Ok I must confess that 24, in my opinion, is the best show ever. Seinfield might be the funniest and there a few really cool sci-fi shows out there, but 24 is the all around best show I've ever seen.
Anyway, I was watching an espisode from season 5 on DVD last night (I own seasons 1 through 5) and something strange happened in one of the scenes. The president and his aid did something I would never have expected in a hit show like 24. It blew my mind, but they actually prayed! I couldn't believe this. I thought, well certainly the show will mock this somehow, but it was a very sincere, intense & emotion scene.
If you're a fan of 24 then you know it's none stop problems and issues for the characters to overcome. Jack (the protagonist) almost always makes the seemingly best decision. Others either follow his lead, exist in a grey area (struggle with doubt and making the right decision) or are bad. The president, in season 5, is in the grey area, unlike the previous president who was more of a Jack type of character. This current president is also not a strong leader and struggles with decision making.
There came a point in this particular episode where the president had to choose between his wife's life and the lives of potentially hundreds of thousands. He was torn and decided to choose the greater lives over his wife's. However, unexpectedly, in a moment of turmoil, he decided to pray and he asked his aid to join him. The two men then kneeled and prayed. Of course viewers aren't privy to their prayers as the camera cuts away just after they kneel. I don't know why, but this really touched me. Of course it would've been cool if the show had portrayed the previous strong/moral president praying over major incidents and issues, instead of this weaker president. However, I was touched by the sincere emotional intensity of this prayer scene and encouraged that even though God wasn't mentioned He was strongly implied.
I guess this also got me to thinking about how God is glorified in our weakness. This made this scene all the more real to me. This scene illustrates well the relationship God seems to most often have with man. We don't turn to Him unless there is no other way out and there is seemingly no good solution. Those who are seemingly strong and independent never turn to Him because they believe their own strength is sufficient. It actually makes sense that a weaker indecisive man would turn to God in a time of crisis, when all other avenues turn up nothing.
Maybe I'm reading more into this then I should, but it was encouraging none the less that my favorite TV show acknowledge God as a savior in some fashion, even if only implied.
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
Do I really have to wash their feet?
What was up with Jesus washing the apostle’s feet? Was this an idealistic “Jesus” moment or an analogy which was never meant to be followed?
John 13:1-13
From reading these verses it seems very plain to me that Jesus was speaking both of spiritual and physical matters. I’m not sure what Jesus meant by: “A person who has had a bath needs only to wash his feet; his whole body is clean.” The only interpretation I can come up with is found in Isaiah 52:7 & Romans 10:14-15. These verses refer to the beauty of the feet of those who bring the good news that proclaims the salvation bought by Jesus Christ. I also know that the feet were a pretty stenchy mess back in the day as folks walked to and fro in the dirt and whatever excrement happened to be mixed in with the dirt. So perhaps Jesus was referring to cleaning the worst part of the body, or in a spiritual sense cleaning out the worst part of our hearts where sin resides? I don't know. This seems like a stretch. Either way this was definitely the most humbling thing Jesus Christ could've done for his apostles.
Now I’d like to take a look at some verses I believe must be interpreted through John 13:1-13. Acts 6:1-7 would seem to indicate that it is acceptable for church leaders to neglect the daily concerns of the congregation in order to focus on studying the word and praying. From my perspective this seems to be the interpretation most church leaders have adopted in their “hands off” approach to leadership. However, this is most definitely not the correct interpretation of these verses. What the apostles did here was delegate some of their authority to others and these others then taught and discipled still others. The apostles were overwhelmed and so they did the right thing and delegated so that the good news of Jesus Christ could continue to spread and the needs of the congregation could be met. This is most definitely not an example to follow in how distant church leadership should be from the congregation. Yes one person can only be involved in so many folks lives, but no one should ever allow themselves to get caught up in the prideful belief that their time in the word or in prayer should supersede their responsibility to be “hands on” with the congregation or that their time is more valuable then anyone else’s.
We should all follow Jesus Christ’s example who washed the apostles feet and then willingly died (as a public spectacle) on the cross for our sins. Philippians 2:1-11
John 13:1-13
From reading these verses it seems very plain to me that Jesus was speaking both of spiritual and physical matters. I’m not sure what Jesus meant by: “A person who has had a bath needs only to wash his feet; his whole body is clean.” The only interpretation I can come up with is found in Isaiah 52:7 & Romans 10:14-15. These verses refer to the beauty of the feet of those who bring the good news that proclaims the salvation bought by Jesus Christ. I also know that the feet were a pretty stenchy mess back in the day as folks walked to and fro in the dirt and whatever excrement happened to be mixed in with the dirt. So perhaps Jesus was referring to cleaning the worst part of the body, or in a spiritual sense cleaning out the worst part of our hearts where sin resides? I don't know. This seems like a stretch. Either way this was definitely the most humbling thing Jesus Christ could've done for his apostles.
