max daves :: Friends blog

November 21, 2008

http://blogs.lifeway.com/blog/edstetzer/2008/11/eric-geiger-and-

geiger.pngEric Geiger is originally from New Orleans, but currently lives in Miami, Florida serving as the Executive Pastor at Christ Fellowship. Many of you will recognize his name from the book, Simple Church (coauthored with Thom Rainer). His new book, Identity: Who You Are in Christ "helps Christians clearly understand who they really are as defined by God's word and unpacks the practical response that goes along with each wonderfully dramatic, empowering, and liberating truth." Sound good? Check out our interview with Eric below for more. This is the third interview in a B&H Church Leadership Books series (the prior two with Brad Waggoner and then Sam and Thom Rainer).



Can you tell us a little about yourself and your background?



I grew up in the New Orleans area in a great Christian home, but the faith did not take root in my life until my senior year in high school. During college I began serving in a local church as a youth pastor and God used that experience to pull me into full-time church ministry. I now serve as Executive Pastor of Christ Fellowship in Miami, Florida where I live with my wife (Kaye) and daughter (Eden).



But part-time I follow Ed Stetzer's every moment on twitter and eagerly await all of his blog posts.



[Note from Ed: Eric has many problems.]



What compelled you to write a book on this subject?



When I wrote Simple Church with Dr. Rainer, I felt "this research, this reality has to be on paper" because the message, I believed, was so critical for church leaders to wrestle with. In the same way, I feel the theme and message of Identity must be internalized and wrestled with by everyday believers.



In the writing of the book, I felt a lot like Jeremiah in Jeremiah 20:9 - this was a message I needed to share, regardless of the result.



identity.pngWhat is the main theme or point that you want readers to understand from reading your book?



The main point is to know who you are in Christ and to live the reality of who you are. As a pastor I see Christians constantly hampered from moving forward spiritually because they lack an understanding of who they really are in Christ. And the faith becomes checking off religious boxes and checklists instead of living the reality of who God has declared us to be. Yet the Scripture is loaded with phenomenal imagery describing who we are (and who the people in are church are), so the book re-discovers metaphors the Bible paints to describe us.



Why are people confused about "their identity in Christ" and how do Christians discover that Identity?



For at least two reasons...



(1) Our enemy seeks to distort our understanding of who we are. He cannot rob us of our identity, as our identity is secure, but he can mess with our view of our identity. For example, many people struggle with seeing God as a Father and seeing themselves as His child because of a bad earthly father. Satan's ability to destroy fathers impacts how many people grow up viewing God.



(2) We, as Christian leaders, under-teach our identity. I think we are fearful that we will come off like a self-help or self-esteem coach so we often stick to teaching lists of how people should behave. It is much easier to teach that way.



Are there some specific lessons you hope readers will learn and apply to their lives after reading your book?



I want people to walk away from reading the book with a greater sense of awe for God and His grace because of the great identity He has given us. I want people to return to knowing who they are. Beginning with our identity instead of the commands rescues us from performance based Christianity and a faith that is relegated to lists.



Few examples: I am His bride - so I live pure. I am His ambassador - so I live a mission centric life (I will leave AL out because of his pride). I am an alien - so I live distinct from the culture.



Do you have a favorite part of the book or a favorite chapter?



Our small group just finished discussing "the alien chapter." And the discussion was phenomenal as we wrestled with living pure but living pure among people who are far from God (I Peter 2:11-12). The chapter really ties into what you are so passionate about, Ed. That people would live transformed lives among people with intention and mission.



A gift for www.edstetzer.com blog readers: Our church recorded a seven-week DVD based small group curriculum that goes along with the book. The curriculum is about 15 minutes of me teaching each session and then has discussion questions for groups to go through together. If a blog reader will email me at egeiger@cfmiami.org and put Stetzer blog in the subject line, we will send out a complimentary DVD within a few weeks (they are being printed now).



How does realizing you are a priest change how you live?



Prayer is bigger than something I do at important junctures in my day. When I really grasped the privilege of the high priest in the Old Testament and realized that God has given me that honor, prayer became a more integral part of my life and day.



