Our Vision for Home Groups

September 21, 2010.

Background:
In the first four centuries after Christ ascended into heaven, the word "church" (ekklēsia) did not have anything to do with a structure, walls, a building, or even a specific location.  Instead, it meant congregation or assembly.  This is why Paul clarified the word by saying "church in their house"  and "the church in" a particular city.  The church in Corinth, for example, likely didn't always meet in a single location.  And in early Church history when Christians were being hunted and persecuted, the believers met in hiding, even in the catacombs--worshiping, preaching, and teaching, right next to the decomposing bodies of those who were recently martyred for their faith.  However, over the years (especially in America), holding services and gathering together in a building specifically designated for the church became extremely practical.   It's wonderful that a local church can meet together in a single building on Sunday and throughout the week!

However, communities built on strong bonds and consistent, safe opportunities to grow, learn, serve, and work out matters of the faith are losing ground to a rapidly moving society of fast communication, long commutes, and social networking.  The little neighborhood community ekklēsia is becoming extinct.  What is left of community is often only seen on Sunday mornings.  To gather together at the church typically requires long drives from opposite ends of the city.  It many not be true everywhere, but it is true for Salt Lake.

Churches are turning to smaller groups that meet in homes in addition to the various gatherings in the church building in an effort to foster a strong community, reach non-believers, and grow relationships.  Many long to mirror the early Acts 2 church communities: "And, day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they received their food with glad and generous hearts, praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved" (Acts 2:46-47, ESV). 

With so many churches utilizing mid-week groups that meet in homes, there are many different models and methods throughout the Church.  Some churches have gone completely to a home-church system without ever meeting corporately in an designated church building.  Other small groups meet with a social goal in mind.  Still others meet to study in greater depth.  Some call for accountability.  For some, it is about outreach.  And sadly for some, it is about checking another box, simply to be doing something "religious." 

These groups come in all sizes and are tagged by many different names.  Some churches call them small groups; some are identified by the name "home group."  I've seen other names too, like community groups, life groups, Soma groups, home church, disciple groups, and so on.  Some meet weekly, some bi-weekly, some monthly, and some actually never meet (because they are more of a phone-tree thing.)

Our Vision for Home Groups:
Lisa and I feel our local church does a great job with classes that meet on Sunday mornings (although it would be nice to see the the number and size of these classes matching the explosive growth of the church).  The sermons are soundly fixed in Scripture, and other mid-week classes at the church building are teaching good doctrine, often with practical application.

The church we attend utilizes a small group system called "community groups."  If I understand correctly, there are a couple groups that meet exclusively in homes, but generally the groups meet together for Sunday school classes and then have regular gatherings in homes at other times.  Unfortunately, there are not very many of these groups.  (It is not my intention to be critical of these groups, but instead, I hope to grow more groups.) Another difficulty is the connection of these groups to Sunday classes.  Given that many people serve the church in a variety of ways, they can't always join a class.  Some people simply have work schedules or other responsibilities that do not allow them to attend a Sunday school class. And there are also people who might not be comfortable yet in attending a Sunday school class for one reason or another.  Therefore, Lisa and I would like to see multiplying home groups (not necessarily tied to a Sunday class)  helping fellow believers grow in their relationship with Jesus, serve as another outreach to non-believers, and then launch more multiplying home groups. 

A group might start with as few as 6 people and hopefully grow to about 10 to 14, at which point the group should be thinking of launching another home group.  Just as Jesus sent out the Apostles in groups of two (Mark 6:7), each group should consist of two leaders--a host and home group leader.  The host will oversee the physical needs of the group, which may consist of providing the place to gather, food, and any other needs; or simply planning who will provide what, when.  The home group leader won't necessarily be planning lessons (more on this in a minute), but instead be a strong leader to guide the group and re-direct the group if it starts to head in a poor spiritual direction.  The leader should be quick to turn to the Bible for guidance as well as lead and encourage the group in prayer. In addition to these two leaders, each group should also have an apprentice leader.  This apprentice leader will most likely be the leader of the next launched home group and will assist the leader and fill in as needed.  If possible, it would be nice if the group also has a apprentice host. 

Each group should examine their needs and pray about how they, together as a home group, can best grow closer to God.  This may or may not mean regular "lessons."  It could be through fellowship and light scripture reading and study.  Maybe games and open conversation, followed by honest corporate prayer.  Or the needs of the group might be calling for a deep well structured study in the Word of God.  Hopefully the group will engage in service projects and activities.  It will really depend upon the individual group.  The goal is for the group to provide a place for people to be accessible to one another, (especially the leaders), so they can work out their faith (Proverbs 27:17) and love God more and more.  And the group should be praying together, helping each other in times of need, and joining each other in celebrating the happy moments of life.  Each member should know the others and be known, meaning the connection between one another is deeper than those of simple book club meeting or Sunday school class.

In addition, the group should be praying about and working to expand their group, especially through the conversion of non-believers.  While some non-believers have no problem walking into a church service on Sunday morning, others may feel more comfortable coming to a home group at a neighbor's house or accepting an invitation from a co-worker.  And discipleship projects (briefly discussed in the previous paragraph) could potentially be outreach activities such as prayer walking, neighborhood barbecues, or offering service to a neighbor in need.

As the group grows, they should be excited to launch another home group to multiply and repeat the process.  Ideally, members of these groups will be found worshiping and studying the Word of God together at the church building on Sunday, and then getting together in homes all over the valley at other times throughout the week.  This might even be a way to understand what God is doing in the Salt Lake valley.  Should the church grow to the point that it is time to plant another church or campus, an area where there are already many home groups might be a ripe location.

How does it start?  From one group.  It's simple. From this single group, people will be invited, apprentices identified, and eventually another group launched.  At that point, two groups will be growing and launching more groups.  Those groups will also continue the process, stopping only after everybody in the entire valley is meeting somewhere in a home group and corporately worshiping Jesus as a part of his Church.     

I will be leading a group that Lisa is hosting in our home.  Will you join us?  If you are interested, please don't hesitate to contact me.

LBTS, Post Dr. Jerry Falwell

At the time of this post, I attend Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary (Distance Learning Program) through Liberty University and I love it!  I am getting a good education and feel that it is great preparation for ministry.  However, given the regular inquiries I receive about LBTS and some recent observations, I've decided to publicly answer the frequently asked questions and offer my thoughts.

But first, here's a little background about me as it relates to LBTS.  (If you need to know more, click here.)  I earned an Associates of Science and an Associates of Applied Science at the College of Southern Idaho, then I transferred to the University of Utah where I earned a Bachelors of Science.  Until attending LBTS, I had never done any distance education on-line or through correspondence.  I'm married to a beautiful woman and we've adopted two boys -- one of which was born and came into our lives while I've been in seminary.  I also am employed full-time in secular employment.

I first started looking into seminaries when I was considering a return to the Army as a chaplain.  God had other plans; but it was the Army's requirements, Liberty's Master's of Divinity chaplaincy track, the ability to complete the program through distance education, and the price that eventually caused me to apply at LBTS.  I've since switched to the professional M.Div, which is a fully-accredited, 95-credit Master's Degree.  I've been at LBTS since Spring 2009 and I am scheduled to graduate in Spring 2012. I have never been on campus, although I'd like to visit and even take some intensives in Lynchburg.  It is my hope to apply for a PhD (Apologetics and Theology) upon the completion of the MDiv.

Like my article, "Choosing a Seminary," I will simply take on one item at a time.  There is some overlap between these two articles, but where the first article was a broad non-specific overview of seminary, this article is specific to LBTS.  If you have questions about items I have not addressed in either of these articles, please don't hesitate to contact me.

Dr. Jerry Falwell.  When people hear I go to Liberty, I often get asked about two people.  The first is Glenn Beck and the other is Jerry Falwell.  I won't get into Beck in this article (you can read more on that topic by clicking here).  Jerry Falwell however, makes for an interesting conversation.  Prior to starting at Liberty, all I knew of Falwell came by way of news sound bites about something controversial he said.  And I remember some of the things people said about him when he died.  I was a little apprehensive; but then I remembered that I graduated from a public university founded by the Mormon Prophet, Brigham Young (University of Utah, February 28, 1850).

I've come to learn that the seminary is not the School of Jerry Falwell--it is Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary.  It is dedicated to teaching the Bible and serving as a reflection of Jesus Christ.  Of course there are some professors that loved Falwell and miss him.  That's to be expected.  It seems that everybody who preaches at convocation feels it necessary to share a story or example of the man who founded the school.  However, outside of a handful of professors and illustrations in convocation, Falwell doesn't come up (unless it is Jerry Falwell Jr.).

In a recorded lecture before Falwell passed away, Dr. Ergun Caner said,

"There will come the time, please here me, there will come a time when Jerry Falwell goes on to glory.  There will come the time when the next generation will either make or brake this university.  They will inherit a great blessing; and you either sit on it and ride it until it dies or you do something with it. [...] It's the typical, central, fundamental necessary point in history.  You have to claim your generation.  It matters not how great and mighty Jerry Falwell is.  It matters not how great and mighty Elmer Towns is. [...] But Elmer Towns will stand before God for what Elmer Towns did with his opportunity.  If all we do is name a building or even build a statue to the guy, if we don't claim our generation, like David was to do--he served his generation and then went to be with the Lord--Liberty's great legacy as it stands right now, the reputation as it stands right now, will become nothing but an empty shell."  

There is some truth to this statement.  Even now I see the school going beyond where Dr. Falwell left it.  Why?  Because the school is not one man, especially not now--it's a skilled and caring staff and faculty dedicated to the gospel and their mission as an institution of higher learning.  In addition, from what little I know about Jerry Falwell, I have think that he would desire his legacy to be a reflection of Jesus Christ, not himself.  

Diversity in the class.  When I log into the discussion boards, I find a variety of students from a variety of Christian denominations, from a variety of locations around the world, from a variety of backgrounds.  I get to see our material through a variety of lenses and perspectives.  There are both men and women, Calvinists and Ariminians, charismatics and secessionists, pre and post tribulationists, Republicans and Democrats and those that just don't subscribe to any political party.  Many of the students are pastors, church planters, chaplains, or others ministers of some sort, so I also get to learn through the benefit of their past and present experiences.  Even some of the professors live in areas other than Lynchburg.  And I've connected with these students (and some of the professors) outside the class through Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, E-mail, Skype, and even phone calls.  I regularly read their blogs.  Three of my local friends attend Liberty--one in the seminary, one in an undergraduate program, and one in a non-ministry related Master's program--and I've had lunch with a local alumni.

Accreditation.  LBTS is SACS accredited.  Before offering on-line programs, it is my understanding that Liberty was ATS accredited.  You might ask why this matters. Accreditation boards exists to ensure that the quality of the education meets a minimum standard.  Schools that meet these standards are considered "accredited."  Various state, regional, and federal departments of education approve and recognize accrediting bodies (or don't). Generally, if a student wishes to transfer credits to another school or pursue a degree beyond the masters he or she earned in seminary, it is important that he or she earned a degree from an accredited seminary.  In addition, many ministry positions such as a military chaplain, missionary, or teacher often require a degree from an accredited school.  There are regional accrediting bodies and national accreditation institutions, as well as discipline-specific accreditation bodies.