Now I’d like to take a look at some verses I believe must be interpreted through John 13:1-13. Acts 6:1-7 would seem to indicate that it is acceptable for church leaders to neglect the daily concerns of the congregation in order to focus on studying the word and praying. From my perspective this seems to be the interpretation most church leaders have adopted in their “hands off” approach to leadership. However, this is most definitely not the correct interpretation of these verses. What the apostles did here was delegate some of their authority to others and these others then taught and discipled still others. The apostles were overwhelmed and so they did the right thing and delegated so that the good news of Jesus Christ could continue to spread and the needs of the congregation could be met. This is most definitely not an example to follow in how distant church leadership should be from the congregation. Yes one person can only be involved in so many folks lives, but no one should ever allow themselves to get caught up in the prideful belief that their time in the word or in prayer should supersede their responsibility to be “hands on” with the congregation or that their time is more valuable then anyone else’s.
We should all follow Jesus Christ’s example who washed the apostles feet and then willingly died (as a public spectacle) on the cross for our sins. Philippians 2:1-11
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Ever the opportunist
I wrote an email to a female friend of mine. It was in response to an email she wrote me about the small group we’re both in. She hadn’t shown up in a few months till this past Sunday. She showed up with her boyfriend. She wrote me about her observations this Sunday as compared with her previous encounters. Prior to this she had felt somewhat ostracized by the group, but this time she felt loved on by everyone. While this is good and I’m sure at least some of it can be attributed to growth, I wonder if it’s because she has a boyfriend this time? This means two things: 1. to the other women she’s no longer a threat (by the way she’s a very attractive woman) and 2. The guys won’t be all over her. I have to admit, the impetus for me to contact her out of the blue a few months ago was because I was feeling rather lonely and I wanted to try to strike up an email chain with an attractive Christian woman. Well I’ve succeeded in this, but she’s seeing someone else.
So this got me to thinking about the dynamics of singles groups, the selfish folks (in the form of opportunists) which generally populate these groups and the general state of singleness in the church. Fortunately I recognized my selfishness before I even sent the first email to this friend. I prayed to God before I sent of the email, changed a few things and tried my best to word it in a brotherly, versus desperate man seeking woman way. Keeping in mind 1 Timothy 5:2. Without going into details this friend has some very serious things going on in her life and I wanted to encourage her as best I could. However, I was still hopeful something would grow between us.
Anyway, this all got me to thinking why are so many folks in the church so unfriendly? Speaking for the singles I think there are 3 possibilities: 1. Insecurity. 2. These groups are full of opportunists. Everyone continually summing up others with the question “What can this person do for me?”. 3. The guarded heart syndrome.
I’d like to spend a few moments on ‘The Guarded Heart Syndrome’ which seems to be pervasive in singles groups. Both men (I’ve probably been caught up in this) and women are prone to this. However, women are by far the biggest culprits. I believe I’ve discussed this issue already, so I won’t dedicate too much time to this, but there has been a huge misunderstanding, of this subject. Women use it and hide behind the notion that it's the man’s responsibility to pursue them. While true, this doesn't negate the woman's responsibility to be at least a little bit vulnerable and emotionally available. Been hurt before? Join the crowd. Unless you want to become a Buddhist, you’re going to have to learn to deal with pain (see my ‘Why Pain’ article). If it’s the man’s responsibility to pursue then it’s the woman’s responsibility to be mature and confident enough to be at least somewhat emotionally available and vulnerable to men during the pursuit. Guys, on the other hand, when employing this, hide behind the delusion of the perfect woman and end up rarely asking any women out.
Human beings are such opportunists. Both men and women are terrible at this. Men, if there’s no chance of getting a date or no physical attraction, then why waste any time with her? Women, if you can’t see yourselves married to the guy within 5 minutes of first meeting him, then why waste anymore time on him? To answer both of these questions: because God told us to. How can you encourage someone, if you don’t interact with them? We need to focus off of our own desires and focus on Jesus Christ. If we'd stop continually being opportunists in the way we relate to others, we'd be able to better relate to others and fellowship could be something much more then it is. This would help to knock down a lot of these barriers we place between us now. Stop looking at the end, when it truly is the means which matters most.
Finally, we are all insecure about something, to one extent or another. Again we can’t be so afraid of getting hurt that we stay inside our shells like a frightened turtle. My pastor said something interesting this past Sunday. He said, “In order for someone to get to know me better, I have to allow them to get to know me.” The context doesn’t matter and the statement is obvious, but it still got me thinking. I started to see how insecurities play right into this guarding my heart crap. Well if you want that guy to ask you out or you want to go out with a certain woman, you’re going to have to be vulnerable and trust in the Lord.