What is the essence of the chapter on the "bride?"



I am really completely forgiven. Not because of me, but because God brought His righteousness into our relationship.



How should understanding we are "an alien" and "an ambassador" impact how we live?



Realizing that we represent another King and another Kingdom in this culture for a specific period of time will cause us to leave our safe Christian sub-culture. The safe sub-culture can actually be dangerous as it gives us an excuse to disobey God.



Great stuff, Eric.



Now it is your turn. Eric will be by to answer questions all day so feel free to jump in.

Keywords: blog, Stetzer

Posted by Ed Stetzer | 0 comment(s)

November 19, 2008

http://blogs.lifeway.com/blog/edstetzer/2008/11/thursday-is-for-

I have been too busy to keep up my normal blogging pace, but will get back to that soon. In the meantime, let me mention a couple of things coming up on Thursday.



Tomorrow, Eric Geiger will be by the blog to answer questions from his newest book, Identity: Who You Are in Christ I will post his interview early in the morning and he will be answering questions all day. Feel free to drop by.



Also, if you are around Chicago, be sure to come by Trinity Evangelical Divinity School for an afternoon conference (open to the community). I will be teaching on the missional church. Info is here.



Let me add that Trinity is a remarkable school and I am quite pleased with my time here. I will be talking more about the school and why you should come here!



Here are some of my notes from class today.



I would like to suggest that what evangelicals need is an adequate ecclesiology if they are to discover resources to deal with the longstanding problems that the critics have identified and quite ably analyzed... Now, many evangelicals are aware of their ecclesiological deficit. In fact, one of the recurring criticisms of evangelicalism is that it has no adequate ecclesiology (p.11 Liturgical Theology The Church Worshiping Community, Simon Chan, InterVarsity Press Downers Grove Ill, 2006)




Two quotes from Husbands and Treier



Both the best and worst of evangelical ecclesiology are rooted in the passionate evangelical commitment to mission. This engenders flexibility that contributes significantly to the accusation that evangelicals do not have an ecclesiology. We do - but our ecclesiology is so flexible that it is difficult at times to identify an effective one. (p.70, The community of the Word; toward an evangelical ecclesiology Mark Husbands and Daniel J. Treier, editor. InterVarsity Press, 2005).



The strength of evangelicalism is its willingness to adapt its practices to the demands of Christian mission. The weakness is its willingness to neglect our identity within the people of God. An improvisational ecclesiology recognizes the demands of adaptation and faithfulness, committing us to both. We must learn properly to confess in word and deed that the church is one, holy, catholic and apostolic. But what those marks mean in particular times and places requires discernment under the guidance of the Spirit. (The community of the Word, p. 71).



From my fellow Southeastern faculty member John Hammett:



A great number of churches in North America are undergoing radical changes as they take new forms and new approaches and move in new directions. But the new forms, approaches, and directions are anything but monolithic. Formerly, if a church identified itself as Baptist, or Presbyterian, or Methodist, one knew pretty much the stance of that church. Such labels are no longer sufficient, or even that helpful. Is the church traditional, contemporary, seeker driven, postmodern? Is it a megachurch, a house church, a cell church, a metachurch? (John S. Hammett, Biblical Foundations for Baptist Churches. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, page 302-303.)




And, one from Shelley who cautioned two decades before the most recent explosion of evangelical innovation:



It should be a source of deep concern to evangelicals that while professing faith in an infallible Bible, they have produced so few worthy books on the Biblical doctrine of the church. (Bruce Shelley, Evangelicalism in America (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1967), p. 124.)




And one more for good measure from Howard Snyder:



In Paul's thought the body is not a simile for the church. The church is not merely like a body. The church does not merely resemble a body in its diversity, unity, and interdependence. It is the body of Christ, who is its head. Every member of the body is, in a mystical sense, a part of Christ. (Christianity Today Magazine, online article: Editor's Bookshelf: Biology Class for the Church, Howard Snyder maps the genome of the body of Christ, David Neff, posted 11/01/2002).




Have a great Wednesday.

