they put up. Just because God uses something to reach someone does not mean He approves of it. I found God through a tough time with drugs. Should we get everyone hooked on drugs so they can find God? No more pragmatism - please.
Phil - Quality of Disciples? What steps does your church take to evaluate the quality of their disciples? What steps do you take? Do you have any disciples? Please answer the questions and not sidestep.
Chris - great - you invite them to Jesus first - what do your church members do? Have you asked anyone when was last time they led someone to Jesus? I ask the question all the time. The answer is pathetic. How about you guys - When was the last time for you.
Chris - do you personally disciple someone who has made another disciple?
How about you Phil?
If the answer is no then perhaps you should put down our "structure guard" and ask Bob how he is doing that?
Phil - your church is healthy? Quite a claim. How did you decide that. I would like to seriously know how you made that evaluation. Your anomoly must be studied because every bit of research I have read shows the number of churched is declining in every county in America and those that are churched increasingly fail to correctly state basic fundamental doctrine. We should be following your model - if you can substantiate that claim.
WAKE UP - Christianity is dying in America, in the church and outside its walls. The society is becoming more hostile towards Christians - not because of people like Bob - but because they see the church differently than you guys defend it.
Your arguements sound like the arguements of the Catholic church after the Reformation. Ohh Martin - just quit writing so much about what is wrong. Give us a chance to make changes, Martin. Have you heard what Zwingli is saying now? Sure we have problems but God is pleased with us. Look how many people were baptised into the Church last year, surely God is working in the Catholic Church. Without a Pope and tradition how will you avoid heresy.
Look at Europe - it won't be long now.
Jesus was accused likewise of some of the same things...
We better get serious about the church and her mission as declared by Jesus Himself right after the resurrection with all authority as God and He declared the mission.
Let's get to work!
Senor and CHris, I'm not concerned about the already reached per say I am deeply troubled that 20 somethings are walking away from the American Church in search of Jesus!
Let's wake up here. We have a serious crisis before us.
This should trouble all of us.
Phil, your second definition is not Biblical and yes it is bad. It carries ramifications that include any in the Christian family who gathers. Let's go to church so we can be part of the Church and many have never even accepted Jesus.
Rework your definition because your second definition is why many are not going to heaven but still attend church. They are gathered but not yet reached and many don't even know they are lost.
What does it mean to be in the Body of Christ? It better mean something or we are on heretical footings.
Anonymous...Why not identify yourself? What do you have to hide? Are you not the ministry machine you pretend to be? I will consider any reply you have as worthless lest you man/woman up and stop hiding.
Bob...Can you agree with what my last comment was? I did not refer to Christians. I was referencing an existing church and its ability to reach the lost. I care about the 20 somethings that is why I am active in reaching them. Don't change the topic and tell me to wake up here. You are shifting the topic!
first of all anony, i think that you need to calm down and take a deep look inwards instead of pointing fingers at everyone else. your post comes off as angry and arrogant. You say that there aren't healthy churches and yet you say that what you are doing is healthy...? from that post alone I say that you arent healthy. Yes there are problems in churches but do you honestly think that there aren't problems in this diciple making movement? is it that perfect? the fact is as long as humans are brought together to interact there will be conflict and there will be problems no system is perfect.
my real problem here is that a philosophy of ministry has been made into a methodology of ministry. suddenly the church is a sinking ship and well all need to bail out. well the fact is that there has been a coroporate form of worship of God's people all the way back to Moses and all of a sudden you guys got the inside scoop from God on the way things are supposed to be done?
and Bob yes 20 somthings are walking away from church... to a place called college... more and more 20 somethings are being granted the oppurtonity to be able to go to college. and most of them go out of state away from their home and thus their home church... some of them join new churches some of them have their faith bashed to smitherines by professors and MOST just become apathetic... for an old guy you seem to think you know alot about people of my generation...
and to be honest the Orthdox churches in this country, the ones that still chant and etc. are seeing a HUGE influx of young people particularly the college age. The students when questioned say that the like the stability and routine... and further more they like that those churches have answers, whether or not they like them.