So this got me to thinking about the dynamics of singles groups, the selfish folks (in the form of opportunists) which generally populate these groups and the general state of singleness in the church. Fortunately I recognized my selfishness before I even sent the first email to this friend. I prayed to God before I sent of the email, changed a few things and tried my best to word it in a brotherly, versus desperate man seeking woman way. Keeping in mind 1 Timothy 5:2. Without going into details this friend has some very serious things going on in her life and I wanted to encourage her as best I could. However, I was still hopeful something would grow between us.
Anyway, this all got me to thinking why are so many folks in the church so unfriendly? Speaking for the singles I think there are 3 possibilities: 1. Insecurity. 2. These groups are full of opportunists. Everyone continually summing up others with the question “What can this person do for me?”. 3. The guarded heart syndrome.
I’d like to spend a few moments on ‘The Guarded Heart Syndrome’ which seems to be pervasive in singles groups. Both men (I’ve probably been caught up in this) and women are prone to this. However, women are by far the biggest culprits. I believe I’ve discussed this issue already, so I won’t dedicate too much time to this, but there has been a huge misunderstanding, of this subject. Women use it and hide behind the notion that it's the man’s responsibility to pursue them. While true, this doesn't negate the woman's responsibility to be at least a little bit vulnerable and emotionally available. Been hurt before? Join the crowd. Unless you want to become a Buddhist, you’re going to have to learn to deal with pain (see my ‘Why Pain’ article). If it’s the man’s responsibility to pursue then it’s the woman’s responsibility to be mature and confident enough to be at least somewhat emotionally available and vulnerable to men during the pursuit. Guys, on the other hand, when employing this, hide behind the delusion of the perfect woman and end up rarely asking any women out.
Human beings are such opportunists. Both men and women are terrible at this. Men, if there’s no chance of getting a date or no physical attraction, then why waste any time with her? Women, if you can’t see yourselves married to the guy within 5 minutes of first meeting him, then why waste anymore time on him? To answer both of these questions: because God told us to. How can you encourage someone, if you don’t interact with them? We need to focus off of our own desires and focus on Jesus Christ. If we'd stop continually being opportunists in the way we relate to others, we'd be able to better relate to others and fellowship could be something much more then it is. This would help to knock down a lot of these barriers we place between us now. Stop looking at the end, when it truly is the means which matters most.
Finally, we are all insecure about something, to one extent or another. Again we can’t be so afraid of getting hurt that we stay inside our shells like a frightened turtle. My pastor said something interesting this past Sunday. He said, “In order for someone to get to know me better, I have to allow them to get to know me.” The context doesn’t matter and the statement is obvious, but it still got me thinking. I started to see how insecurities play right into this guarding my heart crap. Well if you want that guy to ask you out or you want to go out with a certain woman, you’re going to have to be vulnerable and trust in the Lord.
Monday, December 11, 2006
Elders and Deacons
I believe most church leadership and ministries are organized in an unbiblical manner. Now I’m not suggesting that we trash the whole thing and start over. No one and no church congregation are perfect. No one, but Jesus Christ alone, is capable of following the Bible to the letter because we are all sinners. However, when it’s something so simple to follow as it’s written in black in white in the bible, it’s very difficult for me to understand why it’s not being done. Why do so many churches seem to use black highlighters with the Bible? As with the singles groups, it seems like church leadership caves into the will of the congregation versus following the Lord’s will. Just like ancient Israel. The more I read the OT the more I see a pattern of disobedience which is very similar to ours (as a church, but especially as a country); right down to child sacrifices (see my previous article on abortion).
What are the qualifications for an elder and a deacon? 1 Timothy 3 also Titus 1:5-9
Perhaps an earlier picture of elders and deacons? Acts 6:1-7 It would also seem from scripture (first appearing in Acts 15:2) that there is a difference between apostles, elders and deacons. It seems as though there are 3 ruling bodies within the early church. However, whereas the elders and deacons are intended to be stationary (for the most part) apostles are expected to be itinerate. So what modern term best describes an apostle? Missionaries? Church planters? It seems an apostle is concerned with the larger church, while elders and deacons are focused on the local congregations.
It makes sense to have the elders and deacons over ministries, versus pastors. That is, pastor in the way we define this term now. Actually in biblical terms a pastor is a shepherd, so using this definition then a pastor should be either an elder or a deacon. Apostles should be itinerate preachers and missionaries (whether domestic or international).
Why get so caught up in names and definitions? It all boils down to accountability. When you have a ‘Spiritual All-star’, like so many senior pastors are in this country (whether they intend to be or not), who’s going to have the nerve to actually give this kind of guy true accountability? Everyone wants to be liked and accepted by the spiritual All-stars, so the answer is very few folks. For crying out loud, most senior pastors are synonymous with the church name. “Central Baptist Church, starring Dr. Joe Williams. Come worship with us and you might have an opportunity to meet this incredible all-star yourself.”