Keywords: blog, Stetzer

Posted by Ed Stetzer | 0 comment(s)

http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/TheForgottenWays/~3/459059996/

Here is a review of Tim Keller’s book, The Reason for God, reviewed by my industrious friend David Mays



Tim Keller is the founding pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in Manhattan.  The church began in 1989, has 6000 regular attendees, and has spawned more than a dozen daughter churches.  See www.redeemer.com.  Tim’s book is a well reasoned apologetic that grants dignity and respect to all people, regardless of their theological, cultural, political and personal perspectives.  The first part of the book examines seven major objections to faith.  The second part describes evidence for God and Christianity.  This is an excellent book to give to thoughtful skeptics.


“The world is polarizing over religion.  It is getting both more religious and less religious at the same time.” (x)  “Both skeptics and believers feel their existence is threatened because both secular skepticism and religious faith are on the rise in significant, powerful ways.” (xiv)


People are opting for a nonreligious life, for a non-institutional, personally constructed spirituality, or for orthodox, high-commitment religious groups….  Therefore the population is paradoxically growing both more religious and less religious at once.” (xv)


“Believers should acknowledge and wrestle with doubts–not only their own but their friends’ and neighbors’.”  “Only if you struggle long and hard with objections to your faith will you be able to provide grounds for your beliefs to skeptics, including yourself, that are plausible rather than ridiculous or offensive.” (xvii)


“Skeptics must learn to look for a type of faith hidden within their reasoning.  All doubts, however skeptical and cynical they may seem, are really a set of alternate beliefs.”  “The reason you doubt Christianity’s Belief A is because you hold unprovable Belief B.  Every doubt, therefore, is based on a leap of faith.” (xvii)


“My thesis is that if you come to recognize the beliefs on which your doubts about Christianity are based, and if you seek as much proof for those beliefs as you seek from Christians for theirs–you will discover that your doubts are not as solid as they first appeared.” (xviii)


Part I.  The Leap of Doubt


1.  There can’t be just one true religion


Exclusivity is a big issue.  Believing one has the truth can easily lead to stereotyping, caricaturizing, and demonizing others which can spiral down to oppression, abuse or violence. (4)


“What is religion then?  It is a set of beliefs that explain what life is all about, who we are, and the most important things that human beings should spend their time doing.” (15)


“Broadly understood, faith in some view of the world and human nature informs everyone’s life.  Everyone lives and operates out of some narrative identity, whether it is thought out and reflected upon or not.” (15)


“It is common to say that ‘fundamentalism’ leads to violence, yet as we have seen, all of us have fundamental, unprovable faith-commitments that we think are superior to those of others.” (19)  “Which set of unavoidably exclusive beliefs will lead us to humble, peace-loving behavior?” (20)  Christians have within their belief system the strongest possible resource for practicing sacrificial service, generosity, and peace-making.  At the very heart of their view of reality is a man who died for his enemies, praying for their forgiveness.  Reflection on this can only lead to a radically different way of dealing with those who were different from them.” (20)


2. How could a good God allow suffering?


Some say suffering proves there is no loving, all powerful God.  In other words, “If our minds can’t plumb the depths of the universe for good answers to suffering, well, then, there can’t be any!  This is blind faith of a high order.” (23)  “Many assume that if there were good reasons for the existence of evil, they would be accessible to our minds,…but why should that be the case? (24)


“With time and perspective most of us can see good reasons for at least some of the tragedy and pain that occurs in life.  Why couldn’t it be possible that, from God’s vantage point, there are good reasons for all of them?” (25)


“Lewis recognized that modern objections to God are based on a sense of fair play and justice.  People, we believe, ought not to suffer, be excluded, die of hunger or oppression.  But the evolutionary mechanism of natural selection depends on death, destruction, and violence of the strong against the weak–these things are all perfectly natural.  On what basis, then, does the atheist judge the natural world to be horribly wrong, unfair, and unjust?” (26)