That is a very good point senor! Young people are going to college. If they go to a Christian college, they usually have an increase and growth in their faith. If they go to a secular school they get it smashed to bits. I talked about this problem in a post about why youth groups are failing/why people leave the church after youth groups. My heart is for college students. This is one reason why I am studying to be a theology or philosophy professor. I want to help reverse this cycle we're in!
Bob, I know my second definition is not biblical. But that is what the church is today in many respects. When I say that I go to church on Sundays, I mean I go to the location. Just because it is not biblical does not mean that it altogether bad. I don't see how going to church can be bad. Sinners who come to church without knowing Jesus are certainly welcome to attend!! Going to church could soften them up to someday accept Christ. Now until they accept Christ, they cannot be in any leadership or committees or things like that, but they can certainly attend to fill their curiosity about Jesus. Are you saying that if an unbeliever showed up to one of your meetings you would turn him away?? THAT is not biblical. Jesus is for everyone. And they can come find him at the church if they want. We won't turn them away. In fact, when they come we point them right to him.
And one more thing...what do you do with the sinking ship analogy I presented and your inflatable raft? Will you help us fix the Church or will you stay in your raft? Are you a reformer like Luther or are you a revolutionary like Lenin? Jesus was a reformer, a Law fulfiller. There was nothing revolutionary about him!! He did not come to start a new religion, but to fulfill the old one. He did not come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it. I hope we can all be more like Jesus!!
ANONY...i don't like your style and i won't sink to your level. Remove your safety net and we can discuss this like adults.
If a person is sickened by what they see if the mainstream church, why should they stay to help the sinking ship when the sinking ship won't have them?
Why would I want to be in a place where there's a separation between the "professional" ministers and the laity? In most churches I've been in, you have to use your gifts in the parking lot. There's no place during the "official" service for the gifts of mercy or exhortation or encouragement or prophecy. If the Lord gives you something to say, most of the time you're not allowed to disrupt the order of the church ("order" is the excuse anyway). You have to find the person in the parking lot and minister to them there. That's wrong. The body should see these things in action during the gathering.
Every church website in the country talks about making disciples. But for most churches discipleship is a Sunday night class, or a philosophy, but never something that's real and life changing. And I've never been in one that taught you how to reproduce yourself. It wasn't until I was in Kansas with Bob and Terry that I saw true discipleship and realized how badly screwed up my ideas were.
Most churches refuse to change their stripes. After seeing how the church truly functions like I saw in Kansas, I couldn't go back to a traditional church if I wanted to. Condemn us for leaving the "sinking ship" if you must, but there's no way we go back.
As far as Christian colleges go, they just perpetuate the myth that (sorry for all the "thats", Ehret) there's such a thing as a passive congregation and a full time ministry staff who does the "ministry". That's just not in Scripture.
I don't condemn those that want to stay in the traditional church. But don't accuse us of hating the church or abandoning ship just because we refuse to play by "traditions" rules.
A.) No one is being condemned here, exhorted perhpas, held accountable perhaps but not condemned.
B.) Have you actually attended and graduated from a christian college? if not they do not speak of what you do not know.
C.) We didn't say that you hate the church you did. READ BOBS POST! hello! ROFL
D.) You did jump ship... how can you be accused of something that you actually did?
E.) We already agreed that the church has problems, our point is that instead of jumping ship, find a hurting church (which shouldn't be hard) and try to bring new life within that Body of believers... wait... that almost sounds like something from the Bible... No surely the Bible wouldn't exhort believers to build up and encourage downtrodden brothers and sisters in Christ... oh wait...