The way I see it the deacons are to be held accountable to other deacons and ultimately the elders. The elders are accountable to each other and ultimately God. Depending on which translation you read; bishops, elders and overseers are suppose to be the same thing. Pastors, apostles, teachers, prophets and evangelists are roles within the church, not designations of leadership, nor exclusive to church leadership (Ephesians 4:11). I don’t mean to get caught up with names, words and definitions. Such things are a meaningless waste of time. However, our perceptions of the words aren’t, nor are our interpretations of scripture. From my 29 years of experience in the church I’ve seen that pastors and elders have become two very different positions. Pastors are essentially spiritual All-stars and islands unto themselves (i.e. very little to no accountability). Elders have become the buddies of their leader, the senior pastor, I suppose they occasionally lead a Sunday school, help with the behind the scenes running of the church and generally feel pretty good about themselves that they have been found worthy to be knighted an elder.
No more senior pastors! According to scripture all of the elders should have the gift of teaching (1 Timothy 3:2). All elders should take on the responsibility of ruling their households (in a Christ like manner), continual study of the word, prayer, running a particular ministry, and teaching. There should not be one man identified as the superstar pope of the church, as most of our churches are structured. This isn’t biblical. There should be a rotation of speakers, based on their knowledge of the word and ability to speak. The church should encourage the growth of all gifts within the body. Teaching shouldn’t be limited to one man for 30 years. Some elders, though they have the gift of teaching, should be more focused on running other ministries in the church. The deacons should help the elders with the day to day activities within the church, including the running of the church. Also the deacons should be focused on integrating the congregation, whether through organizing and planning social events, accountability groups, men groups, women groups or community groups. The elders should focus on teaching, creating ministries, ruling over the various ministries and the deacons, as well as discipling particular laymen in the church. The wives of the elders and deacons should be used per their gifts. For some of them encouraging their husbands and caring for their family is their ministry. For others leading certain women ministries (under their husband), teaching and discipling other women should be their ministry (Titus 2:3-5). The elders and deacons should have enough discernment to be able to see the gifts the Holy Spirit has given to their wives and encourage them to pursue certain ministries (if their wives desire it), within biblical boundaries. The bible only indicates that women should not lead or teach a man (1 Timothy 2:11-14). There are many other ministries a woman can serve in, not the least of which is her own family.
The only paid ministers of the church should be the elders, and not all of them may need to work full time in the church. If they can hold a full time job outside of the church and still perform their duties as an elder then they shouldn’t be paid by the church. Only those positions which absolutely require a full time commitment should be paid, including other staff positions. Even Paul, a full time apostle and minister to the early gentile churches worked (2 Thessalonians 3:6-10). Deacons, their wives and the wives of the elders, should be of sufficient number to handle all other duties within the church. Anyone who serves regularly in the church should be a deacon, or wife of a deacon/elder. The only other exception to this would be the child of a deacon or elder or someone who is known, directly under a deacon and known to be of good repute (essentially someone who meets the biblical requirements for a deacon, but for whatever reason isn’t).
I believe the verses I references point out many of the things we’re not doing in our churches. I can’t remember ever attending a church which really seemed to believe in discipleship and accountability. I’ve had friends who were involved in Campus Crusade who indicated that both of these activities were going on. Why is discipleship and accountability limited to college ministries? This must be why so many of these folks yearn so much to go back to college. They remember feeling like they belonged to something real. Having wiser and older folks, of the same sex, holding you accountable and taking the time to build a friendship, be vulnerable and disciple is extremely radical in our society. However, you know what? It’s also extremely biblical and we’re not doing it, outside of some college ministries. Having bagels and donuts at 6am on a Friday isn’t discipleship or accountability, it’s fellowship, which while good and scriptural, shouldn’t be the extent of our relationships.
Here’s what this entire article boils down to: discipleship and accountability, from the top down. We are all sinners and the leaders are no different from any of us laymen. Trust me, if church leaders are godly men, then they will thank you and God for taking the time to encourage, prayer for and admonish them. Now I’m not referring to off the cuff pot shots or compliments. I’m referring to prayerfully considered statements, whether encouragement or admonishment. Actually, if done right, admonishment can be an even more powerful form of encouragement.
I digress, before I get onto too big of a rabbit trail, and conclude.
What are the qualifications for an elder and a deacon? 1 Timothy 3 also Titus 1:5-9
Perhaps an earlier picture of elders and deacons? Acts 6:1-7 It would also seem from scripture (first appearing in Acts 15:2) that there is a difference between apostles, elders and deacons. It seems as though there are 3 ruling bodies within the early church. However, whereas the elders and deacons are intended to be stationary (for the most part) apostles are expected to be itinerate. So what modern term best describes an apostle? Missionaries? Church planters? It seems an apostle is concerned with the larger church, while elders and deacons are focused on the local congregations.