The Association of Theological Schools (ATS) has been the primary accrediting body for seminaries for many years; however, they are slow to understand the value of a distance learning program and therefore will not accredit programs that allow a majority of on-line learning.  The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) on the other hand, examines much more than seminaries and is open to examining distance learning programs.  They've been around since 1895 and as of July 2010, SACS accredits 804 colleges and universities in 11 states--479 are public.  They provide accreditation to a number of other seminaries including Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Southwestern Seminary, New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Asbury Theological Seminary, Harvard School for Theological Studies, Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary, South Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Baptist Missionary Association Theological Seminary, Reformed Theological Seminary, St. Vincent de Paul Regional Seminary, Mid-America Baptist Theological Seminary, Memphis Theological Seminary, Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, and Nortre Dame Seminary, to name a few.  Some other notable SACS colleges and universities include, Wake Forest University, Vanderbilt University, University of Texas, University of South Carolina, Tulane University, Texas A&M, TCU, James Madison University,  George Mason University, Florida State University, Duke, Clemson, The Citadel, Notre Dame, and Auburn University.       

On-line vs. the classroom.  This can be a sensitive subject in our rapidly changing world.  Having earned my undergraduate degrees entirely in the classroom, I can say there are pros and cons.  At Liberty, I've been told that that on-line students have the same requirements and the same readings, and we watch recorded lectures from actual classes; however, the on-line students also have weekly discussion board requirements.  The discussion boards require a minimum word count and cited sources.  We also have to respond to fellow students with substantive comments, and again, with word counts and citations.  A professor of mine has told me he feels the on-line courses are actually more difficult because of these discussion boards.  If I was behind and had not done the reading when I was taking undergraduate courses on campus, I could usually slip into the unknown and get through the week unnoticed.  This is not possible in the on-line courses. 

Connection with other students.  One of the cons of on-line education is the lower level of connectivity with other students.  But your education is what you make it.  As I've previously stated, I make a strong effort to connect with other students and professors via social networking sites, E-mail, phone calls, and even the discussion board's student community area.  What I do not have is the opportunity to grab a coffee with a fellow student and chat.

Help from my church and pastors.  To get the most out of seminary, students need to be engaged in their local church.  Having lots of opportunities and pastors that support the student are a must if the student is going to be well prepared upon graduation.  I'm blessed to have this support and it's growing stronger and stronger by the week.

My class load.  Nine credits per semester is considered full-time in the graduate programs.  I'm taking 12 credits per semester; however, I only take two compressed course at a time.  Liberty has a traditional 16-week semester.  This is called A block.  They also offer the same courses in 8-weeks through three different blocks.  B block is the first 8 weeks of the semester, D block is the last 8 weeks, and C block is the middle 8 weeks.  The student will do just as much work, only in half the time.  I've opted to take 2 classes each B block and 2 each D block.  I do the same amount of work as I would have had I taken all 4 classes in the A block, but this schedule means I don't have to switch mental gears between 4 classes.  Also, I have taken classes over the past two summers, but I will be taking next summer off. 

Would I recommend LBTS to others?  You bet! I've found the experience rewarding. LBTS's DLP has allowed me an opportunity I would not have otherwise had.  I work full-time to support my family.  The DLP allows me to schedule my schooling around my other responsibilities.  I am engaged in my community and the DLP means I can remain right where I'm at to serve and minister here rather than packing up and moving.  I think anybody considering seminary should consider LBTS, either on campus or on-line.

These tend to be some of the more frequently asked questions.  If you'd like to ask a question or chat with me, please feel free to contact me.


     Related Articles: Choosing a Seminary

*Photo of Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary & Graduate School is being used without permission; however, upon request from Liberty, I will immediately remove it from this website.
**Photo of Dr. Jerry Falwell is the property of Liberty University and use through the permission of a restricted commons license.

What is the Mormon Doctrine?

Recently, Glenn Beck and his Washington DC rally has prompted some talk about Christianity and Mormonism.  Similar discussions surfaced when Mitt Romney ran for the Republican Presidential nomination.  At the same time, there have been conversations among my fellow seminarians about Liberty University's connection to Beck.  (I fully admit, I am not comfortable with Beck.)  New videos have surfaced trying to show viewers that Mormons are normal people, seemingly, just like everybody else--just like Christians.  And LDS members frequently identify themselves as Christian.  The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) desperately seems to desire inclusion within orthodox Christianity. Some have argued that Christianity and Mormonism are the same or at least, "close enough."  More recently, some think that it shouldn't matter as long as Glenn Beck can manipulate American religion in such a way to conform to his political bent.  Others however, are deeply concerned with Beck's beliefs and actions.  Although Glenn Beck is a essentially a rating-hounding shock-jock, the more meaningful conversations center around the similarities and differences between the Mormon and Christian theologies or doctrines.

What tends to happen with the conversation surrounding Mormonism is a focus on the minor issues.  I confess that I have got mired down in this mess in conversations with Mormon friends and missionaries. But the minor issues are meaningless without first addressing the major matters of the LDS religion and Christian theology.  I suggest that we within (generally accepted) Christianity need to better understand the major tenants of the Mormon doctrine, while Mormons need to understand the major tenants generally required to carry the title, Christian.  I also feel it is important that we attempt to settle on some agreed definitions.  All too often we are using the same words but they hold different meanings.  Only after we address the major doctrines and vocabulary will we be able to get to the heart of the matter.

There is no doubt in my mind that many of us (including me) understand only a caricature of the other's beliefs.  This is not to say that once we get a better understanding of the opposing position Mormons will stop sending missionaries to Christian's homes and Christians will consider Mormons inside the traditionally accepted walls of the orthodox tent; but at least our conversations will be more accurate.  If indeed there are differences that mean some of us are outside salvation, then it is only expected that we would want to share a gospel that brings about salvation.  On the other hand, if we find we share enough that we will all be together in God's Kingdom (and I admit that at the moment, I do not feel this is the case), than we are really just wasting our time arguing over meaninglessness.

Glenn Beck is Pat Robertson?

Few would argue with me when I say Glenn Beck is divisive.  He's a lightning bolt between Conservatives and Liberals, Democrats and Republicans, Republicans and Republicans, Evangelicals, and, as Felicia Sonmez of the Washington Post suggests, Mormons.  It seems that there are many members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS, Mormons) saying that Beck does not speak for their organization.  So it would seem that while many Evangelicals take issue with his theology,  so do some Mormons.  How interesting.

I am only speculating, but I wonder if those that take no issue with the theology of Glenn Beck--be it Christian or Mormon--actually don't care because they are more drawn to his politics?

It is interesting to note some of the Mormon statements made in Felicia Sonmez' blog article "Is Glenn Beck's rise good for Mormonism?"  It seems that Glenn Beck is to Mormonism as Pat Robertson is to Christianity.  This could become a tremendous open door for Evangelicals and Mormons to discuss the more significant matters of theology.  It could finally be time that we move away from discussing life-styles and moral behavior and actually get to discussing matters of salvation, the nature and person of Christ, and various other essential factors of the respective faith systems.

*Photo by Luke Martin is registered under a Creative Commons License.

Church Planter by Darrin Patrick

I have not yet read Church Planter by Darrin Patrick, but by the video and some reviews I've read, I am intrigued.  Church planting books usually have a lot to say about planting philosophy, methodology, and strategy.  There is a lot of "how to." But unlike most other books on church planting, Patrick seems to place the bulk, if not all of his attention on the planter. It's about "who to." In the same vain as Eugene Peterson's, Working the Angles, Patrick appears to argue: get the core right within the leader and the the rest will fall in where it needs to fall in.  By keeping God in focus, a church plant will have life.  And if I am understanding correctly, he starts with the planter, not the community, not the sender, not the financial support, not the vision for the church. 

I've placed this book on my wish list and look forward to reading it.

Youth Ministry

Introduction. Most adults will admit that being a teenager is tough. For many, it was the most difficult period of their lives; but still many will also say it was a fun and interesting time. The period from junior high through high school is a time of growth and understanding. It is a time of learning through failure and success, and everything seems new. Friendships are grown and developed. And, as teenagers, people learn how to transition from the time of a childhood to adult maturity (although this transition in many western societies protrudes into a person’s early 20s). There are reasons for a strong youth program in church, some of which will be discussed here.

What is Youth Ministry and Why. According to Youth Ministry Exchange, “80% of Christians become so by the age of 18, with influences such as conventions, camps, retreats” (Youth Ministry Exchange). And of these Christians that became Christians before the age of 18, LifeWay Research has found that, “70 percent of young adults ages 23-30 stopped attending church regularly for at least a year between ages 18-22” (LifeWay Research, slide 6). Of all the reasons given for the break, 20% of them indicated that the respondent did not feel connected people in his or her church (LifeWay Research, slide 10). Youth ministry is the organized effort to train youth, share the gospel to young people, provide service opportunities, offer mentorship, make a way for accountability from leaders and peers, and foster connections with others through relational community (Valley Bible Church).

It would be unreasonable to think that a child could transition from worshiping, learning, and fellowshipping with others in a children’s ministry into an adult ministry, so youth ministry serves to bridge the gap. In addition, youth ministry and youth leaders help shepherd a young person through the awkward and often difficult time of this period. In fact, this may be the most significant time for growth and development in a Christian’s lifetime, especially if 80% of Christians became believers before the age of 18. Youth ministry is a place for foundations to be laid. It is a place for relationships to be developed. There is support found with peers, and there are opportunities for non-believing friends to be invited. And there should be fun and joy along with training, rebuking, and instruction.

Examples of Youth Ministry. Youth ministry may take on many different forms, but it must serve as the Holy Spirit has structured it for the specific area, specific church, and specific group of teens. Often a strong youth ministry program will offer some sort of Sunday school or separate service for the youth. There might be a youth worship team leading worship (which helps foster ministry opportunities for the youth), or the youth might remain with their parents through a time of corporate worship (which helps slowly integrate the group into the adult fellowship) to be released midway through the service. A mid-week evening service should be offered. Fellowship opportunities are usually a normal part of youth ministry, which can include anything from game nights, movie nights, camps, concerts and events, Bible studies before or after school, or just about anything a creative youth leader can come up with. The youth program should also include service opportunities. Some churches will have a service day were the youth help out the community by performing a task like trash clean up or painting. At times, these service opportunities shift to feeding the homeless or serving in a rescue mission. And mission trips are a valuable addition to any youth program. Although few churches do it, the youth ministry is the right time to start integrating small group habits. With the parents’ help, smaller groups can meet in homes together to study, worship, and fellowship in an intimate setting. It is advisable that these are completely youth lead, although with every aspect of youth ministry, there should be supervision from a responsible leader. The only limitations of youth ministry are found in the leader’s mind and the availability of resources.

