Converts or Disciples

Oklahoma State parents, a Univ. of Oklahoma son? We shall see...

Matthew 28:18-20 – And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”

In my Evangelical background, I was taught (either directly or by absorption) that the Great Commission = evangelism. This, of course, falls right in line with the interpretation given by most Evangelical traditions. However, as has been observed repeatedly, the verses say, “make disciples” not converts. It should be noted that one cannot make a Christian disciple of a non-Christian.

What I have seen as far as discipleship goes are the following: A) one-on-one discipleship where one person trains another in the classic spiritual disciplines of prayer, Bible study, Bible memorization, fasting, etc. or B) offering classes to church members in how to evangelize, what their spiritual gifts are, and tithing. But, as noted in the previous post, churches are just recreating the same kinds of people, over and over. Typical Evangelical churches end making a building full of pastor/teachers and some Pentecostal/Charismatic churches are creating modern-day “apostles/prophets.”

However, there are other gifts. I will just limit the list to Romans 12. For example, Romans listed prophecy, service, teaching, exhortation, giving, leading, and mercy. When was the last time (or the first time) there was training for mercy people, givers, leaders, or servers? When those with these gifts are not trained to use them, then the church is crippled. Not all of its parts are healthy and functioning properly. Thus, the church is ill-equipped to make a difference in the world.

What are the alternatives? For certain, I do believe that there must be “intellectual” training in the historic doctrines and beliefs of the Christian church. Every believer needs to know what they believe and why. But, after that, what do we do? Each believer should be aided in identifying their spiritual gifts. After ascertaining those gifts, the new believer should be paired up with a mature believer of the same gifts. Think of an apprentice-master situation. The mature believer would show the new believer what it looks like to live out and use their spiritual gifts.

By doing this, we can avoid trying to force people who are not spiritually gifted to be pastor-teachers or evangelists to become pastor-teachers or evangelists. And, as people walk in the gifts that God gave them (as opposed to the ones the church would rather they have), they will quite naturally do “lifestyle evangelism.”

To be continued…

Vern

What Are You Doing?

Don't Ask

Many Christians are familiar with Matthew 28:19, which says, “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.” Lots of churches have marshaled their forces and created campaigns, evangelism tracts, outreach programs, and the ever-famous door-to-door evangelism. Each of these processes has been quite successful at varying points throughout history. This is obvious as they are repeatedly returned to even though most of them (in my opinion) are experiencing diminishing returns.

At the same time, it is pretty undeniable that the American church is more and more irrelevant at being “the salt of the earth” or “a city set upon a hill.” American Christians are just as American and messy as American non-Christians. Both conservative and liberal Christians have wed themselves to political parties, seeking to use the power of the U.S. government to achieve ostensibly “Christian” goals and aims.

Why has this happened? I want to grab the shirt collar of so many (so-called) church leaders and say, “What are you doing?” Why are churches so ineffective at influencing not just the culture around them, but apparently their own parishioners/congregants?

Ephesians 4:11 discusses the various positions (or offices) that God gave the church: apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers. Some denominations (Baptists, Bible churches, some Reformed churches) highlight the last three offices. This fits in well with their church doctrine and structures. They either emphasize evangelizing the masses or teaching a lot. A few try to do both. Other denominations focus on the first two offices since apostles and prophets are associated with great supernatural power and authority. Some Pentecostal and Charismatic groups eagerly desire this power and authority.

What does Ephesians 4:11 have to do with the church failing in its mission? We must turn to verse 12: “FOR THE EQUIPPING OF THE SAINTS FOR THE WORK OF SERVICE, TO THE BUILDING UP OF THE BODY OF CHRIST.” Church leadership often seems to have forgotten that its purpose is to equip the saints and build up the church. Sharing the faith, communicating data about the faith, healing people, and casting out demons are all commendable activities. But, it the church itself isn’t built up, and the saints aren’t equipped then what’s the point?

“What are you doing?”

What seems to have happened, and continues to be happening, is that the American church has defined “building up the saints” as training/creating three types of Christians: evangelists, pastor/teachers, or apostle/prophets. But what happens when someone with the gift of mercy wants to enter the ministry formally or just serve in a lay capacity? Each church and denomination has its own cookie-cutter mold that everyone must fit into: if a church is led by a dynamic teacher, then it stands to reason that most of the congregants will probably assume that to be a minister is to be a teacher. The same is true if the leadership is heavily evangelistic or charismatic. I’m not aware of too many churches that train and develop people who are gifted as mercy givers, or servers, or exhorters, or givers.

Perhaps if the saints were properly equipped, they would be salty and filled with light. Perhaps if the saints were trained in who they are, what their faith is, and how to exercise their spiritual gifts, they would be more effective in affecting their cities, states, and cultures. Maybe instead of pressing all the parishioners/congregants of a church into one mold, those people would change the world.