It makes sense to have the elders and deacons over ministries, versus pastors. That is, pastor in the way we define this term now. Actually in biblical terms a pastor is a shepherd, so using this definition then a pastor should be either an elder or a deacon. Apostles should be itinerate preachers and missionaries (whether domestic or international).
Why get so caught up in names and definitions? It all boils down to accountability. When you have a ‘Spiritual All-star’, like so many senior pastors are in this country (whether they intend to be or not), who’s going to have the nerve to actually give this kind of guy true accountability? Everyone wants to be liked and accepted by the spiritual All-stars, so the answer is very few folks. For crying out loud, most senior pastors are synonymous with the church name. “Central Baptist Church, starring Dr. Joe Williams. Come worship with us and you might have an opportunity to meet this incredible all-star yourself.”
The way I see it the deacons are to be held accountable to other deacons and ultimately the elders. The elders are accountable to each other and ultimately God. Depending on which translation you read; bishops, elders and overseers are suppose to be the same thing. Pastors, apostles, teachers, prophets and evangelists are roles within the church, not designations of leadership, nor exclusive to church leadership (Ephesians 4:11). I don’t mean to get caught up with names, words and definitions. Such things are a meaningless waste of time. However, our perceptions of the words aren’t, nor are our interpretations of scripture. From my 29 years of experience in the church I’ve seen that pastors and elders have become two very different positions. Pastors are essentially spiritual All-stars and islands unto themselves (i.e. very little to no accountability). Elders have become the buddies of their leader, the senior pastor, I suppose they occasionally lead a Sunday school, help with the behind the scenes running of the church and generally feel pretty good about themselves that they have been found worthy to be knighted an elder.
No more senior pastors! According to scripture all of the elders should have the gift of teaching (1 Timothy 3:2). All elders should take on the responsibility of ruling their households (in a Christ like manner), continual study of the word, prayer, running a particular ministry, and teaching. There should not be one man identified as the superstar pope of the church, as most of our churches are structured. This isn’t biblical. There should be a rotation of speakers, based on their knowledge of the word and ability to speak. The church should encourage the growth of all gifts within the body. Teaching shouldn’t be limited to one man for 30 years. Some elders, though they have the gift of teaching, should be more focused on running other ministries in the church. The deacons should help the elders with the day to day activities within the church, including the running of the church. Also the deacons should be focused on integrating the congregation, whether through organizing and planning social events, accountability groups, men groups, women groups or community groups. The elders should focus on teaching, creating ministries, ruling over the various ministries and the deacons, as well as discipling particular laymen in the church. The wives of the elders and deacons should be used per their gifts. For some of them encouraging their husbands and caring for their family is their ministry. For others leading certain women ministries (under their husband), teaching and discipling other women should be their ministry (Titus 2:3-5). The elders and deacons should have enough discernment to be able to see the gifts the Holy Spirit has given to their wives and encourage them to pursue certain ministries (if their wives desire it), within biblical boundaries. The bible only indicates that women should not lead or teach a man (1 Timothy 2:11-14). There are many other ministries a woman can serve in, not the least of which is her own family.
The only paid ministers of the church should be the elders, and not all of them may need to work full time in the church. If they can hold a full time job outside of the church and still perform their duties as an elder then they shouldn’t be paid by the church. Only those positions which absolutely require a full time commitment should be paid, including other staff positions. Even Paul, a full time apostle and minister to the early gentile churches worked (2 Thessalonians 3:6-10). Deacons, their wives and the wives of the elders, should be of sufficient number to handle all other duties within the church. Anyone who serves regularly in the church should be a deacon, or wife of a deacon/elder. The only other exception to this would be the child of a deacon or elder or someone who is known, directly under a deacon and known to be of good repute (essentially someone who meets the biblical requirements for a deacon, but for whatever reason isn’t).
I believe the verses I references point out many of the things we’re not doing in our churches. I can’t remember ever attending a church which really seemed to believe in discipleship and accountability. I’ve had friends who were involved in Campus Crusade who indicated that both of these activities were going on. Why is discipleship and accountability limited to college ministries? This must be why so many of these folks yearn so much to go back to college. They remember feeling like they belonged to something real. Having wiser and older folks, of the same sex, holding you accountable and taking the time to build a friendship, be vulnerable and disciple is extremely radical in our society. However, you know what? It’s also extremely biblical and we’re not doing it, outside of some college ministries. Having bagels and donuts at 6am on a Friday isn’t discipleship or accountability, it’s fellowship, which while good and scriptural, shouldn’t be the extent of our relationships.
Here’s what this entire article boils down to: discipleship and accountability, from the top down. We are all sinners and the leaders are no different from any of us laymen. Trust me, if church leaders are godly men, then they will thank you and God for taking the time to encourage, prayer for and admonish them. Now I’m not referring to off the cuff pot shots or compliments. I’m referring to prayerfully considered statements, whether encouragement or admonishment. Actually, if done right, admonishment can be an even more powerful form of encouragement.