F.) As far as use of gifts within the meeting... Paul in 1 Corinthians 12:22-26 says that there are some parts that have less dignity then others... He says that those parts are kept hidden from the eyes of others for their protection... So one of my youth sponsers has the gift of service, does that mean that he should come and vaccum the youth room during the middle of worship? NO of course not... Paul says that there should be order. Our God is not a God of chaos. And THERE IS a place for people to use their gifts during a service, but some people a.) are too lazy or b.) have gifts that are not needed, useful, or helpful DURING the service. and to be honest Chad sometimes the best place to use your gifts is in the parking lot. Jesus talks about doing things for His glory alone not for your glory.
ekklesia = assembly. There is a gathering aspect to being church. 'Where two or three are gathered in my name ...' Being church, at least a large part of it, is about coming together in Christ. Whatever new wine skins are created will always include some type of coming together and some type of leadership.
Bob, etc. Stop attacking straw men. You're not being prophetic or doing anyone a service that way. No one claimed that 'church' means calling people to sit in a pew. Nobody here is saying church is a location.
BTW, God is alive and well in Europe. I wish you could have been present for the incredible expression of the Body that I experienced last night - outside the church building (in an office), with an Anglican priest leading a spontaneous, Spirit-led, liturgical communion among a small-group of believers that gathered to show love and concern for one another and renew their commitment to suffer for Christ and call the lost to follow Jesus as disciples.
If you truly want an uncontrollable move of the Holy Spirit, then quit putting Him in a box and telling everyone where He can and cannot work.
Amen, H2B!! That's awesome news from Europe! and thank you for clarifying the Greek context/meaning of the word.
I can also vouch for the growth of the church and the working of the Holy Spirit in Europe. I was in Spain this summer for three weeks on a missions trip with IWU. We primarily worked with "jovenes"...young people ranging in age from 16 to 30. This group loves Jesus and they love coming to church! It was awesome to see their heart for the Lord. And if you like numbers, these groups of jovenes had over thirty attendees --in a churches of fewer than 200. Revival is happening in Europe! And God is using both the traditional church and beyond the walls. I am planning on returning to Spain as a leader this summer. Pray that my team will come together in these next few weeks, and pray for the people of Spain, that their hearts will be made ready to receive our ministry and witness for the Lord. Pray for revival in Spain, especially among the young people. Christ be praised! For he is able to do immeasurably more than we can ask or think!!!
I love how you guys continue to miss point...at least some of you...
I hate the church being reduced to a location. That's the radical point I made. I also do not have your definitions of the Church. Talk about sidestepping the purpose of this post.
Honest2Blog the Church is the Body of Christ and when she gathers she is a holy gathering. You know that across this land and around the world the Church is being reduced to a gathering in a location. The lost do not understand what it means to belong to the family of God - the Body of Christ - inclusion only by being invited by Him and Him alone.
Chris, was anony right? Why do you need to know him/her?
Phil, you have not yet seen my point. Your second definition leads to deception for the unreached.
Do you men (& women perhaps) not see the crisis in the American Church?
The way we define Church defines what we do to enfold the lost into her.
Keep attacking Seno I have great ability to handle the likes of you. You need to re-read your comments in the mirror.
My brothers be careful you are not missing the point here. When Church the Body of Christ is reduced to a location or a gathering place there is deception.
Chad - comes closer than any of you to giving a definition on what is the church...
Keep your thots coming - some of these guys cannot get past traditional things to see the glorious you speak of.
Some of you assume more than you should...you attack before you ask questions.
In the Disciple Driven Church movement we still gather together and we scatter as the Church. We just DO NOT reduce Church down to a location.
This means our gatherings look way way different than yours. It's all about how we define the Church.
Bob you keep going back to your original post, and I suppose that's fine. BUT you DO keep side stepping there have been other very serious issues brought up that you have not addressed. Some of which I would very much like to hear your responses to.
I apologize if I came across as overly sarcastic or rude that was not my intention, but Bob if you are going to tell people they need to look in the mirror you must be willing to do that yourself. Read your last 3 post for example.