References:
LifeWay Research. Spring 2007 “Church Dropouts: How Many Leave Church between ages 18-
22 and Why?” LifeWay Website. Microsoft PowerPoint presentation file.
http://www.lifeway.com/lwc/files/lwcF_Church_Dropouts_
How_Many_Leave_Church_and_Why.ppt [accessed June 12, 2010].

Valley Bible Church. Ten Reasons Why You Should Be Involved in Youth Ministry.
http://www.valleybible.net/Youth/reasons.php [accessed June 12, 2010].

Youth Ministry Exchange. 10 Reasons Why I’m in Youth Ministry.
http://ymexchange.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=130&Itemid=66
[accessed June 6—June 12, 2010]. 
*Photo by Flickr user, Leah Manchi. 

Moving With the Wind

My loving wife, knowing my desire to do something adventurous, bought me a tandem paragliding ride.  I was recently able to get that ride on the North side of the Point of the Mountain in the Salt Lake valley.  The forty-minute flight, has offered me many reflections on flying with the wind, but also about our partnership with the Holy Spirit.

Paragliding is essentially riding on the wind much like surfing is riding on the water.  The pilot first lays the glider out in a special area where the wind blows at just the right speed, going just the right direction.  In addition to the wind, the sun's rays cause thermal updrafts, which can also carry the glider to higher altitudes.  My flight started on a bench about 300 feet higher than the city below.  Behind me stood a steep, 1,000 foot mountain.  Waiting, we felt the wind on our face; waiting, the right gust blew life into the glider.  With the right wind and thermal activity, we managed to climb high enough to glide right next to the larger hill and catch the ridge wind to carry us nearly 2,000 feet above the city.

As I was given the controls, I realized that I was not flying.  I was riding.  I was not actually in control.  Neither was my tandem pilot.  A paraglider is nothing like a powered airplane that goes nearly wherever the pilot, lift, and thrust dictate.  No.  We were moving with the wind, only able to make adjustments to the glider in order to deflect the wind.  We were dependent on it to move us in the direction we desired to go.  But here's the thing: We desired to go where the wind would take us.  We wanted to be in the place where we had the option to go up or down and side to side, because as soon as we moved away from the wind, we would only be able to descend and land, ending the flight.

Our relationship with Holy Spirit is very much the same.  Each believer is gifted by the Holy Spirit.  These gifts (whatever they may be) are like the glider.  They allow us to ride on the wind, but only in the direction the wind is going.  If we desire to trust the wind and ride with it, we will fly to great heights.  However, should we wish to go our own way, we will quickly learn how absolutely dependent upon the wind we are.  There is no flight without the wind.

After we landed, another glider was coming in fast from the wrong direction.  You see, landing requires that you go into the wind so you have enough lift at slower speeds.  This pilot had the wind at his back.  He was falling quickly and racing forward faster than he could run when his feet (and then his body) made contact with the earth.  In that moment, as I watched a disastrous landing, I realized even more about the wind.  First, it must be respected because the wind is in control.  This poor pilot, it seemed, decided he was in control and learned a very hard lesson, a very hard way.  In fact, it is highly likely that he didn't intend to land with the wind at his back, but was actually facing the consequences of earlier actions and wrong decisions.

Second, I realized how wonderful it was for me that I had a guide who has flown in the wind for many years.  I was able to have a good and safe flight thanks to his dedication to understanding and respecting the wind.  And because of the safety and guidance he provided, I was able to learn about the wind through his example.  He taught me lots about the wind while we flew; which brings me to the third thing: understanding the wind and flying well clearly takes time, study, and practice.

And finally, we can't see the wind, so it is difficult to know exactly what it is doing.  We had to watch other gliders to see how the wind was moving them.  At times, we could follow them and ride the same wind; other times we would avoid going where they were to keep from suffering from their unfortunate circumstances.  My pilot explained that the wind does some things over the ridge that do not allow gliders to ride it.  It's called "rotor" and the result of flying in it would be, as explained by my pilot, that "our wing would be under our feet, then over our head, then under our feet, then over our head."  And, as I was told, if we moved away from the bench's edge, we would "sink out" and loose our ability to gain altitude.  If the wind were to push us into certain areas, we could loose control all together. (Did you know at times it can actually be difficult to get out of the wind's control and come back down?)

In a discussion with a man named Nicodemus, Jesus said, "The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit” (John 3:8, ESV).  Also worth noting is that in this passage, the Greek word pneuma is used for "wind" and the "Spirit."  

*Photos take by John Anderson is the property of Shannon Lucas and registered under a Creative Commons license.

Adult Ministries

Introduction.   

Too often, church leaders will preach on the commission of Matthew 28:19-20—“Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you” (ESV)—placing their entire focus on the word “Go,” but neglecting “make disciples” and “teaching.” However, if we are to take Jesus’ directive seriously, churches must do more to teach adults than simply provide coffee and a Sunday sermon. Specific ministry should be developed for adults.

What is Adult Ministry and Why. 

Richard H. Gentzler, Jr. and Bill Crenshaw define adult ministry as a “comprehensive ministry that will enable persons to grow in faith and faithfulness as Christian disciples” (Gentzler and Crenshaw 2000, 13). This ministry is broad; potentially covering specific ministries directed at subsets of adults, such as, men’s and women’s ministries, singles and married groups, young adults, Sunday school, small groups, senior’s fellowship, or recovery and addiction programs. And given the many ministries that fall under a term like adult ministry, it is important they be coordinated to function well together toward the overarching vision of the church. Reaching adults at a deeper level affects the spiritual health of the community. “Since adults make up the majority of members in most congregations,” writes Getzler and Crenshaw, “the world of the coordinator heavily impacts the live of the congregation” (Gentzler and Crenshaw 2000, 8). Adult ministry certainly does not have to be complicate; Gentzler and Crenshaw offer the following guidance: “A leader of adults is on a spiritual journey and invites others to join in a pilgrimage” (Gentzler and Crenshaw 2000, 9).

“Adults who participate actively in the full range of worship, learning, and service opportunities through the church,” according to Gentzler and Crenshaw, “will grow in their faith and faithfulness as they grow older” (Gentzler and Crenshaw 2000, 13). This means that adult ministries are not just social gathering alone, they are opportunities to participate in something greater. As a leader of adult ministries, the leader “can help adults of all ages grow toward spiritual maturity by providing a caring and challenging environment for study, reflection, and action” (Gentzler and Crenshaw 2000, 13). While in no way an exhaustive list, this paper will turn its focus to examining some specific adult ministries opportunities.

Examples of Adult Ministry.  

All ages of adults can benefit from a targeted ministry. Young adults are just transitioning into adulthood and are accustomed to an educational setting as well as social opportunities. Moving into a more mature program is an easy transition and sets a trend for lifelong learning and fellowship. This is typically the age when many will drift away from the church, so a program specifically for this age group offers a great strength to the church. A young adult program may actually provide the answers and growth to help a young adult see the continual need for Christ. Middle-aged believers are often neglected because they are so busy. They often have jobs, children, and little time. A ministry for this group of adults must be aware of these difficulties but can served as a great help for this group and a leadership training ground. In today’s society, there are many in the middle-aged category that are single parents and need an opportunity for fellowship and growth more than ever. And seniors still need to fellowship and grow in Christ. Not only do they need ministered too, they themselves often have time and ability to be ministers to other adults.

A small group program is a great way to provide opportunities across age groups. In these programs, adults can learn, fellowship, and grow in a smaller, safe community of believers. In addition, groups for men or women only allow specific issues to be ministered to and taught. A singles group is a great way to help those dealing with loneliness and it is also a great outreach beyond the walls of the church.

The suggestions provided here are few. A church leader should look at the needs of the body, pray continually, and work to develop strong ministries for adults that will result in spiritual maturity and growth. This will not only help the individual adult, it will help the community of believers.

References:
Gentzler, Richard H., Jr. and Bill Crenshaw. Adult Ministries: Ministries that help adults love

God and neighbor. Nashville, Tenn: Abingdon Press, 2000.


*Photo taken by Dietmar Temps Photography and is licensed under a creative commons license.

What's With Jesus' Eggs?

It happened in my Sunday school class of third and fourth graders.  I had just read Matthew 11:28-30 from our NLT Hands On Bible (which is printed for this specific age group--it is the New Living Translation with lots of busy factoids and boldfaced stuff).  The passage reads,

Then Jesus said, "Come to me, all of you who are weary and carry heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you. Let me teach you, because I am humble and gentle at heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy to bear, and the burden I give you is light."

I looked up and saw a couple confused faces.  As I was about to discuss how this passage relates to our lesson, one of the girls blurted out, "Why does Jesus have eggs?"

It took me a second, but then I realized she was asking about the yoke.  What a great question!  We happened to be discussing burden so I asked, "Who knows what yoke is?" Hands rocketed up!   ". . . That is not part of an egg."  Hands went down almost as fast.  Blank stares all around.  I drew a yoke (the farming type, not the breakfast food) on the whiteboard and we discussed what a yoke is, its purpose, and what Jesus meant by his statement (to contrast Jesus' statement and his "yoke" with "religion" We also read Matthew 23:1-4).

After church that Sunday, my mind was still in high gear.  I couldn't help but think about how much of the Bible requires an understanding of the culture and vocabulary in order to comprehend it.  I don't believe any of these kids have lived on a farm, and I don't suspect they ever will.  Sure, we can reduce the word choices to meet a fourth-grade reading level, but that really doesn't help the situation.  They can read and spell "yoke," but if they don't understand what a yoke is and how it is (or was) used, it doesn't help.  For children, we often have to provide a contemporary paraphrase of the Bible and lots of teaching.  Then, over time, we need to introduce historical culture and vocabulary.

Adults are faced with the same situation.  Some of the Bible reads easily and smooth, but most of what is said requires a little work.  The same is true of Shakespeare. Imagine how much understanding is lost without a little comprehension of the script.  Not realizing that something is comedy or satire could have tragic ramifications. Realizing the significance of Shakespeare's use of iambic pentameter greatly brings about his intended  meaning and focus.  One must take time to see how the play would have been understood and received by the audience of Shakespeare's day.  It is nearly a requirement to know the political and social constructs of that time period. Often, these things are not self explanatory within a single play, that is, the play doesn't always provide us with these necessary details. The more plays by Shakespeare one reads, the greater overall understanding one gains. But sometimes one even needs to research beyond the work of Shakespeare.  And by no means could a guy pick up Hamlet, flip to the middle somewhere, read one or two lines for the first time and claim he understands the entirety of the play, or even more arrogantly, that he knows all about Shakespeare.  Understanding Shakespeare takes a little work, but the payoff is absolutely worth it.  How much more does this apply to the Bible!