I digress, before I get onto too big of a rabbit trail, and conclude.
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
Why do we choose hell?
I met with the interim singles pastor, from the church I’m currently attending, the other day for lunch. Of course I was thinking perhaps this was going to be a meeting concerning my ascension to leadership in the singles group. My pride was wrong yet again. The meeting was about me attending a 20 something’s singles group instead of the 30 something’s singles group. The meeting lasted for about 1-1/2 hours and we had a good talk. I think I made my perspective and reasoning clear to him and he made his perspective clear to me. The outcome of the meeting was inconclusive (he’s going to get back with me) and ultimately, for the purpose of this article, irrelevant. I would, however, like to focus on one part of the conversation. That is, are singles groups biblical?
I explained why I believe singles groups are unbiblical and what I believe the more biblical model is. Then I shared with him my belief that humans will always choose hell and related this to the desire of most single people to have singles groups. Why do singles want to be in a singles group? A couple of possibilities: 1. they feel awkward, out of place and unloved in the church body and/or 2. They want to be around other singles folks of the opposite sex who share their belief system, for the purpose of dating. These two possibilities are from the perspective of a single person. Realistically, however, the answer is yet another failure of the church to effectively minister to the body (not just the singles) using a biblical format. What do I mean? I’ll get to that in a little bit.
What do I mean when I say we choose hell? I will answer that with another question. What is hell? More specifically why does it exist, who will go there and why will they go there? Hell is a place of eternal damnation, eternal separation from God. It exists because rebellion exists. People who reject the good news of Jesus Christ will go to hell. These people choose to believe a lie, live in darkness and emptiness, rather then the glorious light. These people utterly reject the notion that they are that bad, need God or arrogantly accept full ownership for their sins and reject the power of forgiveness bought by Jesus Christ. These people choose hell over eternity with Jesus Christ.
So can we assume rebellion leads to sin which leads to death and hell, without the forgiveness of Jesus Christ? Now let’s take a look at how this country was formed. Rebellion! Also how was the protestant movement formed? Rebellion! So both our country’s politics and religious practices are founded in rebellion. Now this is by no means to suggest these rebellions were wrong, just pointing out facts. However, we have to take a long hard look at the results of these rebellions on our society today. 1. A nation pursuing selfish ambition over God and 2. churches continually pop up in rebellion to other denominations. America has never stopped pursuing independence, now even from God, and the protestant movement in America has never stopped protesting and pursuing independence steeped in rebellion. So now we have thousands of denominations and religions which supposedly follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. Which church is true and which is false? The lines become obscured and so only God knows.
Back to the churches failure to reach out to and minister to single members of the body. When the first pastor decided to start up a singles ministry what was he most likely thinking? Only God knows, but I suppose he was sick of listening to the frustrations of the single people who kept crying for a singles group. “I’m not married because I can’t meet any single members of the opposite sex.” So the pastor finally caved in, put a ministry reject in charge (as most churches still do) and the glorious singles movement was birthed from the Sunday school format.
What are the problems with the singles ministries: 1. leadership 2. separation from the church body 3. seen as rejects 4. pastors (especially those who have been married since they were 12) have no clue how to minister to singles.
Leadership: from the perspective of someone involved in ministry, being a singles pastor has to seem like the bottom of the barrel, even a youth pastor is looked at with more respect (especially since many senior pastors started out as youth pastors). This is the special needs arm of the church. As a result singles pastors either see it as a very temporary stepping stone to bigger and better paying jobs or they’re the worst of the worst. Basically this means that singles either get a pastor with his eyes fixed on something else or who is completely inept or both.
Many times pastors will concede to the will of the congregation, provided it isn’t blatantly unbiblical. It’s so much easier to do what people say and want rather then go to God and His word for wisdom on what’s best for these people. Got to maintain that 6 figure income, and pissing people off is no way to maintain a high standard of living. Don’t want to potentially cause division or lose productive (tithing) members.
So what does choosing hell have to do with Christian singles groups? In summary, the singles want to be around other singles so they don’t feel awkward, out of place and also so they can increase their odds of getting married. The married couples either see themselves as having “graduated” from the singles ministries (high school, college, job, marriage) and so either don’t want to be involved with singles ministries or don’t know how to minister to singles. So the singles effectively either become the rejects of the church or take over the church and turn it into a big “christianized” club scene/meet market with a spattering of Christ. Ever been to a one of these types of churches? My question is: at what point does trying to blend in with society compromise the unbending truth of the word? At what point does giving people what they want essentially go against scripture? At what point does giving people what they want equal unworthy leadership?