And finally Bob I would like to see your arguments defended by scripture. Everyone else here has done such... can you?
Senor, you forget this is my post. And I get to draw you back to original question, What is Church.
I don't have to answer anything, because you are muddying the water on the original post. You don't want to answer the What is Church question.
I can define What is Church and with Scripture when I decide to.
Answer the question What is Church and quit biloviating.
H2B said, Bob, etc. Stop attacking straw men. You're not being prophetic or doing anyone a service that way. No one claimed that 'church' means calling people to sit in a pew. Nobody here is saying church is a location.
The Planter, you know that's not what I am doing. Shame on you.
Bob,
I answered your question. You throw back to the original question in order to dodge where the thread goes after we have answered the question. Good/bad debate tactic.
Why do I need to know the identity of the anonymous individual, credibility. If you are going to introduce/incite a topic like this that spurs emotion, then you ought to be man enough to sign your name and join it. I suppose it doesn't matter that much because I know who it is anyway. I just thought that they should really enter the discussion and stop pretending.
Conclusion: Bob I am concerned about you. I mean this for real. You are making a major mistake with the way you are going about this. I am all for a disciple making venture. If I wasn't for making disciples then I should be honorable and turn in my ordination. Your mistake comes with how you have set out to do this. You are full of hate. I am truly concerned.
Chris, you make these statements of concern and yet you haven't talked to me in years. I'm full of passion, not hate. While you defend your traditions you miss opportunities to see new expressions of God (I hope this is fair).
How we define Church defines our expressions.
How do you know God has not called me out to do this? How do you know God is not in this? You don't. You say your concerned yet never have you spoken with me about your concerns. You don't care, instead you seem defensive of what I suggest. You and I have different benchmarks for caring, that's O.K.
You have not defined What is Church, that's the point of the blog. Why do you refuse to define, What is Church?
I am guilty of baiting you in this post. Oops, can I do that.
HOW CAN I BE FILLED WITH HATE AND YET PRAY FOR YOU, NAPPANNEE MISSIONARY CHURCH, BEULAH CHURCH, NORTH CENTRAL DISTRICT? At least I'm asking God to bless you, that's more than you are doing for me, right!
Really I have nothing more to lose in order to see Holy Spirit Disciple's making Disciples movements birthed across America. These movements will threaten status quo as you have already seen But Oh, the transformation is like nothing ever experienced in my lifetime.
I'm with you on Any posts. In principle I don't like it when they shoot that way. If that's how they do it I'm all ears and eyes anyway. It's usually my friends.
You keep saying that I have not answered your question yet. If you will refer back 25 comments ago (unless someone beats me in this reply) I did.
You are right in saying that we have not talked in years. Very true. I was simply basing my conclusion on my browsing of your blog with in the last several days. That's all.
You said: "How do you know God has not called me out to do this? How do you know God is not in this? You don't. You say your concerned yet never have you spoken with me about your concerns. You don't care, instead you seem defensive of what I suggest. You and I have different benchmarks for caring, that's O.K."
Again, you are absolutely correct. I did not say that you are not called to this. I am sorry if you interpreted what I said to mean that. Please let me try again to be more clear. I am not saying that you are not called to this, my concern is how your are going about accomplishing your call. Two very different things.
I went to Arizona Bible College and Southwestern Bible College in Phoenix, AZ, so I know exactly what I'm talking about.
Why would I want to find a hurting church and fix it when the way they conduct church is the exact opposite of what I believe church is? Let them bring in high priced consultants to fix them. I don't want any part of them. If they correct themselves, great. If not, let them function in the outer court.
Your example of vacuuming during service was a strange straw man. None of us have ever encouraged something like that. What if the Lord gave a member a word of encouragement for the Body? Would he be allowed to share it before or after the pastor, or would he be forced to do it outside the service? In most churches, he has to wait for elder approval to even get up there.