It seems almost nuts to think that someone would pick up the Bible, mine out a few passages, and claim he or she understands the whole of the Word of God.  Yet, we see this happen all the time.  Nobody would claim to do this with any other book, so why is it acceptable to do so with the Bible?  (It seems that even critical scholars feel this is an acceptable practice, although they would never allow their students this type of research in any other field of study.) 

To understand the Bible means to do a little work.  It helps to know the meta-narrative, that is, the story from start to finish.  Other aspects are necessary too, such as the genre and writing style of the individual book and its author, where it fits within the meta-narrative, who wrote it and why, who the intended original audience was and how they may have received it, the cultural and political context, and the time period.  We need to be sure we understand the words and phrases.  And by no means should we read our own culture back into that period. (Slavery, for example, was substantially different then as compared to how we know it today-- even to the extent that Joseph, a slave, was able to rise to become the second in command of all of Egypt, something unthinkable of a black man in Georgia circa 1820.) We should pray and meditate on the passages.  And discussing what we are reading with others is also extremely helpful too.

The Bible is a rich, wonderful, beautiful, deeply meaningful book.  There are sections that couldn't be more clear.  But there are also passages that are confusing to us and require some work.  It does take a little work, but the payoff is more valuable than your life.  If you are absolutely unfamiliar with the kind of work I am talking about, or if this sounds intimidating, don't be intimidated!  This takes a lifetime, and even then, with God's Word there will always be more to learn and grow into.  The important first step is to read and keep reading.  Enjoy it.

If you have no idea where to start, I suggest the book of Luke and then Acts.  These two books were written by a guy who set out to record and verify the life of Jesus and the early Church.  He was writing to report all of this to a guy named Theophilus.  He helps answer the big questions, such as, "Is Jesus who he claimed he was?"  Another suggestion is the book of John.  This is also a record of Jesus' life.  It was written so you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name (John 20:30-31).  Or I suggest the Psalms.  These are recorded prayers prior to the coming of Jesus, sung as songs.  Keep in mind they were not originally written in English, so don't expect them to rhyme.  This beautiful poetry is some of the most heartfelt pleading and praise to God found anywhere in the Bible.  And please don't feel like you have to pick up a copy of the King James.  (I almost never read from the KJV.)  The English Standard Version (ESV) and New International Version (NIV) are both a little easier to read (and the ESV is an outstanding work of modern scholarly translation).  Or, for a little smoother reading, try the New Living Translation (NLT).  Don't get hung up on translation, just start reading.  If you have questions, you are always welcome to contact me. 
  
*Photo of eggs by Billie Hara is registered under a Creative Commons License. Photo of the yoke is also registered under a Creative Commons License.

Children's Ministries

Introduction  

The church of tomorrow is seen in the children of today. Beyond the reality that a church that tends well to children will draw more families to their congregation, the church leaders must be cultivating and training children if they hope to invest in the future of the Church. A good children’s ministry is a necessity to any church reaching an area where children are present. Children’s ministry is a strong tool to help teaching and guide mothers and fathers in their role as parents. Jesus demonstrated a strong passion and love for the care of children, and the Bible dictates that parents and communities have a responsibility to train and correct children if they are to be brought up right in Christ.

What is Children’s Ministry and Why

Children’s ministry is any organized effort to minister to and train children. They can be found in many forms, but they must have a correct focus and purpose. Criswell says, “All the programs for children in the church ought to have an outreaching, evangelistic appeal. Everything done ought to mean something for Christ” (Criswell 1980, 258). Children’s ministry programs should understand and come under the teaching of the Bible. Much of the teaching is directed at parents, but the church can be a service to both the child and the parent if guidance comes from Scripture.

In Matthew 18, Jesus is asked who the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven is. He calls to himself a child and says,

“Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom. Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me, but whoever causes on of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea” (Matthew 18:3-6, ESV).

This passage shows that Christ cares for children and loves their humility. But in addition, he charges those present (and by extension, the student of the Bible today) to receive children and keep them from sinning. Deuteronomy 6:4-9 demonstrates God’s desire that the children be taught Scripture and the ways of God. And when Paul writes to encourage Timothy he says, “But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus (2 Timothy 2:14-15, ESV, emphasis added). This passage clearly demonstrates that Timothy new the Scriptures from his youth, and it is from those Scriptures that he learned and knows of the salvation through Christ. While not prescriptive, it does show the value of teaching children of Scripture, salvation, and of Jesus Christ.

Examples of Children’s Ministry 

The most common from of children’s ministry is found in Sunday school. Criswell argues this is the most important and it has a great value because it works in conjunction with the entire family as each member has something for him or her at church on Sunday (Criswell 1980, 258). Sunday school for children generally offers the ability for children to socialize with one another, but it also includes some age-appropriate worship and teaching. In addition to Sunday school, mid week programs can serve children well. MOPS, that is Mothers of Pre-Schoolers is another opportunity to minister to children and train and teach mothers.

Something else to consider is the single parent environment become prevalent in many communities. Clinton and Hawkins claim, “40 percent of American children are being raised in homes where no father is present. These children have more physical, emotional, and behavioral problems than children whose father is present, and it is more likely that they will be incarcerated” (Clinton and Hawkins 2009, 182). This certainly does not mean that the church is solely responsible to fill the void of a missing father; however, a children’s ministry program might have an opportunity to provide a child aspects missing in his or her life, as well as continually introduce the child to Jesus. Regardless of the program, the key is for a pastor to see the need and generate programs for children that will fill that need in a Christ-centered way.

References:
Clinton, Timothy E., and Ronald E. Hawkins. The Quick-Reference Guide to Biblical
Counseling: Personal and Emotional Issues. Grand Rapids, Mich: Baker Books, 2009.

Criswell, W.A. Criswell's Guidebook for Pastors. Nashville, Tenn: Broadman Press, 1980.
*Photo property of D Sharon Pruitt and used by permission. 

SBC On Alcohol Use Sounds Tipsy

I realize a number of Christian denominations prohibit the consumption of any alcohol; and that’s fine. If Christians freely choose to abstain from alcohol, I applaud them.  But what about a complete abstinence as a doctrinal position?  I’ve been doing some reading in order to get a solid understanding of the justification behind the abstinence of alcohol as a theological or denominational position. I want to understand the arguments of those who make the claims that any consumption of alcohol is a sin, that drinkers can’t or won't go to heaven, or that anybody consuming any alcohol should be removed from any leadership or ministry position.

In my reading, I came across a rather interesting article posted on the Southern Baptist Convention Ethics and Religious Liberty blog titled, “On Alcohol Consumption,” by Richard Land and Barrett Duke, dated July 25, 2006. (I accessed this web page on August 10, 2010).  As I was reading the article, I started to wonder if the authors were sharing a bottle of wine as they penned the article. Regardless their position, there seems to be some contradictions, extra-biblical or secular arguments, and odd understandings of the biblical narrative. As soon as I make known my potential biased notions, I'll address some of these examples.

My bias upfront: First and foremost, I must say that whether Christians consume alcohol or not should not be a matter worth splitting churches over.  Anybody who thinks otherwise should read Romans 14:13-23.  Second, I realize the Southern Baptist Convention places very few denominational positions upon their members, leaving these things up to the local congregation. However, I am learning that there is a very strong culture with the SBC, which is nearly authoritative.  Next, I attend a great local church that is a member of the Southern Baptist Convention (although neither of the senior pastors are actually SBC).  Also, I'm a graduate student at Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary, which is a SBC school with many (if not all) SBC professors.  I should also say that I enjoy the craft of beer brewing in my home, although two kids, a full-time job, and full-time seminary leave no time for this hobby at the moment.  I should also point out that after I returned from the war, I abused alcohol, which brought about many other problems in my life.  Now, when I do brew beer, I give most of it away.  I do occasionally consume alcohol (generally "Utah" beer or wine), typically during a meal in social settings, and always with a strict limit of "one and done."  I believe alcohol is no more evil or sinful than money.  It is the abuse of, or idolatrous attitude toward it that brings about sinful problems.  I remain open to changing my view on a alcohol based on a sound argument from the Bible. (If you feel compelled to make that argument, you can contact me here.)

Now that my bias and personal position are out of the way (to the extent that bias can be removed), I'll move to a discussion of the SBC article.  Rather than providing an overview, I ask that you read the article for the bigger picture. It's located here: http://erlc.com/article/on-alcohol-use/

After moving through an introduction and a historical overview of the South Baptist resolutions over the years, Land and Duke write,

"When one considers the high cost of alcohol abuse to individuals, families, and society, it is surprising that some Southern Baptists insist on their right to drink. Alcohol problems cost American society more than $184 billion per year in health care, criminal justice, social services, property damage, and loss of productivity expenses. Alcohol is a factor in as many as 105,000 deaths annually in the United States and a primary contributor to a wide array of health problems and human suffering. These include various cancers, liver disease, alcoholism, brain disorders, motor vehicle crashes, violence, crime, spousal and child abuse, drownings, and suicides. Even those who are able to control their drinking should recognize that they are engaged in a behavior that is destroying millions of lives, and choose to abstain rather than encourage by their behavior someone to drink who will not be able to control his drinking."

This argument, although compelling, does not address the question at hand: What does the Bible say about drinking?  In addition, this particular argument is more than acceptable for individuals to adopt as a reason to avoid alcohol altogether; but when a denomination or church incorporates a no-drinking policy based on this argument, they still tend to create a perception that they are taking a position based on a biblical stand rather than a secular argument.  And if the Bible does not condone drinking, their stand runs of the risk of becoming a legalistic "Bible plus." In addition, an argument could be made that a lifestyle of fast food consumption and no physical activity costs American just as much of not more in health related problems.  Therefore (the argument could go), a denomination could declare members of their organization are prohibited from consuming fast food and they must exercise for a minimum of 30 minutes per day, four days a week.  But still, this would be an argument from a secular position. (And I'm not sure the SBC Messengers would ever adopt a policy like this one, no matter how fat an unhealthy America gets.)

The article continues with a lengthy secular argument.  At one point they write, "[. . .] and virtually all users of other drugs start with alcohol, that’s why it’s called the “gateway” drug." This is a risky argument because it verges on a spurious relationship and it's a bit slippery.  First, there's a good chance that many of these drug users that started with alcohol drank soda before that.  So based on this argument, soda could be the cause of heavy drug use.  In addition, this type of argument does not take into account all the people that consume alcohol and never engage in other types of drug use.  In fact, some only drink beer or wine and never even shift to stronger forms of alcohol.

Things start to seem contradictory as the argument shifts to the Bible.  Statements made  to make one point only later become a contradiction for another point.  (I've taken out the material in between for clarity; however, please read the article in its entirety to see what I've left out.)  Take for example this line of reasoning,

"Because alcohol is such a dangerous substance [. . .] However, it appears that the negative aspect is principally related to the debilitating effects on people, not on the alcoholic beverage in itself. Alcohol as a substance is not evil. For example, Psalm 104:14-15 speaks of wine, “which makes man’s heart glad,” as one of God’s provisions for man."