Now what does any of this have to do with Christ and hell? I believe Christ has very little to do with this, in fact. I’ve even recently fallen into the trap of believing getting married is a numbers game. Well, especially as a Christian, it isn’t at all. It’s the will of God. Either we as Christians believe God will provide for us or we don’t, or at least we don’t trust God. If we believe it’s a numbers game then we perceive the opposite sex more as an item to be purchased (especially with internet dating) rather then flesh and blood coheirs of eternal salvation. Instead we should hold onto God’s providence and view the opposite sex as people who we should serve and encourage rather then items which we expect to personally satisfy us (whether emotionally or physically). God brings people into your life for His glory not your satisfaction.
Sorry I’m having trouble winding this up. Here goes.
In conclusion, people will naturally choose eternal death and damnation over Jesus Christ every time. Yes, we humans are inherently wicked. If by nature we will choose eternal separation from God, then why wouldn’t that same nature encourage us to separate ourselves from each other? “I don’t want to be reminded of my singleness, so I’m going to separate myself from married couples.” “I hated being single, so now that I’m married I’d rather not be around single people.” “I can’t serve or lead anyone and I’ve been married for 20 years. What do I know about ministering to single people?” Are any of these quotes remotely godly? Yet I bet these thoughts, or very similar ones, have crossed many minds in the church.
To the married members of the body of Christ:
So what do we do with all of these darn single people? You love on them and take them into your small/community groups. You really integrate them into the congregation. You actively put their interests ahead of your own. It’s called discipleship and it’s about sharing your life with someone else with the hope God will move in that person’s life. It’s really easy, what would you desire if you were in their shoes? You’d want to feel loved, accepted, a part of a family. Yes you’d also want to be married, but doesn’t that really stem from this desire to be wanted and belong? I say most single people would be much more content with real Christ like community then with this blind leading the blind mentality of singles ministries we currently have in so many churches.
To the church leadership:
Can the singles groups and actively disciple and encourage the married portion of your congregations to take a very active role in the lives of people outside of their marriage. Yes you’re called to lead your wife and serve your husband, but that person isn’t supposed to be your entire world. Place singles in real community groups with cross generational members. You really want to focus the singles on Jesus Christ take them out of an arena which focuses them on the opposite sex, lustful thoughts, selfish actions and improper/unbiblical perspectives of marriage. “But that’s not our intentions. We are trying to focus them on Jesus Christ through teaching”. What do they say? The path to hell is paved with good intentions. When you put a bunch of single people together what do you think you’re going to get? And why do singles need yet another monologue? We need fellowship, encouragement and discipleship. We need to feel loved and we need the church to really reach out to us instead of placing us in foster care until we’re old enough or well enough to be married. Of course this can’t be done at once, but this should be the goal. If implemented in a gracious way you won’t lose any of the folks God wants you to have. The other benefit is that you won’t need yet another pastor and more money can go out to reaching the community and supporting missionaries. There are many roles in the church which are currently occupied by paid staff which could very easily be done by laymen, deacons or elders, but that’s another article.
Finally, to my single bros and sisters in Christ:
Give your church a chance. I mean a real chance, not 3 strikes and your out. Check out the men’s/women’s fellowships, the missions ministries, the youth groups. Check out any and all of the ministries in the church. God blessed me so much in fellowship at my old church in Charleston. I’ve probably never felt closer to a church family then I did at this church. I’ve heard several of my friends chastise this church and its leadership and they’re welcome to their opinions. Is the church perfect? No, but what church is? It’s too easy to divorce ourselves from marriages, friendships, family members and churches when things don’t go our way or we get hurt. Let me tell you something… It’s this type of mentality which is tearing this country and our churches apart. I’m not innocent of this type of behavior by any means. I’ve been aching to check out another church and I’ve been somewhat chastising the church I’m currently attending. It would be very easy for me to simply leave this church right now and remove myself from the single pastors leadership. However, I want to see what his verdict will be. I want to see how God works in His heart to do His will in my life. God knows I’d love to have more direction in my life and this is one way to possibly get it.
I explained why I believe singles groups are unbiblical and what I believe the more biblical model is. Then I shared with him my belief that humans will always choose hell and related this to the desire of most single people to have singles groups. Why do singles want to be in a singles group? A couple of possibilities: 1. they feel awkward, out of place and unloved in the church body and/or 2. They want to be around other singles folks of the opposite sex who share their belief system, for the purpose of dating. These two possibilities are from the perspective of a single person. Realistically, however, the answer is yet another failure of the church to effectively minister to the body (not just the singles) using a biblical format. What do I mean? I’ll get to that in a little bit.
What do I mean when I say we choose hell? I will answer that with another question. What is hell? More specifically why does it exist, who will go there and why will they go there? Hell is a place of eternal damnation, eternal separation from God. It exists because rebellion exists. People who reject the good news of Jesus Christ will go to hell. These people choose to believe a lie, live in darkness and emptiness, rather then the glorious light. These people utterly reject the notion that they are that bad, need God or arrogantly accept full ownership for their sins and reject the power of forgiveness bought by Jesus Christ. These people choose hell over eternity with Jesus Christ.