Using gifts has nothing to with drawing attention to yourself, sometimes they're for the edification of the Body. Your're right, some gifts are not for use during the gathering of believers. But some are. And my point is, the gifts that should be used during the gathering are often not even aknoledged by the church. Hence, they're quelched.
Yes, I did akwardly word my post and contradicted myself. Thanks for noticing that. I abandoned the traditional ship, and have no qualms about doing so.
I used to roll my eyes at people like Bob. But experience changes bad theology, and I was stuck in my traditional and bad theology and had no idea. Now I consider myself free.
How do you guys shape your quadrilateral? You know what I am talking about if you have gone to seminary or a Christian college. In what order to you place Scripture, tradition, reason, and experience to shape your worldview? This is really at the heart of our outlook on ministry.
My quadrilateral was discussed in the original post that burst this whole thing open. I order them like this: Scripture, tradition, reason, experience. About a 60, 20, 10, 10 ratio. That is how my worldview is shaped. That is the view that I am coming to this discussion. I can also make a very good case for this view.
Everyone has a quadrilateral. What is yours? Bob, from the likes of your postings lately, I get the sense that you get rid of the tradition side altogether. Am I right? If I am, that's dangerous. I also get the sense that you might get rid of the reason side as well. And you may not get rid of Scripture, but you minimalize it beneath experience. Is this a fair assessment of your quadrilateral (really only two lines, which do not form a shape and is therefore incomplete)? It seems that the thing that is driving you the most is your bad experience you had with some black sheep of the family. I'm interested in yours and others' quadrilaterals.
And Bob, could you answer in regards to my sinking ship analogy? I am still waiting. I answered your questions and responded to your "hate statements. Now I am discussing how such things are NOT stupid. I am relating to your post. Can you be so kind as to answer my questions that relate to your post? Will you help fix the sinking ship? and what is your quadrilateral like?
I never asked how is the church expressed. What is Church?
Have you a quadrilateral? Do not sidestep. I answered your questions. Defining church inevitably results in discussing the church's character, how it is expressed. You cannot describe a person without talking about what he does, what he believes, how he expresses himself. If you neglected these things, you would not be defining him. Likewise you cannot talk about the church without talking about how she expresses herself.
Now will you answer my questions as to how the church is expressed. How do you order your quadrilateral? How will you act towards a broken church? Are you part of the church? Tell me how you work in these areas.
Of course I am familiar with a quadrilateral. And I have a standard test for Truth. At least I'm not leaving out the RHEMA of the Holy Spirit as the Wesleyan Quad does.
You did not answer the question WHat is Church? You cannot talk about expressions until you do that. I insist, really.
what part of "the communion of saints, the catholic (universal) Christian community" do you not see? I told you what the church is (way up there in the earlier post). And I don't think you would have any reason to disagree with this definition.
I have defined the Church in its most basic form. Now can we complete the definition by talking about expressions? Again I ask, quadrilateral? (and I do acknowledge the Holy Spirit in this; He is the one that guides us through it). Again, how will you respond, as an expression of the church, to the sinking ship? Are you content on your raft? Or will you help us fix the hole?
i think the question Bob and i would like to pose, is: Is the old ship worth saving? or are we going to hop on the new boat the Lord has sent us? carrying the old boat will put unecessary strain on teh new vessel, if it will be able to carry it at all, so both is NOT an option from where we are standing.
WOW.
I see the ship worth saving. I hope you would too someday.
""""Are you a reformer like Luther or are you a revolutionary like Lenin? Jesus was a reformer, a Law fulfiller."""""
Your right. Luther and his reformers stayed in the Cathloic Church forever and ever and they are still in it working today.... Wait, oh yeah, Luther tried on the inside, was rejected and then had to break away.