Alcohol is a dangerous substance but not an evil one.  The problem is the debilitating effects of a glad heart, which is a provision for man from God.  Okay?  How about this next example? Pay special attention to the sweet or new wine "is grape juice" argument,  

"Even sweet wine, which is thought by many to be mere grape juice, can debilitate (see Hos. 4:11) [. . .] When used in its non-metaphorical sense, it appears to run the full gamut of meanings, from grape juice, usually qualified by the adjective “new,” to the fully fermented alcoholic beverage. [. . .] In Acts 2:13 the observers supposed that the apostles were full of “sweet wine” because of their behavior when the Holy Spirit had filled them."

It's not every day you see completely irregular or unexplainable behavior like that in Acts 2 and attribute it to mere grape juice.  And I'm not sure how or why non-alcoholic grape juice takes away understanding like Hosea 4:11 claims.  Could it be that maybe that new or sweet wine was not exactly grape juice?

How about the "it's not the same alcohol" argument?

"While the use by some biblical characters of alcoholic beverages is undeniable, it is important to note that the beverages these men and women consumed were not the kinds of alcoholic beverages people consume today. The alcohol content of beverages referred to in the Bible was considerably lower than many of today’s alcoholic beverages." 

The alcoholic content of wine is determined by the amount of natural sugars in the juice that are consumed by yeast.  The byproduct of this consumption is alcohol and gas.  Wine is still naturally produced this way; so is beer. So for this argument to hold true, either grapes contained less sugars or the yeast was prevented from consuming all of the sugar (a complicated process that involves a reduction of temperature, typically with refrigeration, or complex fine filtering of the yeast).  The problem is that this argument is attempting to compare alcohol like vodka (80-120 proof) with wine (20-40 proof).  In that case, the argument works.  But how does this argument stand up if the biblical characters were drinking wine (even at 20 proof) and someone today is drinking beer at 7 to 16 proof)?  It would seem than, based on this argument, that beer today is okay? But again, is this what the Bible is teaching or does this come from a secular style argument?

But what if all the conditions then were the same as today, say for example, missionaries in a third-world country, making their own wine in similar physical conditions as the first century Near East? Then is drinking okay?  In regard to sanitation, the authors write,  

"Additionally, we must keep in mind that sanitary conditions were not what they are today. Alcohol provided an ideal way to maintain the potability of beverages. Without it, people would have suffered even more from common parasites and other health threatening ailments resulting from ingesting contaminated water (see 1 Tim. 5:23)." 

And how about Jesus?  Lots of people will point out that it appears that on occasion Jesus drank wine.  To this the authors argue,

"Jesus wasn’t engaged in drinking alcoholic beverages because He felt it was His right to do so, He was doing this to make a point—that the unbelieving just looked for excuses not to believe."

Ah, what? How about providing some Scripture references to support this statement? They continue,

"Considering the Bible’s very negative attitude toward drunkenness and Jesus’ dedication to God, it is inconceivable to us that Jesus ever drank alcohol recreationally or that He was ever drunk."

Okay?  But how are they defining "recreationally"?  If Christians were to sit down to dinner with Jesus today and they rule out getting drunk or drinking as a recreation, can they have a sanitary, basic glass of wine with their dinner and conversation, or would Jesus call this behavior a sin?  (What if Jesus made the wine?)  Again, what does the Bible say about drinking alcohol in a social setting without any intent to get drunk.  This, I think, is the question most people want answered.

The article continues to plead with the reader not to drink any alcohol in any way.  More arguments are offered.  It's about Christian witness, they say, but what then of drinking one beer alone while watching spots on TV; or what about a single glass of wine with a group of believers during dinner?  There is the argument that alcohol abuse can cause sin so it should be avoided all together; but again, this argument could also be applied to having a little money.  They make many secular arguments, but this still does not answer what the Bible says.

The article also eats some space arguing against drunkenness.  I think there is much less ambiguity in this area.  I don't find that Christians disagree as much here.  Therefore, the question most Christians want answers for is the question of what the Bible says about one glass of wine with dinner, or a glass of champagne at a wedding, or a beer with hot wings over a theological discussion with a friend.  What does the Bible say about this use of alcohol? 

Where the struggle comes is when we think the answer must be an either/or proposition.  Think about it.  Is it possible that the answer requires context?  Is drinking okay within proper limits and settings?  Is this something that lives in a gray area?  I believe it does (not unlike a number of other things the Bible teaches), which is why strong teaching on what the Bible does say is a must, while also avoiding the temptation to create a legalistic approach to alcohol.     

*Photo by Sonja Pieper and is registered under a Creative Commons license.

Baptism

Introduction. As Erickson puts it, baptism is the “initiatory rite of the Church” (Erickson 1998, 1098). And as such a rite, there is much debate centered on baptism. How should it be done, and by who, to whom? What does it mean, theologically? Why baptize at all? Across the Church, there are those that hold that babies should be baptized, while others say it is for believers only, and some set an age when one can reasonable believe and be baptized. In some churches, baptism is done by sprinkling water over the head (aspersion), in others water is poured over the head and body (affusion), and still others dip or submerse the candidate into or completely under water (immersion). Priests or Bishops are the only ones authorized to baptize according to some church structures, while others say any believer in Jesus can baptize. Some argue that salvation comes through baptism, while others say is it a sign of a covenant relationship, while still others say it is a “token of salvation,” that is, an “outward symbol or indication of the inward change that has been effected in the believer” (Erickson 1998, 1105). While a fair treatment of these many questions is reasonable, for the sake of space, this post will only address the believer’s baptism, as “a symbol of beginning the Christian life (Grudem 1994, 970), and completed by immersion.

Baptism in the New Testament. All four Gospels record the baptism of Jesus by John the baptizer. It is likely that Jesus was baptized by immersion, given that he went in to and came out of the water. The word used in the text is baptizō, the meaning according to Grudem, to “plunge, dip, immerse” (Grudem 1994, 967). Grudem argues, “This is commonly recognized as the standard meaning of the term in ancient Greek literature both inside and outside of the Bible” (Grudem 1994, 967). And considering that Jesus was perfect, having never sinned (Hebrews 4:15), the baptism was not about cleansing or washing away of previous sins. Before Jesus ascended into heaven, he instructed his disciples to make more disciples and “baptize them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19, ESV).

Throughout the Book of Acts, accounts of believers being baptized demonstrate that action, that is, baptism, followed belief. Acts 2:41 says, “those who received his word were baptized” (ESV). Acts 8:12 indicates that the people hearing Philip were baptized only when they believed. And there is evidence that these baptisms were by immersion, such as Philip and the Ethiopian Eunuch “going down” and “coming up” out of the water (Acts 8:38-39).

But what is the meaning of the act itself? In Acts 22 Paul recounts his conversion story, which includes Ananias calling Paul to “be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name,” (Acts 22:16, ESV). However, Romans 6:3-4 and Colossians 2:12, paint a picture of the symbolism of dieing and being buried with Christ but then being resurrected to life with Christ. So is baptism the washing of sins or symbolic or both? On this matter, Grudem states, “But to say that washing away of sins is the only thing (or even the most essential thing) pictured in baptism does not faithfully represent New Testament teaching. Both washing and death and resurrection with Christ are symbolized in baptism, but Romans 6:1-11 and Colossians 2:11-12 place a clear emphasis on dying and rising with Christ” (Grudem 1994, 969).

Baptism today. While baptism itself is not a means of salvation, it is an act commanded by God and a beautiful public pronouncement of the new believer’s symbolic death and resurrection with Christ. It is also (generally) the initiatory rite into the Church. Baptism is about the candidate and his or her new life; therefore, Criswell says, “The baptismal service ought to be a beautiful and deeply spiritual occasion whether held in a creek, a river, a pond, or in a church baptistery” (Criswell 1980, 201). He further instructs, “Baptism is a death, a burial, and a resurrection. Remember to feel that, believe that, and the rite will come naturally to the administrator” (Criswell 1980, 204-205).

Because the ordinance does not belong to man, but to Christ’s Church, the administrator is not as important as the candidate. In fact, while the administrator should be a Christian believer, the baptism would not be invalidated should that administrator turn out to be an apostate (Criswell 1980, 200). For this same reason, local churches should not require a rebaptism of a believer as a means of membership into their local congregation.

References:
Criswell, W.A. Criswell's Guidebook for Pastors. Nashville, Tenn: Broadman Press, 1980.

Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology. Grand Rapids, Mich: Baker Book House, 1998.

Grudem, Wayne A. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1994.

*Photo: Lance Cpl. Michael K. Kono, network administrator, Marine Wing Communications Squadron 38, Marine Air Control Group 38, 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing, and 19-year-old Sparks, Nev., native, is brought out of the waters during a baptism at Al Asad, Iraq, May 30. Chaplains representing two separate commands aboard the air base baptized five service members during the spiritual event. Photo by Sgt. J.L. Zimmer III. Cleared for Release

Are All Christians Believers?

It seems that we too often associate the term "Christian" with one who believes that Jesus was fully God and fully man, was executed on a cross, taking the punishment for our sin as our substitute, who rose again to life on the third day and ascended into heaven to sit at the right hand of God.  We think a Christian believes that Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

But today, this definition is not necessarily the meaning of "Christian" any more than the definition of "student" is someone who willing desires to learn and grow in knowledge through study and discipline.  How many students can you think of that went (or are presently going) to school only to party all night and miss classes all day?  How many students like being in college for the social aspects.  How many Christians do you know that identify with Christianity as a social club, but either don't believe that Jesus is who he claimed he was, or  don't understand the gospel enough to make a decision either way?  And what of the groups that insist in calling themselves Christian but profess doctrine that is clearly not inline with the Bible, like the LDS?  Or how about those "Christians" that show little or no life evidence of faith?  You may know someone like this.  Or what about a "Christian" church like the Westboro Baptist Church?

When I think about this, John 6:47-66 comes to mind.  In this passage, Jesus explains that he is the bread of life.  Using graphic symbolism, Jesus teaches that those who eat his flesh and drink his blood will have eternal life.  Misunderstanding, many of the disciples question this teaching, really struggling with Jesus' instruction.  And John 6:66 says, "After this, many disciples turned back and no longer walked with him" (ESV).  Here Jesus had many followers hanging on his every word.  He had just fed thousands.  Yet an earlier passage in chapter 6 tells us that they were only in it for the miracles.  They wanted to see amazing things or be healed.  Some were just hanging around for the entertainment.   So it is with some "Christians" today.

It could be that there are some "Christians" sitting next to you in church that are not believers in Christ.  Many people on Facebook claim "Christian" as their faith but clearly don't believe the doctrines of Christ.  Many wear crosses but do not know the God-man who died on one for them.  And there are those that see Christianity as a moral code or way of life, an ethic or politic.