“If we ask the question: ‘Why does God allow evil and suffering to continue?’ and we look at the cross of Jesus, we still do not know what the answer is.  However, we now know what the answer isn’t.  It can’t be that he doesn’t love us. …  God takes our misery and suffering so seriously that he was willing to take it on himself. [on the cross].”  (30)  “Embracing the Christian doctrines of the incarnation and Cross brings profound consolation in the face of suffering.” (33)


3.  Christianity is a straitjacket.


“Many say that all truth-claims are power plays.  When you claim to have the truth, you are trying to get power and control over other people.” (37)  “If you say all truth-claims are power plays, then so is your statement.” (38)  “All denunciation implies a moral doctrine of some kind…” (38, quoting G. K. Chesterton)


“In many areas of life, freedom is not so much the absence of restrictions as finding the right ones, the liberating restrictions.”  “Instead of insisting on freedom to create spiritual reality, shouldn’t we be seeking to discover it and disciplining ourselves to live according to it? (46-7)


4. The Church is responsible for so much injustice.


There are three issues to consider: the behavior or character flaws of Christians, the issue of war and violence, and fanaticism. (52)


It is argued that religion tends to make cultural differences into a cosmic battle.  However, Communist, Russian, Chinese, and Cambodian regimes of the 20th century rejected all organized religion yet produced massive violence against their own peoples.  When the idea of God is gone, a society will make something else the transcendent ideal.  (55)


“In Jesus’s and the prophets’ critique, self-righteous religion is always marked by insensitivity to issues of social justice, while true faith is marked by profound concern for the poor and marginalized.” (60)  “The shortcomings of the church can be understood historically as the imperfect adoption and practice of the principles of the Christian gospel.” (61)  “To give up Christian standard would be to leave us with no basis for the criticism.” (62)


5. How can a loving God send people to Hell?


“In our culture, divine judgment is one of Christianity’s most offensive doctrines.”  (69)  There are a number of hidden beliefs inside this critique.


“In ancient times it was understood that there was a transcendent moral order…built into the fabric of the universe.”  Violation of this order brought consequences.  One had to learn to live in conformity with this reality.  Modernity, presented the natural world as ultimate reality and we could mold it to fit our desires.  We now think we can control the spiritual world too.  It seems unfair that there should be a God who would punish us.  We believe in our personal rights!  “Not all of humanity has accepted modernity’s view of things.”  “Why should Western cultural sensibilities be the final court?”  (71-2)


“God’s wrath is not a cranky explosion, but his settled opposition to the cancer…which is eating out the insides of the human race he loves with his whole being.” (73, quoting Becky Pippert)  “He is angry at evil and injustice because it is destroying its peace and integrity.” (73)


“The biblical picture is that sin separates us from the presence of God, which is the source of all joy and indeed of all love, wisdom, or good things of any sort.”  “if we were to lose his presence totally, that would be hell–the loss of our capability for giving or receiving love or joy.” (76) “Hell, then, is the trajectory of a soul, living a self-absorbed, self-centered life, going on and on forever.” (77)  “In short, hell is simply one’s freely chosen identity apart from God on a trajectory into infinity.”  (78)


“It is not a question of God ’sending us’ to hell.  In each of us there is something growing, which will BE Hell unless it is nipped in the bud.” (79, quoting C.S. Lewis)


6.  Science has disproved Christianity


“Must we choose between thinking scientifically and belief in God?” (850


“It is one thing to say that science is only equipped to test for natural causes and cannot speak to any others.  It is quite another to insist that science proves that no other causes could possibly exist.” (85)


In the statement, “miracles can’t happen,” there is a premise that “there can’t be a God who does miracles.” (86)


It is one thing to say that I will look for my car keys under the streetlamp because the light is better there.  It is another thing to say that the car keys cannot be elsewhere because I can’t see there!