But you are right about Jesus. His followers worked in the Synagogues and stayed in the Synagogues for ever and ever bringing greater and greater reform....wait, oh yeah, they tried and when the Jews in the synagogues did not accept what they were saying, they left and went out. I don't know why you give examples like this when they disprove your point. All great reformers get to the point where they have to leave the already established movement.
""""My quadrilateral was discussed in the original post that burst this whole thing open. I order them like this: Scripture, tradition, reason, experience. About a 60, 20, 10, 10 ratio."""""
Lets look at this. This is very very concerning. None of these things should be a percent, because they all should be in harmony.
Scripture can not be contradicted. Scripture is 100% perfect. If I experience, reason, or if tradition violates scripture, then my experiences, reasoning and traditions are wrong.
The Holy Spirit interprets scripture. The Holy Spirit gives revelation into scripture. Do you not listen to the Holy Spirit? Where is the Holy Spirit in all of this? The Holy Spirit will not tell you anything that contradicts scripture of course.
The rest of your stuff appears to be attempting to interpret scripture with your flesh. The way the Greeks looked at learning and such. It is useless. You can not reason out God. Nor do traditions point to God. Nor can your experiences be of God without the movement of the Holy Spirit.
It is very concerning that tradition is higher than reason though. Even if you are looking at scripture using only the flesh, you are relying on what others have told you above what you can figure out and what you read in plain English. You are letting people tell you your faith. If the Holy Spirit worked and showed you something that violated your traditions you would not accept it according to your statement. How can God change your heart? What does He have to do? He can not tell you what the truth it, He can not reveal anything to you because that is experience and if it contradicts your traditions you reject it. You have moved into a place where you do not expect to actually hear from God anymore haven't you? That is a horrible place to be. I was there for many years. Please, think about this. Consider what God wants not what tradition dictates. How is God going to speak to you?
Hi eric, if you really begin to think about it my model makes sense. I of course agree that Scripture cannot contradict itself. The others only safeguard against an improper interpretation of Scripture. You may think it is the Holy Spirit showing you an interpretation, but it could very well be your own thoughts and prejudices being read into the text. I do of course believe that the Holy Spirit leads you to correct interpretation, but he works through these other parts of the quadrilateral.
Regarding tradition, it makes sense to test your interpretation against the generally accepted interpretation of your local church, your denomination, and the Christian community as a whole from all of history. This is only logical.
In regards to reason. Do we not serve a reasonable, logical God? Of course we can not conceive the depths of that reason, but I believe that he does allow us to find him and his will through reason, at least in part. Reason is part of God's image in us. It is an act of worship when we use that gift to seek him. Faith and reason have been joined together. Christianity solidified the marriage between Athens and Jerusalem. In fact Jesus Christ is the "Logos." He is the Word, Logic, Reason (John 1).
If we need to discuss this further, let's open up a new discussion about the quadrilateral. But please think about it first. Perhaps take some classes that teach it. It really is a good way to approach the Christian faith.
Phil,
"""""Regarding tradition, it makes sense to test your interpretation against the generally accepted interpretation of your local church, your denomination, and the Christian community as a whole from all of history. This is only logical."""""""
How? That is not what Christ did. Did Christ just accept all the old traditions the Pharisees had?
Is reason a good way to approach things from a humanist standpoint? Of course. Absolutely. Reason is the best thing in the world when you take all works of God out of the equation. In fact, that is all that is left. The Holy Spirit can actually impress on you apart from anything. God can actually talk directly to you. You can hold a conversation with Him. That completely defies logic, reason, and anything else.