I remember recently reading a man calling himself a Christian who claimed that the there was no intelligent designer of the earth of life, that life and all things are just a chance happenstance, and that God has no influence over creation (because it was not his creation in the first place).  I'm not sure how that position can fit within Christian teaching because it can't.  It just can't.  I know of people that call themselves Christians but deny that Jesus is exclusively the way to heaven, something Jesus himself clearly taught. 

Therefore, we must take caution when assuming the meaning of the word, "Christian."  Christian originally was not an adjective, like Christian music or Christian books; it was a person who held a confession in Christ.  However, today, it is really a self-identified membership into a social identity.   There are some that are trying to avoid using the word all together, often substituting it with "Christ-follower," but this doesn't really change anything.  And there are some who are diligently trying to reclaim the meaning of the word, but Webster's doesn't have word police.  So what we really ought to do is keep in mind what a Christian is or is not.  We should bear in mind that a person calling him or herself a Christian may be an ambassador for  Christ's Kingdom, or not.

How Did We Get Here?

While not always the case, one of the best ways to identify the most significant events of one century is seeing the results in the following centuries.  But standing just over the threshold of the 21st Century, it is rather difficult to look back into the 20th Century and identify what events will have the longest and most significant consequences.   However, if I am required to try, I must say that failure best categorizes the events of the 20th Century. Failure to alleviate the suffering of mankind at the hands of government; failure to bring about a utopian society through egalitarian principles; and even failure to place the created above the Creator.  Mankind failed to achieve the unwritten goals of the 20th Century.  

The 20th Century witnessed the rise of individualism, a greater globalization of various people groups, modernization, an increased hope placed in the scientific method, and liberalization of thought.  Nations went to war with one another on a scale greater than any previous century.  The method of killing was honed through practice and science to the extend that a single bomb could now annihilate millions of men, women, and children.  Greater resources were needed to keep the industrialized nations advancing.  Non-industrialized nations were colonized to fuel the greed, thus infecting indigenous peoples of the non-industrialized communities with the same woes of the rest of the world.  The unsinkable ship (the Titanic) sank.  Economic markets collapsed around the world.  Walls of separation were build between the East and the West, between nations, and between cultures.  And walls of separation were torn down.  The scientific marvel, the Space Shuttle Challenger, exploded right before the eyes of millions of school children eagerly watching the first teacher jettisoned into space. Genocide. Apartheid. HIV/AIDS. Corruption. Riots. Post office and school shootings. Hope was greatly challenged.  Failure. 

In the jumble of the changing world, people looked for answers to the problems they were observing.  For some, Karl Marx offered a solution--communism. For others capitalism offered hope.  Some turned to politics.  Some sought scientific answers.  The atheist philosophers blamed religion and God.  Nazis blamed the Jews.  Political conservatives blamed the liberals and the liberals returned in-kind.  Nuclear arsenals became the answer for those who could amass them.  Many in the West sought answers in Eastern world religions and philosophies.  In the East, some turned to a greater mysticism, totalitarianism, or various other religious practices. Some simply checked out with the aid of drugs. Many found comfort in apathy.  

But not every answer had negative results.  The Civil Rights movements in the West granted greater freedoms to minorities and women.  The non-resistant protest method surfaced in India and America.  Nations formed united alliances and unions in an effort to work together. Concern for less fortunate people of other nations developed.  Conservation movements fostered a respect for nature. And through positive advancements,the quality of life for many greatly improved.

The Church also attempted to offer answers. "More than any international organization, corporation, or political movement" writes Gonzalez, "the church cut across national boundaries, class distinctions, and political allegiances" (1985, 336).  The challenge however, was that the Church was not in agreement.  Gonzalez states, "War, and racial and class strife divided the church--often along lines that had little to do with earlier theological differences" (336).  (Had the Church put more weight in Biblical teaching and theology instead of political posturing and advancing moral rules, it might not have had as much of an issue.) 

The Eastern churches, specifically the Orthodox communities attempted to unify, mostly through the World Council of Churches, but sadly many disagreements and schisms resulted.  Roman Catholics sought religious reform through the efforts of the Second Vatican Council.  The Protestants made strong attempts to offer answers in light of the advances and failures of the 20th Century.  Some sought greater unity in the Church while others made attempts to separate themselves from society, finding comfort in fundamentalism. Many Christians programs were promoted to help the poor, afflicted, and suffering.  Some were even created.  The missions movement started or continued, and stronger, bold evangelism was promoted.  Greater work was placed upon translating the Bible.  Christians advanced the message of hope in Christ Jesus through new technologies and church planting. But unfortunately, among Protestants disagreements surfaced and schisms birthed new denominations.  An effort to promote moralism over faith came at the cost of sharing the hope of grace found only in Jesus.  Christians also found themselves having to defend (and advance) the gospel through political activism, elections, and the court systems of various nations.  As Christians reacted to the difficulties of the 20th Century, societies started reacting to the Christians, which is where the 20th Century closed. 

So now, ten years into the 21st Century, the Church is facing a great opportunity to provide answers were previous generations may have fallen short. 


González, Justo L. The Story of Christianity:The reformation to the present Day. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985.

Called to the Chaplaincy?

August 3, 2010.

I noticed an area of great need while I was serving in the military, especially when I was in Iraq: good chaplains.  From what I saw, there was (and still is) a shortage of them.

I have been out of the military and home from Iraq for six years, but it was about three years ago when I stopped saying "somebody really ought to do something about that," and started saying, "maybe I ought to do something about it."  Up to that point, I had never seen myself as a minister, pastor or in professional ministry (before the war I wanted to be a rich lawyer), but the chaplaincy was something I could see myself doing.  I wanted to have a dirty boots ministry, that is, I wanted to be in the mud with the combat guys most in need.  

Investigating the requirements, I found that as a chaplain candidate I would need to earn an M.Div at an accredited seminary, get an ecclesiastical endorsement from an official endorser (recognized and approved by the US Government), gain ministry experience, go through the various military officer and chaplain schools, and eventually be selected as a chaplain through a board selection process.  I looked into my seminary options and chose Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary, although at the time I didn't consider myself baptist.

My next step was the ecclesiastical endorsement.  My local church was not heavily connected with their denomination, to the extent that I had attended there for 2 years and had no idea with who they were affiliated (this is not uncommon in Utah).  With the help of my pastor, I started working through what would potentially be a six year process to obtain a full endorsement from this denomination.  However, as I was working though the material they sold me and reading the books they recommended, I ran into some theological issues.  No-Go's might be a better word.  Taking these to my pastor was informative but didn't help me rectify my problems.  Informing the endorser, he had me talk with people in upper leadership throughout the denomination in an attempt to convince me of their doctrinal positions.  In the end, I came to realize that there was no way I could sign the required doctrinal statement.  I also figured that with these difficult theological differences, it might be best for my family to seek out a local church of a different denomination, or no denomination.

Finding a new church community in Salt Lake City is hard.  It's even harder when that church must also be associated with an organization approved to endorse military chaplains.  After a while. I gave up trying to find a church community that could serve as an endorser and sought out a low-support, doctrinally weak, on-line endorser.  Passing their assessment and paying their fees, I was endorsed.  This freed up one one requirement, I we could fellowship with any group of believers.  (It was in this time that Lisa and I hung out with some church planters from Portland.)  But now, six years later, we've settled in a great church close to our home called Holladay Baptist Church.

Now it was time to apply for re-entry into the military.  This nearly year-long process became grueling given the mountain of paperwork and my post-war counseling.  Through the process of appeals I was eventually allowed to go through the Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) where potential soldiers are screened.  At an out of fighting-shape 34, this screening was no picnic, but I managed to pass.  However, after finishing at MEPS, I learned that the rest of my paperwork was "stale" and we'd have to start over.  I was already starting to see that I was old by Army standards and would not likely be able to hang with the young bucks I wanted to serve.  And three years of fighting through the challenges felt like I had my foot jammed in a closed door.

Through many other things which may be a topic of another discussion, I decided it was time to give up this effort.  However, over the course of the three years, I started seeing myself as a pastor or professor or a servant in just about any professional or volunteer ministry.  I love seminary and am learning so much.  We've found an amazing church community.  I feel deeply grounded in my theology.  And it might be that I was never called to serve as an Army chaplain.  But that's okay because the process has greatly developed and shaped my thinking about God, myself, my family, ministry, and calling.  And now it seems that something else might be on the horizon. We'll see.

There's still a need for good chaplains in the military.  I am praying that I can still serve veterans in some capacity and I'm also hoping to see a flood of young guys go to seminary and become the kind of chaplains that can minister in the mud where they are needed most. As for me, I'm simply waiting on the Lord (or at least trying to).

*Both photos are in the public domain.

Top 10 Biblical Discoveries in Archaeology

If you are not a reader of Parchment and Pen, you're really missing out.  Parchment and Pen is the theology blog from Reclaiming the Mind Ministries.  If you like theology, you really ought to check it out.

Tim Kimberley, a graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary and a staff member at Reclaiming the Mind Ministries, has stared a great series on the blog called, "Top Ten Biblical Discoveries in Archaeology."  The series not only shares some interesting history, it also demonstrates some of the many archaeological discoveries that support the accuracy and credibility of the historical aspects of the Bible.  I highly recommend checking it out.  To do so, click here or on the graphic above.

*I have not received permission to use the graphic above, but at the request of Tim Kimberley or Reclaiming the Mind Ministries, I will remove it from this post.  In addition, I have no martial connection to Pen and Parchment or Reclaiming the Mind Ministries other than purchases I have made from the website and Bible.org.  

Graduate Student Can't Keep Her Christian Beliefs?

How should a college balance the diverse but deeply held beliefs of its students?  Should students of a university be required to share the same political ideology?  How about the same worldview?  Would it be right for a college to require that a gay or lesbian student be encouraged (or required) to believe that his or her sexuality be a condition of choice?  Or what if a Muslim student was required to accept that all ethics were derived from Christianity in order to graduate?   

Before reading on, watch this video clip, the subject of which has been discussed in a number of recent news stories, both in print and video.

Now, before I continue, I'd like to remind you that the nature of news media is such that the article or clip is not likely accounting for all sides of a complete story or historical event.  It provides outsiders a glimpse, of which the perspective and details are chosen by the author or editor and presented within the limitations of time and the medium.  I'd venture to say that we don't have anything close to the entire story.

That being said, I've noticed some diverse ways in which this story is being reported.  From one perspective, the articles and clips (like this one) paint Keeton as a victim.  Other articles--often published by outlets with unmistakeably gay names--paint her as obstinate and "homophobic."  (As of yet, I've not seen any of of the Christian publishers paint the school as "Christophobic.")  I'd like to call attention not to the story itself, but the reaction to it, and the bigger aspects of it. 

How is it that a group of people can demand the opportunity to feel safe and accepted in a public community but then not afford the same opportunity to those different from themselves?  Is this a double-standard?  I say yes.  I also admit that many Christians have done this to others throughout history.  And many Christians have been on the oppressed end of this stick too, like in Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, and China.