 


7.  You can’t take the Bible literally


What people mean is that the Bible is not entirely trustworthy because some parts…are scientifically impossible, historically unreliable, and culturally regressive.” (99-100)


“I find more people now especially upset by what they call the outmoded and regressive teaching of the Bible.  It seems to support slavery and the subjugation of women.  These positions appear so outrageous to contemporary people that they have trouble accepting any other parts of the Bible’s message.”  (109)  “Many of the texts people find so offensive can be cleared up with a decent commentary that puts the issue into historical context.” (110)  “Some texts do not teach what they at first appear to teach.” (111)


For many, “their problem with some texts might be based on an unexamined belief in the superiority of their historical moment over all others.  We must not universalize our time any more than we should universalize our culture.”  “To reject the Bible as regressive is to assume that you have now arrived at the ultimate historic moment, from which all that is regressive and progressive can be discerned.  That belief is surely as narrow and exclusive as the view in the Bible you regard as offensive.” (111)


“To stay away from Christianity because part of the Bible’s teaching is offensive to you assumes that if there is a God he wouldn’t have any views that upset you.  Does that belief make sense?”  (112)


In addition, we should distinguish between the major themes and message of the Bible and its less primary teachings.  …consider the Bible’s teaching in their proper order.” (112)  “It is therefore important to consider the Bible’s core claims about who Jesus is and whether he rose from the dead before you reject it for its less central and more controversial teachings.” (113)


Intermission


“Underlying all doubts about Christianity are alternate beliefs, unprovable assumptions about the nature of things.” (115)


The second part of the book exercises a “critical rationality” that “assumes that there are some arguments that many or even most rational people will find convincing….  It assumes that some systems of belief are more reasonable than others….”  But, of course, these do not eliminate all counter arguments.  (120)


“When a Russian cosmonaut returned from space and reported that he had not found God,…this was like Hamlet going into the attic of his castle looking for Shakespeare.  If there is a God, he wouldn’t be another object in the universe that could be put in a lab and analyzed with empirical methods.  He would relate to us the way a playwright relates to the characters in his play.  We (characters) might be able to know quite a lot about the playwright, but only to the degree the author chooses to put information about himself in the play.” (122)


“In the Christian view, however, the ultimate evidence for the existence of God is Jesus Christ himself.”  ‘He wrote himself into the play as the main character in history….” (123)


Part 2.  The Reasons for Faith


8.  The Clues of God


There are no incontrovertible proofs for God.  But when we looked at them as clues, “cumulatively, the clues of God had a lot of force to them.”


The Big Bang is a clue.  That the cosmos is fine-tuned for life is a clue.  The regularity of nature is a clue.  Beauty is a clue.


“…the very fact that the universe had a beginning implies that someone was able to begin it.  And it seems to me that had to outside of nature.” (129, quoting Francis Collins, The Language of God.)


Richard Dawkins says there may be trillions of universes and some of them may be fine-tuned to sustain life.  “Although organic life could have just happened without a Creator, does it make sense to live as if that infinitely remote chance is true?” (132) [I don't think it is scientifically possible for life to have happened. dlm]


“Evolutionists say that if God makes sense to us, it is not because he is really there, it’s only because that belief helped us survive and so we are hardwired for it.  However, if we can’t trust our belief-forming faculties to tell us the truth about God, why should we trust them to tell us the truth about…evolutionary science?”  Or any scientific theory at all?  (138)


9. The knowledge of God


Keller demonstrates that deep within us we already know there is God.


“The secular, young adults I have known have a very finely honed sense of right and wrong.  There are many things happening in the world that evoke their moral outrage.”  (144)  “…but unlike people in other times and places, they don’t have any visible basis for why they find some things to be evil and other things good.  It’s almost like their moral intuitions are free-floating in midair….” (145)


“I think people in our culture know unavoidably that there is a God, but they are repressing what they know.” (146)


If there is no creator God then there is no sound rationale for moral obligation or human rights.  Who says so?  In fact, nature itself is terribly violent.


“If a premise (’There is no God’) leads to a conclusion you know isn’t true (’Napalming babies is culturally relative’) then why not change the premise?