There are two symbols in the Bible. There are two Greek words for "word". One is Logos which is the written word. One is Rhema which is the revealed word of God. God showing himself to us. The same idea extends back through the old testament and into the new through the symbol of dirt and water. Dirt/dust is symbolic of truth or logos. Water is symbolic of the Spirit of God or Rhema. That is why when we leave a city that rejected us, we shake their dust off our feet. Why man was created from the dust of the ground and the breath of life or spirit was breathed in him. That is why the serpent ate the dust of the ground. You sound like you are seeking to understand scripture using the dust only. The dust alone can not be understood. It is void of understanding to the hearer. It has no revelation from God. Seek to understand the Logos, to understand the dirt using the Rhema, using the Spirit of God which He has given you access to. God Himself living inside of you. You have access to HIM. Consider that. Consider how illogical just using logic to interpret scripture is when you can seek God and He will give you answers you need and He will tell you what you need to know, and He will help you interpret scripture, and He will not allow you to misunderstand His voice if you are walking in His Spirit. The sheep know the voice of the Shepard. Don't rely on yourself to understand scripture, a spiritual book. Rely on the God of the universe that wrote it.
You confuse a Greek word "Rhema" with a Hebrew word "Nephesh." Though the concepts may be similar, the words are different. Nephesh is the breath of life that God breathed into us. Rhema does refer the Holy Spirit working, ut not necessarily the breath of life. Logos is not symbolic of dust or material things as you say. The Logos is Christ. "In the beginning was the Logos. The Logos was with God and the Logos was God..." Are you comparing Christ to dust?
I want you to know that I do of course acknowledge the Holy Spirit in the quadrilateral model. He is the one who allows us to know anything about Scripture. He does work (best I might add) in and through this model.
Regarding tradition...Jesus did reject a lot of the Jewish traditions that were not in themselves required by the Law. He rejected much of the "Mishna" which was written in the 400 year gap between the last Old Testament writing and the arrival of Christ. The Mishna was intensely legalistic. For example, dictating the number of steps on the Sabbath, washing hands before one eats, and so on. Jesus did refuse to abide by these in certain circumstances. He did not however reject any part of the Jewish Law of Moses. He came to fulfill the Law, not the Mishna.
Likewise, when I say tradition, I refer to the creeds, the solid doctrines. I don't refer to lighting a certain number of candles or singing the right types of songs or having liturgy or anything else that God himself does not require. When I use tradition, I ask the question, What position has the Church traditionally held in this particular passage of Scripture. The Holy Spirit is in this because surely a consistently held view would likely have been inspired by the Holy Spirit. If he revealed one thing back then, wouldn't he reveal the same thing today? This is what I mean here. Now with Luther and his rejection of indulgences...He used tradition to arrive at the conclusion that indulgences were wrong. The church had not traditionally held that view until his contemporary time. He also used Scripture, reason, and experience all guided by the Holy Spirit.
Does this clarify? If not, let's ask Bob to open up and talk about the Quadrilateral in a new thread.
Phil, The Logos is the TRUTH.
The Rhema is the Revealed Truth.
I know this is off the topic a bit but the one thing missing in much of the preaching today is the Rhema.
Logos without the Rhema is condemnation/judgment. It is like hearing a sermon and knowing what the next line is. It lacks power. It is watered down. The Holy Spirit is the revealer of Truth. We need Rhema in order to understand the deeper meaning of Scripture/Truth.
The Quad does not address Rhema and her importance in our search for Truth.
Since I've been leaning about rhema the Word of God has incredible life.
I know I explained things pretty quick. I did not confuse the words, but I probably did not express things well. Dust is a symbol for Truth. Christ is the truth. Water is a symbol for the Spirit. The Holy Spirit dwells inside us.
Anyway you said,
"I refer to the creeds, the solid doctrines.""""
Okay, what specific creed does the disciple driven church disagree with? We disagree with no creeds but mans traditions. The beliefs are not really all so wrong, the actions do NOT math the beliefs. No ones key beliefs involve a building, "going to church", a pastor leading them, or any of the junk that has been added. People just believe those things because they done them over and over.
""""He used tradition to arrive at the conclusion that indulgences were wrong. The church had not traditionally held that view until his contemporary time."""""
He had 94 other problems too. He did not set up another cathloic church. Martin Luther changed key beliefs.
Post a Comment
<< Home