If a Christian were to demand that a Muslim not be allowed to express his or her views in a college setting, most would identify this demand unfair.  Can a Christian or Muslim hold to his or her belief (and I would say lifestyle) to the same extent as a homosexual man or woman holds that they cannot or will not change his or her lifestyle?  Again, I'd say yes.

Is religion a protected class in America?  Yes.

Is creed a protected class in America?  Yes again.

I'm just curious if the school would require a gay or lesbian counseling student to attend church services in order to obtain an understanding of people who hold a Christian worldview.  Should an atheist be required to change his or her view because he or she is not in agreement with a much larger majority that believes in some kind of higher power or deity?  

So why does is this student required to change a deeply held belief or conviction?  I realize that some will want to argue that this belief is a choice, that is, that she was not created with this belief.  However, millions of reformed and Calvinist Christians would disagree.  They argue, as I argue, that Keeton was born and created to be a believer of Jesus Christ.

Teaching Kids About Prayer

The Sunday School teacher for the 3rd and 4th graders at my local church has had to take some time off this summer to deal with a medical issue.  While I wish she didn't have the medical difficulty, I'm finding tremendous joy substitute teaching the class.  We use a curriculum developed by Group. There's a pre-planed weekly lesson, a box of visual aids, and a bunch of matching NLT bibles. The material is okay, but I think my students are smarter than Group's target class.  Therefore, this week I added some additional information to the class and I think it went well.

Teaching this class has been good for me because I'm having to take the communication from a level I'm accustomed to in seminary down to a level that a 3rd grader can understand and find application.  That being said, I think this is the case even for teaching adults.

Here's my basic outline of last Sunday's class: 

The week's verse from the curriculum is "Never stop praying" --  1 Thessalonians 5:17

Illustration: "Who here has ever spoke to the President of the United States? How about any leader or king of any other country?  Well, I once met a former president and do you know what; I had to go through security, and I was assigned a time when I would meet him, and I could only talk with him for a second, and I probably won't every get to talk with him again.  What do you think it takes to get to talk to the President in the White House?  But did you know you can talk to the King of Kings, God?"

Bible chase game to find the scriptures that answer the following questions.

When should we (or can we) talk with God?
1. Psalm 5:3 (Morning)
2. Psalm 71:7-8 (All day)
3. Psalm 119:55 (Night)
4. Psalm 55:17 (Morning, Noon, and Night)
5. 1 Thessalonians 5:17 (Always be praying)

How should we pray? 
1. (The previous week's lesson was to come boldly before God. Use this time to review last week's lesson than offer some more scriptures for the class to race to find.)
2. Matthew 6:9-13 (This is how he showed us to pray, discuss elements of prayer and remind the class that these are not requirements or rules, but Jesus teaching us.)
3. Colossians 4:2 (Alert mind and thankful heart)

How should we NOT pray?
1.  Matthew 6:5 (Is Jesus telling us that we shouldn't pray on street corners?  I opened our class in prayer and you saw me, is Jesus saying that I was wrong?  Maybe is Jesus talking about using prayer to show off and make it more about ourselves instead of talking with God?)

Where should we pray?
1. Daniel 6:10 (In our homes)
2. Matthew 6:6 (In private)
3. Acts 16:23-25 (In prison, hard times)
4. Jonah 2:1 (In the belly of a fish)

(Pause to explain the seriousness of stoning.  Give a background of Stephen's evangelism that got him into trouble.)
5. Acts 7:59-60 (Even when we are dying)
6. Luke 23:34 (Jesus prayed on the cross for the people putting him there)

Review
When should we pray? How should we pray? (How should we not pray?) Where should we pray?

Prayer Walk
1. Explain what a prayer walk is and that prayer walking is not something that holds more or special power or anything like that because God hears us anytime, from wherever we are.  However, sometimes we are reminded to pray for people or things because we see them on our walk. And sometimes we'll even be able to pray with other people. (Also, this will reinforce the idea that we should always be praying and that we can pray anywhere.)
2. Go for a pray walk through the church building, stopping to pray as people feel led to do so.

Pray and Watch Reminder Cards
Hand out reminder cards and have the kids write 5 names of people they want to remember to pray for.  Tell them to put the card on the fridge or someplace they will see it often.  Every time they see the card, they should be reminded to pray for those five people. Then they should also watch for opportunities to serve those five people.

Handouts
Give out weekly home fun and Bible memory verse handout.  Also give out coloring sheet with map and remind the kids that they can pray in all those places and anywhere, anytime.

Cross-Cultural Servanthood by Duane Elmer

CRITIQUE OF

Elmer, Duane. Cross-Cultural Servanthood: Serving the World in Christlike Humility. Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity, 2006.

INTRODUCTION

Duane Elmer has traveled and taught in over seventy-five countries, serving as a cross-cultural missionary and teacher. After hearing him lecture on the topic of cross-cultural servanthood, many people have asked Dr. Elmer if his material is in print (14). Cross-Cultural Servanthood is his attempt to put his knowledge and experience into publication after fifteen years of “reading and researching the topic, gathering stacks of articles and ideas and interviewing people in numerous countries” (14). His book “focuses on relational and adjustment competency so that the servant spirit we wish to portray will, in fact, be seen and valued by the local people” (14). Cross-Cultural Servanthood, by Elmer’s own words is a book that “examines the process of becoming a cross-cultural servant,” drawing from his personal experience to include his failures, the experiences of others from many countries, research, and Scripture (19). In three parts, Elmer addresses a basic overview of servanthood in general, the process of servanthood in other cultures, and a consequences of mixing leadership and servanthood with the previous two parts. His other publications include Cross-Cultural Conflict, Cross-Cultural Connections, and Cross-Cultural Partnerships. Elmer earned a Ph.D. at Michigan State and presently is the G. W. Aldeen Professor of International Studies at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. His wife, “born and raised in Zimbabwe with a Canadian mother,” offers additional insight and is present in a number of illustrations throughout the book.

In what follows, an overview of Elmer’s work will be offered. Significant points and arguments of servanthood and culture made by Elmer will be summarized as they develop through the three parts of the book. Following the summary is an examination and analysis of the author’s work proceeded by a brief conclusion.

BRIEF SUMMARY

Cross-Cultural Servanthood is ultimately about servanthood in the form of mission and evangelism work. From the first page of his book, Elmer opens with an illustration of understanding cultural differences. It may have been his first real understanding (or lack there of) servanthood. His new bride asked what he would like for breakfast and he suggested eggs. But when he sat down for breakfast, his expectation of over-medium eggs was sitting face-to-face with poached eggs. Of the resulting conversation, Elmer writes, “My wife’s desire to serve me in this simple but meaningful event was misinterpreted and badly handled by me. I was not thinking servanthood” (12). Elmer uses this simple and easy to understand example to express the simultaneous difficulty and simplicity that is cross-cultural servanthood. Elmer continues, “Servanthood is revealed in simple, everyday events. But it’s complex because servanthood is culturally defined—that is, serving must be sensitive to the cultural landscape while remaining true to the Scripture. That is both the challenge and the burden of servanthood—and of this book” (12). After using himself as the poor example, Elmer seizes the opportunity to confess that for much of the first part of his missionary life, he was culturally insensitive and did not have the correct servant attitude he feels is necessary for missionary work and evangelism, and subsequently this is also the primary topic of his book (15-20).


“Serving,” according to Elmer, “is the ability to relate to people in such a way that their dignity as human beings is affirmed and they are more empowered to life God-glorifying lives” (146). Servanthood however, is an attitude of serving. And proper servanthood should be Christ-like, modeling Jesus’ method of connecting with others as we serve them (21). Elmer argues early in the Part One,

"If we set out to become a servant, it can become mechanical and appear artificial or forced. If, however, servanthood is seen as our deepest identification with Christ and inhabits our being, then serving others will be a natural, often unconscious, expression. At this point servanthood is not only what we do but what we are" (22).

The remainder of the first part of the book sets out, mostly through examples and illustrations, to make the case for servant evangelism and cross-cultural awareness.

Matthew, Luke, and John are the three primary biblical sources used by Elmer to make his case. Outside of the very fact that Christ entered our culture to serve us, Jesus provided the best picture of servanthood when he washed his disciples’ feet (13, 22-26). Christ gave up of the robe, that is, the appearance of his Kingship, and took on the towel of the lowly servant to wash his disciples’ feet. As Elmer implies, Christian servants are also to give up the position of honor for the position of servanthood in the name of Christ, following Jesus’ example.

Secular examples from various fields of social studies and practical observation are also used throughout the book. In the opening part of the work, Elmer shares a parable of a monkey and a fish. The monkey, seeing the fish struggling in the current, grabs the fish and lays it on the bank. Eventually the fish is motionless and the monkey thinks he did a good thing for the fish (27-28). Elmer’s point is summed up in his statement: “The fish likely saw the arrogance of the monkey’s assumption that what was good for monkeys would also be good for fish. This arrogance, hidden from the monkey’s consciousness, far overshadowed his kindness in trying to help the fish. Thus good intentions are not enough” (28). The monkey is the Elmer’s focus; through the remainder of the book, the reader is encouraged to be more culturally aware.

Part Two is loaded with examples of people from one culture entering into another with incorrect assumptions. Generally, the most glaring examples are when Western culture meets Eastern, or when either enter the “Two-Thirds world” culture, as Elmer often calls most of African and other improvised nations. Elmer’s goal of Part Two (and really much of the other two parts as well) is to keep the reader from being a monkey (37). To encourage his reader to have a true attitude of servanthood, Elmer spends a great deal of pages working on cultural awareness. He writes, “Therefore, let us intentionally, everyday, ask what we have learned about how a servant looks and acts in this culture. Otherwise we may be deluded into thinking we are serving when others may not see it that way at all” (37). It is in this section that Elmer identifies a linear model to help one integrate into and understand a culture other than his or her own.

Although he best explains it in reverse order, Elmer’s model for entering and serving another culture starts with Openness. “Openness with people of other cultures” Elmer says, “requires that you are willing to step out of your comfort zone to initiate and sustain relationship in context of cultural differences” (151). The next step is Acceptance. In this step, there must be a comfort and feeling of safety around one another (151). Acceptance is followed by Trust. On trust, Elmer writes, “You can’t build trust with another person until they feel like they have been accepted by you—until they feel that you value them as human beings” (151). Then comes learning. After trust is established, there is a greater likelihood that people will share important information (151). And finally, there can be understanding. Understanding requires that one “learns from them and, eventually, with them” (150-151). However, immediately after outlining this linear model with the help of six chapters of illustrations, Elmer provides a diagram from the Eastern, non-linear approach. In this model, all of these area point toward servanthood and one would not have to work through all of them before serving others (152). Elmer shows the model with a diagram and explains it in two paragraphs; then he writes, “Use the model that works best for you” 152).