Just maybe…

Vernon

Give Me a Diaper Please?

"Is This the Future of the Church?" My nephew eating a rose petal.

I recently had a thought in regards to some of the current post-modern influenced forms of American Evangelicalism. I will attempt to elaborate as follows:

The Eastern Orthodox churches look at the era of the Early Church as one of infancy. The Church was essentially a new born and needed time to digest and work out what it believed about its encounter with the Person, Jesus the Christ. He was human and yet divine. How did these things work out? Although the subsequent growth and organization of the Church has been looked upon with much suspicion or downright disdain, the Orthodox view those things as necessities for the Church to “grow up.” The post-Constantine legalization of the Church and its integration into the Empire have been cause for accusing the bishops of making Christianity into a pagan religion or of their being pushed around by the Emperor. Of course the Orthodox view that time in history as essential to the Church finally being able to finish her adolescence and move onward into fuller maturity through her Ecumenical Councils.

One thing that was pointed out in a class that Aubrey and I are in, was that most of the Reformers were seeking to return to the “purity and innocence” of the Early Church. They wanted to rid the Church of the theological and doctrinal “innovations” of the Church of Rome. In other words, the Reformers wanted to harken back and return to the theological and doctrinal purity of the Early Church. And what was that? The New Testament, as it is the corpus that is closest in time to that fabled era. Thus, sola scriptura.

Today, the post-modern Christians are repeating what the Reformers did: trying to reform the Church by returning to the fabled era of the Early Church. But, instead of seeking doctrinal purity, post-modern Christians are seeking to return to the “pure” structure and organization of the Early Church. They are protesting the abuses of “institutional” churches (those with hierarchies, committees, and buildings) assuming that if the Church can cast off the shackles and bonds of structure, order, theological certainty, and clergy, then perhaps she will be free to fulfill her mission of discipling the nations in an “organic and missional” way.

What’s interesting, is if the Orthodox are correct, then both the Reformers and today’s post-modern Christians are seeking to return the Church to a state of infancy. Yes, during infancy there is phenomenal and stunning growth and development. But, does anyone really want to return to the days of diapers, rashes, and falling down all the time? Does the Church need to become a baby again? Does she need to “be reborn”?

On one other note, both the Reformers and today’s post-moderns seem to have missed something. The health of the Church does not lay in her purity of doctrine or her purity of form and organization (or lack thereof). The health is in her people walking in the Spirit, abiding in the True Vine. Institutionalization or lack thereof does not guarantee perfect Church. Neither does debating over the correct doctrine. It is the heart of the people and whether or not that heart beats in time with that of their Master in Heaven.

So, perhaps the Church does not need to be reborn in doctrine or form (although that may be needed in certain locations), but needs to be reborn in her walking in the Spirit and exhibiting His fruit: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control.

Vernon

Psalm 1

Click here to read the post on Psalm 1.

 

Extremes

Older, Arab gentlemen, Jerusalem

Last night, Aubrey and I attended a costume party. I went dressed in a traditional Arab man’s outfit: the long, white shirt that looks a bit like a skirt, a black over “coat” for decorative purposes, and a plain white keffiyah, like the one in the picture.

As we were walking to the residence of the party, we passed two men who were taking their children trick-or-treating. One of the men looked at my outfit and laughed and said something to the effect of “needing to shoot people” like me (i.e. Arabs). I was a bit apprehensive about wearing the full outfit in public, but I figured being up in the Northwest, where political correctness is supposed to be all the rage, maybe I would find “tolerance.” I knew better.

On our way home, we passed a teen-aged kid who saw us and yelled at me, “Muslim!” We didn’t recognize what he said at first and kept going on. He then yelled, “If you’re not a Muslim you are being really disrespectful!” It finally dawned on us what he was saying. We were amused because the kid isn’t educated enough to know that my outfit is not religious. It is Arab which is not synonymous with Muslim. I was in no way being insulting to Arabs nor Muslims. In fact, I bought the clothes from an Arab-Muslim in the Old City in Jerusalem. He was in no way offended. He actually helped me pick out the correct accessories.

The incident just made me think about the curious blindness that people of all types have towards “hot button” issues. In regards to Arabs and Muslims, the first people reminded me of some very conservative Christians who are staunchly pro-Israel and seem to act as though Arabs are more or less animals that can/should be rounded up and shipped off somewhere else. These first people also reminded me of certain types of people who are so staunchly patriotic that they make blanket statements that they “should shoot people” who look the same way I was dressed. This is frightening to me. Arabs are human beings. They are like any other group of people: most are kind, friendly, helpful, and generous. Sure, there are crazies who want “to kill people” who are dressed as I am at this second (as an American). But, as a general rule, Arabs and Muslims are people. They deserve to be according dignity and respect that all humans ought to receive.