10. The problem of sin


“Sin is the despairing refusal to find your deepest identity in your relationship and service to God.  Sin is seeking to become oneself, to get an identity, apart from him.” (162) The primary way to define sin is “the making of good things into ultimate things.  It is seeking to establish a sense of self by making something else more central to your significance, purpose, and happiness than your relationship to God.” (162)


“Every person is desperately seeking…’cosmic significance.’”  “Our need for worth is so powerful that whatever we base our identity and value on we essentially ‘deify.’  We will look to it with all the passion and intensity of worship and devotion, even if we think of ourselves as highly irreligious.”  (163, citing Ernest Becker)


“…sin destroys us personally.  Identity apart from God is inherently unstable.  Without God, our sense of worth may seem solid on the surface, but it never is–it can desert you in a moment.” (164)  “There is no way to avoid this insecurity outside of God.”  “An identity not based on God also leads inevitably to deep forms of addiction.”


“Building our lives on something besides God not only hurts us if we don’t get the desires of our hearts, but also if we do.” (166)  “…if you don’t live for Jesus you will live for something else.” (172)


11.  Religion and the Gospel


12.  The (True) Story of the Cross


“Why would Jesus have to die?” is a very frequent question. (187)  If someone damages you, you can get revenge–which goes on and on–or you can forgive.  But someone pays for the damage.  To forgive is a form of suffering.  You have both the damage and you forgo revenge.  It hurts.  Someone pays.


“Forgiveness means bearing the cost instead of making the wrongdoer do it, so you can reach out in love to seek your enemy’s renewal and change.  Forgiveness means absorbing the debt of the sin yourself.  Everyone who forgives great evil goes through a death into resurrection, and experiences nails, blood, sweat, and tears.”  “Everyone who forgives someone bears the other’s sins.”


God himself absorbed the pain.  “This is a God who becomes human and offers his own lifeblood in order to honor moral justice and merciful love so that someday he can destroy all evil without destroying us.” (192)  “There was a debt to be paid–God himself paid it.  There was a penalty to be born–God himself bore it.  Forgiveness is always a form of costly suffering.” (193)


13.  The reality of the resurrection


“If Jesus rose from the dead, then you have to accept all he said; if he didn’t rise from the dead, then why worry about any of what he said?  The issue on which everything hangs is not whether or not you like his teaching but whether or not he rose from the dead.” (202)


“The only way anyone embraced the resurrection back then was by letting the evidence challenge and change their worldview, their view of what was possible.  They had just as much trouble with the claims of the resurrection as you, yet the evidence–both of the eyewitness accounts and the changed lives of Christ’s followers–was overwhelming.” (211)


14. The dance of God


“I have been arguing that the Christian understanding of where we came from, what’s wrong with us, and how it can be fixed has greater power to explain what we see and experience than does any other competing account.” (213)


“If God is triune, then loving relationships in community are the ‘great fountain…at the center of reality.’” (216)


God calls us to glorify, praise, and serve him.  “And the only way we, who have been created in his image, can have this same joy, is if we center our entire lives around him instead of ourselves.” (218)

Keywords: Alan, blog, Hirsch, missional

Posted by Alan Hirsch | 0 comment(s)

http://blogs.lifeway.com/blog/edstetzer/2008/11/one-of-my-favori

paganxianity.jpgOne of my favorite troublemakers is Frank Viola. When George Barna "entered" house church world (through his writings, at least), one of my comments was that he had not actually connected with any of the people in house church world. In other words, Barna was saying all the things house church people say, but not providing any solutions or awareness of the house church movement. And, I found Revolution to be a relatively unhelpful book for that reason (and several other theological reasons I have stated elsewhere).



In the follow-up book, Barna seems to have jumped whole hog into the house church world with none other than Frank Viola. Together they published Pagan Christianity which riled a lot of people up (me included) and not just because of the not-so-subtle title. For what it is worth, I think New Testament scholar Ben Witherington did a great job in his series on the book (starting here) and Frank was gracious in his response.



I like Frank. Sure, there are some areas we differ, but I like people with passion. He just sent me a copy of his new unpublished manuscript for his next book. So far it is really good and no mention of how just about everything I do in church is pagan (grin). Frank and I have been emailing a bit and it got me thinking about some research I did a couple of years ago to see if there really was a big movement of house churches out there.