Moving into Part Three, Elmer attempts to synthesize the first two parts with the idea of Christian leadership. Part Three introduces the new topic of leadership (which more will be addressed in the subsequent section). The question becomes, “How do we combine the concept of service with that of leadership?” (155). Much of Part Three shifts into advice about the dealing with challenges and struggles often faced by missionaries. And then Elmer concludes first with the idea that cross-cultural servanthood requires practice and second, that all are called to something that will require servanthood. He states, “God has a significant role for you in his global mission. But it can be significant only if you are able to follow the servanthood of Jesus, which is difficult in the best of circumstances but especially challenging in the places that are foreign to you” (198).

CRITICAL INTERACTION OF THE AUTHOR’S WORK

Dr. Elmer’s effort to share his knowledge and skill set should be appreciated by those desiring to serve a mission or plant a church in a culture different than their own. The book is a strong contribution to the topic of evangelism and should be included on many a missionary or church planter's bookshelf.  Elmer's background has a trustworthy feel and his illustrations make what might seem complex understandable. Part One is valuable and a solid introduction to his overarching point. The style and tone of the book are such that the reader feels simultaneously encouraged and convicted.

Part Two is where the bulk of the book’s value is found. The liner model leading up to service is both informative and practical for not only work in a foreign culture, but for working in the nuanced differences within cultures closer to home. A practical application guide or workbook to assist in the teaching of a church missionary team the tools for serving in different cultures could accompany Part Two. However, the shortcoming of Part Two is the focus on cultural understanding over services, and even more so, the lack of sharing the gospel. The topic of understanding the cultural drowns out the reason for understanding the culture in the first place.

Part Three, while helpful and informative, did not seem to fit the purpose of the book. Prior to introducing leadership into the picture of servanthood, there were not logically surfacing questions in the area of leadership. Elmer, in the opinion of this author, should have concluded without the introduction of the new topic of leadership.

Elmer’s model for cross-culture servanthood can be applied to local cultures, but none of his examples demonstrated anybody reaching differing cultures within the boarder of the United States, or even Western cultures. He did not address situations like service on a Native American reservation, or into the inner city, or in a poverty-laden area. Modern trends are encouraging missionaries and church planters to go into cultures different then their own but still closer to home—be it rural or urban, east or west, New York or LA or Portland or Salt Lake, or even differing cultures within their same area. Given the large number of those reaching into these different cultures, Elmer might have served a broader readership had he included some of the aspects of subtle cultural differences. Or maybe this should be the topic of an additional book that places the focus of serving the different cultures within our own communities.

CONCLUSION

Cross-Cultural Servanthood is a valuable book for anybody taking the gospel into any culture different than his or her own. Working through Elmer’s model of servanthood should help Christians in most relationships. Elmer is correct when he says, “The following pages will unpack the idea of cross-cultural servanthood. While not being easy, it is the calling of every person who wishes to follow Jesus, whether in your home culture or beyond. The principles in this book apply to a wide range of Christians—in one sense, to all who want to serve others” (12-13). This author believes that Elmer is also correct in saying that all who desire to follow Jesus must desire to be servants. We must put aside the robe and pick up the towel (22-26).

Purchase this book at Amazon.com by clicking here.

* This post was, in its entirety or in part, originally written in seminary in partial fulfillment of a M.Div. It may have been redacted or modified for this website. 
** Purchases made through the links on this site help support this ministry. 

Working the Angles by Eugene Peterson

Introduction. In his book, Working the Angles, Eugene Peterson identifies the work of the pastor or leader by drawing on the geometric imagery of a triangle. “The visible lines of pastoral work,” says Peterson, “are preaching, teaching, and administration” (Eerdmans Publishing, 1987, 5). This is often how pastors identify themselves, that is, primarily as the preacher, teacher, or church administrator. Before reading his book, one of, or a combination of these three duties is how I often envisioned myself in future ministry opportunities. But these three important straight lines are at the mercy of the three angles that actually form the triangle. To this Peterson writes, “Most of what we see in a triangle is lines. The lines come in various proportions to each other but what determines the proportions and shape of the whole are the angles” (5). The lines are the visible and the expected of the pastor’s duties, but the angles dictate everything. “The small angles of this ministry are prayer, Scripture, and spiritual direction,” Peterson continues (5). Without these angles, the lines hold little shape or semblance of meaning.

This is not a book review. Rather, what follows is a self-reflection. This is an evaluation of my prayer life, study of Scripture, and present spiritual direction through my understanding of Peterson’s book. I will offer my thoughts and ideas about the concepts of Working the Angles, through the same structure as the book. Peterson breaks his book down by three sections following the same focus of each angle: prayer, Scripture, and spiritual direction. I will do the same for this post.

Upfront I can say that I feel that two angles of my triangle are developing well and are a strong part of my life; but one angle is the regular subject of my prayers and is in need of serious help and growth. In addition, I have been working though a difficult decision regarding the Army chaplaincy and this book has greatly helped guide my decision away from that direction.

Prayer. Peterson expresses that prayer is of the utmost importance for every pastor and leader. Everything should always come down to prayer, always. Prayer is not simply for getting things started at secular gathering and meetings, as if it is the starter pistol of a track race. And it should not be a token thing; it is powerful and dangerous, significant. The pastor or leader’s life, according to Peterson, must be strongly identified through a life of regular, honest, meaningful prayer.

As I read though the significance of prayer, I found myself in strong agreement. Hebrews 4:16 says, “Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in a time of need” (ESV). Because of this passage and others, I feel confident to boldly approach God in prayer; and as I read Psalm 139, I know that God knows me thoroughly. Therefore, my personal prayers can be honest and guttural. While I confess, at times I selfishly ask for God to bless me in this way or that, much of my prayer life is my desire to draw nearer to God to know him, myself, and my relationship with Jesus so much better. I wake with prayer, pray in the shower, when I’m shaving and brushing my teeth, walking past neighbor’s homes, riding the bus, working, after meeting with co-workers, when I'm studying, and before I go to bed. I pray at any moment I can, even when I am using the restroom. Yet, sometimes I will forget to prayer and go for hours without talking with God. There is loneliness, but then again I am drawn back to him to share joy and pain, confusion and understanding.

However, I am coming to realize that I often shelter my relationship with God by avoiding the deeper approach toward God when I pray with others, sometimes even when I daily pray with my wife and children. It is my prayer that I feel comfortable to boldly approach God with them too.

I am in the process of re-entering the military as a chaplain; or I should say I was in the process. Much of my concern with the chaplaincy falls squarely in the three angles of this book. There is debate about the chaplain’s ability to pray honest prayers to Jesus, in his name. While I do not think it is absolutely necessary to end a prayer specifically, “in the name of Jesus” as a recently removed Navy chaplain does, I do believe prayer should not be that token thing to hold on to tradition. Thinking back to my eight years in the military, I cannot recall a chaplain’s public prayer that was not simply a cursory prayer to “get things started.” It is as if having the chaplain open a ceremony with a prayer is the Army’s way to appease some and hold on to tradition. After reading Peterson’s book, I am no longer confidant that I can be a participant in the capacity required by the Army. And if prayer is a significant angle (which I believe it is), than it stands to reason that counseling sessions and various other aspects of the chaplain’s duties with soldiers should include honest prayer. However, the last four decades have seen a shift away from Christian prayer in the chaplain ministries (with the exception of Sunday services), in many cases actually preventing prayer in this capacity.

Scripture. The pastor or leader should be a man (or woman) of the Book. If the Bible is to be understood as God’s written word to us—and I believe it is—than the pastor should know the material inside and out. There should be a strong desire to read and hear from God often. But as Peterson explains, knowing the material is not just the ability to regurgitate a passage as needed or achieve high marks on a test, it is to breath it in, live it, understand it, deeply know it. It should sustain life and shape how the leader understands everything. I believe my approach to the Bible (as God’s Word) is an honest approach to getting closer to God, hearing from him, and infusing the Scripture into the core foundations of my life. Like Eugene says should be the case, my “office,” where I most often read, is actually called my “study.” Although I also listen to Scripture when I am commuting to work and on occasion I will read from my iPhone when I’m standing in line or passing time.

I typically start my time in Scripture with prayer. I read from a daily reading plan, and I journal. At times, I will read large portions of the Word for a broad overview or to capture the meta-narrative. Other times, I will read one verse repeatedly, chewing on it, praying it, trying to make it a part of me like a blood transfusion. I read from many translations and sometimes I will read from the Greek (although I still greatly struggle with this). Sometimes I read and study at the “101 level,” that is, the devotional reading for peace and enjoyment. Other times my reading is a deeper study, exegeting passages and examining words; and still other times I involve commentaries to seek out a much deeper or more academic understanding. Scripture is the focus of most, if not all of my reading. My purpose for reading Scripture is to hear the word of the Lord and to know him more. And Scripture is the measuring stick of how I come to understand everything else.

Spiritual Direction. As I hinted in the introduction, one life area is in dire need of improvement. It is this area—spiritual direction. At times over the past three years, I have acted as a spiritual director or mentor for others; but through much of that time, I have been void of a serious, dedicated spiritual director. I have two or three guys I can go to for prayer and help with big decisions, but I do not feel like I have a go-to guy for the little things, the mundane, who will call me out when I need it most and stick with me as I work through my junk. It is often my prayer that God will bring this man into my life, and soon.

As Peterson says, every person needs a spiritual director in his or her life, throughout the entire lifetime of the believer. I absolutely trust he is correct. When we are hermits, that is, when we are not deeply known by other believers, we tend to see ourselves as 'amazing,' much better than reality would state. But when we have a spiritual director, there is an honesty that is not present otherwise. There is humility and growth and help and honesty about us, pointing us toward repentance, sanctification, and a better relationship with God. I do not, at present, have this level of support, which is why entering the chaplaincy is risky at best, irresponsible, and unwise. Peterson’s section on spiritual direction is a stark reminder of something that has been a long struggle for me. Peterson also struggled with the lack of a spiritual director. He said it was because he did not want to give up control. This is somewhat true for me too. And I am struggling to find a willing, capable mentor that I trust and feel I can be open with. I see that I need to repent and work through this issue. I realize, as Peterson eventually did, that the reason I do not have this man in my life is due to problems I am struggling to deal with and embrace in a repentant, honest manner. (The level of frank honesty might be a bit high for this post, but is this not somewhat the point of the final section of the book?) So, I keep praying, waiting, and watching.

Conclusion. I found Peterson’s book informative and convicting. Ultimately, I was questioning my readiness to enter the chaplaincy and Working the Angles acted as a conformation that I am not yet there. I need to continue to pray and listen to God’s word and guidance through reading Scripture. I need to open my life up to a spiritual director. Until I can get the angels resembling a triangle, the lines of preaching, teaching, and administration will not connect, leaving me with a haphazard and unfruitful ministry.

* I have no material connection to this book. This post was, in its entirety or in part, originally written in seminary in partial fulfillment of a M.Div. It may have been redacted or modified for this website.