The second person displayed a different type of ignorance: that of idealism. This kid doesn’t know that “Arab” and “Muslim” aren’t interchangeable. He also doesn’t know that traditional Arab clothing is not intrinsically religious. Most of the Arabs we met in the Middle East were only nominally religious. But, this kid here has bought into the idea that Arabs who are Muslims are somehow a delicate, overly-sensitive people group who must be coddled with kid-gloves. This is not true either. I’ve met many and the ones I know are really easy going and laugh at themselves with ease.

To sum up, last night was a good reminder to me that not all things, and particularly people, are black and white and many things require a bit of nuance.

 

Reminders

Psalm 23

Last night, we attended the first session of a church history class taught at a local Greek Orthodox Church. The class is, obviously, taught from an Eastern viewpoint rather than a Western one.

One of the things mentioned by the instructor, was that during the great theological debates over the nature of Christ, all lay people in the East were conversant in Trinitarian theology. Whether one was a priest or the trash collector, you were able to read and write and discuss the finer points of how did Christ’s humanity interact with his divinity?

This was not the case for the Christian West. After Rome fell to the barbarians in the mid 400s AD, Western Europe headed into the Dark Ages. Ultimately, only the clergy were able to read and write (along with court officials) and therefore theology became the “job” of the clergy and the lay people just showed up and participated in church worship.

This info was a reminder of the exact same data we had learned in our History of the Church in the East class while in Jerusalem. This idea of the lay people being well educated and trained has long inspired us and given us one of our goals: to provide accessible scholarly info to the lay people. We in the West are almost totally literate. Yet, we’ve still maintained the Western tradition of punting theological understanding to the “paid clergy.” This (in my opinion) puts many lay people at risk when engaging in debate with co-workers or neighbors in regards to our hope.

All this to say, I encourage you to study and grow. If ancient Believers could understand the minutiae of Trinitarian doctrine, surely so can we.

Did We Drop Something?

Snake River Gorge, Twin Falls, Idaho. A long way down.

I am currently reading through NT Wright’s book Surprised by Hope. I’m not too far into it but it is very, very good. He examines the current Christian understanding of the ultimate Christian hope: resurrection. Wright points out that most western Christians have an idea that resurrection = going to heaven and living with God “up there” in a quasi-disembodied state. Wright points out that the 1st Century AD understanding of resurrection was of a physical resurrection and life on earth. He reminds us that at the end of Revelation, the new Jerusalem descends out of heaven and comes to earth.

Although not all churches or traditions have abandoned the teaching of a true physical resurrection of the body, I do agree that it is little emphasized. The dominant Christian culture in the States (when it deals w/the afterlife) does seem oriented around the intermediate stage where we rest in Paradise with God until He chooses to complete the restoration of all things. This intermediate stage has become confused with the ultimate goal.

When did we start dropping that important piece of theology?

The Move

Dawn: Curt Gowdy St. Park, WY

The trip from Oklahoma went off w/o a hitch. Involved were four camping days, lots of scenic driving, lots of not-so-scenic driving, and being rather impressed with my 16 year old Isuzu pickup. Eastern Wyoming is beautiful. So is western Oregon. Everything in between? It’s ok. No offense though…

My biggest impression is, actually, how vast the U.S. is. Israel is tiny, tight, and most of its distances are vertical: lots of mountains w/steep, narrow valleys. Being in the Plains and the West is a shock: broad, open, and endless. In Israel, even poor farmland is at a premium. Here, we’re literally drowning in some of the best farmland in the world. This means we are a phenomenally wealthy country. It is truly staggering.

On a vaguely related note, in our new backyard is a plum tree. They are falling off the tree in droves. I’ve seen them for sale for around $1.50/lb. I eat them for free.

Rain

Since returning to the States, we’ve had at least four straight days of rain, beginning on Monday (we returned Sat PM). I’ve seen almost as much rain this week as I did during the entire last year in Jerusalem. Israel is in a drought.

Just random observations.

Wisdom from the East: Attitudes & Expressions

Man has such powers that he can transmit good or evil to his environment. These matters are very delicate. Great care is needed. We need to see everything in a positive frame of mind. We mustn’t think anything evil about others. Even a simple glance or a sigh influences those around us. And even the slightest anger or indignation does harm. We need to have goodness and love in our soul and to transmit these things.

We need to be careful not to harbor any resentment against those who harm us, but rather to pray for them with love. Whatever any of our fellow men does, we should never think evil of him. We need always to have thoughts of love and always to think good of others. Look at St. Stephen the first martyr. He prayed, ‘Lord, do not hold this sin against them’ (Acts 7:60). We need to do the same.

The Elder Porphyrios