You see, I am pro-house church (largely because I believe God uses all kinds of churches). I want house churches to "work." But, if you listen to some house church people, it sounds like there are movements everywhere in the states. And, I was pretty excited about them... but I could not find them. So many leaders say, "no, not a movement here yet, but check with Denver" (or Long Beach, or San Antonio, or Rhode Island). Anyway, you get the point.



I believe that God can and does use house churches, but the over-statement of their prevalence and effectiveness does not help. People like Frank know there is an uphill battle here, but I think an important one. And, I see people like Neil Cole and others working hard to advocate and demonstrate house chuch effectiveness. And, if and when it does break through, it could bring a huge change.



But, when Revolution came out (along with some spectacular headlines) we wanted to do some research and find out just want was going on... and here is the article we published a couple of years ago at the Center for Mission Research.



The Rise of House Churches and Alternative Faith Communities
from the Center for Missional Research




The "revolution" has recently become big news-- many committed believers are rethinking (or leaving) the established church for alternative forms of church and/or community. The term, "revolution," popularized by George Barna in the book by the same name, describes many trends, but the main focus is on the move to non-traditional expressions of church (marketplace faith communities, house church, arts, etc.).



Rabbi Gellman (who has some positive things to say about evangelicals in general), wrote about the move away from traditional, organized church in Newsweek as one of the top religious trends for 2006. (His excellent article is here.) Though this trend has not yet been noticed by many in the evangelical church, it is growing in prominence and reputation.



Barna explains in his October 24, 2005, Barna Update:



Millions of people are seeking God without going through a local church. This controversial movement of people seeking to "be the Church instead of just going to church"...




Barna explains here:



In 2000, most of the nation's organized religious activity took place at or through local churches. Today, Barna's research points out, the action is shifting to newer forms of corporate religious commitment. In a typical week, 9% of all adults participate in a house church. An even greater proportion--22%--engages in spiritual encounters that take place in the marketplace (e.g., with groups of people while they are at their place of work or play, or in other typical daily contexts).




In one chart, he describes the transition to a Christianity that is less connected to a local established church:



research_altfaith1.png



Put simply, there is a significant group of men and women leaving the established / institutional church but holding to a form of Christian devotion. According to some, this has led to a dramatic increase in alternative faith communities, which in turn has led to some major theological and ecclesiological concerns. Although this is not the focus of our polling research, see here, here, and my own here for theological responses to Barna's book and the trend.



Who Are These Revolutionaries and How Many Are There?



This house-church trend has attracted the attention of even the secular media. Time magazine recently featured an article on the subject, NBC news did a television segment, (Since ecclesiology--the theology of church--has become such a big issue among our churches, we, at the North American Mission Board, have created helps that explain what a church is through some ecclesiological guidelines.) These issues will continue to grow in prominence, forcing us to evaluate what a biblical church is. And we can and must evaluate in the light of scripture, not just in the history of our history, tradition, and, for that matter, polling data.





What about the Numbers?



The numbers have made quite a splash--one headline declared "1 in 5 American Attend a House church." At the Center for Missional Research (CMR), we wanted to go deeper to help inform our churches about what this trend means for them. Over the last several months, we commissioned Zogby International to survey more than 3,600 people (1200 interviews on three occasions) about several issues, but particularly about their involvement in spirituality and alternative expressions of church.



We asked, "Do you meet weekly with a group of 20 people or less to pray and study scriptures as your primary form of spiritual or religious gathering?" Remarkably, 26.3% of the 3600 Americans who were asked that question indicated that they did--as their primary form of spiritual or religious gathering. Comparatively, in one of the three surveys, we cross-tabbed the number to those who considered themselves "born again." In that case, 42.1 % of those who identified themselves as born-again Christians said that they met weekly with a group of 20 or less people as their primary form of spiritual or religious gathering.



It should be challenging, exciting, and concerning that one out of four Americans consider their small or house group / church / synagogue / mosque to be their primary source of spiritual training. However, most of those who consider their small community to be their primary place of spiritual encouragement still attend church at a significant rate. Only a smaller percentage of those who attend a small spiritual community do not also attend church--but that is still a large number:



frequency_attendance.png



When we cross-tabulated the "small group" question with the "church attendance" question, we found that 50 out of 3,600 adults attend both a group of 20 or less and "rarely" or "never" attend a place of worship. If extrapolated, this is almost 1.4 percent of the American population and may represent the purest measure of those who are not involved in an organized church, synagogue, or mosque but still are involved in some alternative faith community like, in the Christian faith, a house church. That is about four million people--not a small number. Barna's people have estimated that a million Americans are involved in the "house church," or the Christian expression of the above trend.

This trend toward home based faith expressions may also explain the significant number of people who identify themselves as "spiritual but not religious." According to an earlier CMR/Zogby poll, 22% of people consider themselves "spiritual but not religious," particularly those who rarely or never attend church. The less frequently they attend church, the more likely they are to consider themselves spiritual, but not in a religious way. The chart below illustrates:



frequency_assessment.png



What Can We Learn?

While we don't celebrate the revolution if it means people leaving biblical churches, we need to recognize it is happening and ask "why?" A few years ago we were upset that so many from our churches were turning from us to Islam or Mormonism. Now things are different. They have not been recruited to another faith, many have been repelled by the practice of ours.



We need to look more deeply into the Word so we can lead our churches to be more biblical--with biblical covenant community, biblical leadership, biblical church discipline, biblical preaching, and other biblical, foundational characteristics. It does not matter if a biblical church meets in a cathedral or a coffee shop. That's not the point. But it must be a church because God has chosen the church to make known His wisdom (Eph. 3:10).



New biblical forms need to be welcomed and affirmed, particularly those that evidence more of the true community that many are finding in alternative faith communities. We need to bless all forms of scripturally-sound churches. Why? Because the church is essential. The church is not the center of God's plan-- Christ is. But the church is central to the plan of Christ for His name and fame to be more widely known.

Keywords: blog, Stetzer

Posted by Ed Stetzer | 0 comment(s)

http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Tallskinnykiwi/~3/458433649/london.h


I am in London. somehow. I was viewing a motorhome conversion yesterday which didnt work out and am about to get back up to Scotland. Had an enjoyable brekkie with Jonny Baker this morning at St John Bread and Wine and Juli was able to come also.


I really love London. We walked past the place where Salvation Army had their first indoor service in the 1800's.




Posted by Andrew Jones | 0 comment(s)

http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Tallskinnykiwi/~3/458433649/london.h


I am in London. somehow. I was viewing a motorhome conversion yesterday which didnt work out and am about to get back up to Scotland. Had an enjoyable brekkie with Jonny Baker this morning at St John Bread and Wine and Juli was able to come also.


I really love London. We walked past the place where Salvation Army had their first indoor service in the 1800's.




Posted by Keith Broadbent | 0 comment(s)

http://frankviola.wordpress.com/2008/11/19/a-word-to-all-authors-aspiring-or-actual/

Posted by Frank Viola | 0 comment(s)

November 18, 2008

http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Tallskinnykiwi/~3/456926168/interest


Blind Beggar: NT Wright on the future of the church in Western society

Steve Knight on stopping Google becoming evil

David Brenham on Seminary emergency

Internet Monk presents Iain Murray




Posted by Andrew Jones | 0 comment(s)

http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Tallskinnykiwi/~3/456926168/interest


Blind Beggar: NT Wright on the future of the church in Western society

Steve Knight on stopping Google becoming evil

David Brenham on Seminary emergency

Internet Monk presents Iain Murray




Posted by Keith Broadbent | 0 comment(s)

http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/TheForgottenWays/~3/457128538/



A cartoon by Thom Tapp in these hard economic times….HT

Keywords: Alan, blog, Hirsch, missional

Posted by Alan Hirsch | 0 comment(s)

<< Back
Random Members
juli Reynolds
John Teeling
Jason Hutchinson
David Leon Card
Mark Meyers
Jon Sampson
Jim Schoch
Greg Qualls
Dustin Schmidt
Mark CE
Geoff Mallinson
Michael Hinkle
2008 National New Church Conference