So can we assume rebellion leads to sin which leads to death and hell, without the forgiveness of Jesus Christ? Now let’s take a look at how this country was formed. Rebellion! Also how was the protestant movement formed? Rebellion! So both our country’s politics and religious practices are founded in rebellion. Now this is by no means to suggest these rebellions were wrong, just pointing out facts. However, we have to take a long hard look at the results of these rebellions on our society today. 1. A nation pursuing selfish ambition over God and 2. churches continually pop up in rebellion to other denominations. America has never stopped pursuing independence, now even from God, and the protestant movement in America has never stopped protesting and pursuing independence steeped in rebellion. So now we have thousands of denominations and religions which supposedly follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. Which church is true and which is false? The lines become obscured and so only God knows.
Back to the churches failure to reach out to and minister to single members of the body. When the first pastor decided to start up a singles ministry what was he most likely thinking? Only God knows, but I suppose he was sick of listening to the frustrations of the single people who kept crying for a singles group. “I’m not married because I can’t meet any single members of the opposite sex.” So the pastor finally caved in, put a ministry reject in charge (as most churches still do) and the glorious singles movement was birthed from the Sunday school format.
What are the problems with the singles ministries: 1. leadership 2. separation from the church body 3. seen as rejects 4. pastors (especially those who have been married since they were 12) have no clue how to minister to singles.
Leadership: from the perspective of someone involved in ministry, being a singles pastor has to seem like the bottom of the barrel, even a youth pastor is looked at with more respect (especially since many senior pastors started out as youth pastors). This is the special needs arm of the church. As a result singles pastors either see it as a very temporary stepping stone to bigger and better paying jobs or they’re the worst of the worst. Basically this means that singles either get a pastor with his eyes fixed on something else or who is completely inept or both.
Many times pastors will concede to the will of the congregation, provided it isn’t blatantly unbiblical. It’s so much easier to do what people say and want rather then go to God and His word for wisdom on what’s best for these people. Got to maintain that 6 figure income, and pissing people off is no way to maintain a high standard of living. Don’t want to potentially cause division or lose productive (tithing) members.
So what does choosing hell have to do with Christian singles groups? In summary, the singles want to be around other singles so they don’t feel awkward, out of place and also so they can increase their odds of getting married. The married couples either see themselves as having “graduated” from the singles ministries (high school, college, job, marriage) and so either don’t want to be involved with singles ministries or don’t know how to minister to singles. So the singles effectively either become the rejects of the church or take over the church and turn it into a big “christianized” club scene/meet market with a spattering of Christ. Ever been to a one of these types of churches? My question is: at what point does trying to blend in with society compromise the unbending truth of the word? At what point does giving people what they want essentially go against scripture? At what point does giving people what they want equal unworthy leadership?
Now what does any of this have to do with Christ and hell? I believe Christ has very little to do with this, in fact. I’ve even recently fallen into the trap of believing getting married is a numbers game. Well, especially as a Christian, it isn’t at all. It’s the will of God. Either we as Christians believe God will provide for us or we don’t, or at least we don’t trust God. If we believe it’s a numbers game then we perceive the opposite sex more as an item to be purchased (especially with internet dating) rather then flesh and blood coheirs of eternal salvation. Instead we should hold onto God’s providence and view the opposite sex as people who we should serve and encourage rather then items which we expect to personally satisfy us (whether emotionally or physically). God brings people into your life for His glory not your satisfaction.
Sorry I’m having trouble winding this up. Here goes.
In conclusion, people will naturally choose eternal death and damnation over Jesus Christ every time. Yes, we humans are inherently wicked. If by nature we will choose eternal separation from God, then why wouldn’t that same nature encourage us to separate ourselves from each other? “I don’t want to be reminded of my singleness, so I’m going to separate myself from married couples.” “I hated being single, so now that I’m married I’d rather not be around single people.” “I can’t serve or lead anyone and I’ve been married for 20 years. What do I know about ministering to single people?” Are any of these quotes remotely godly? Yet I bet these thoughts, or very similar ones, have crossed many minds in the church.
To the married members of the body of Christ:
So what do we do with all of these darn single people? You love on them and take them into your small/community groups. You really integrate them into the congregation. You actively put their interests ahead of your own. It’s called discipleship and it’s about sharing your life with someone else with the hope God will move in that person’s life. It’s really easy, what would you desire if you were in their shoes? You’d want to feel loved, accepted, a part of a family. Yes you’d also want to be married, but doesn’t that really stem from this desire to be wanted and belong? I say most single people would be much more content with real Christ like community then with this blind leading the blind mentality of singles ministries we currently have in so many churches.
To the church leadership:
Can the singles groups and actively disciple and encourage the married portion of your congregations to take a very active role in the lives of people outside of their marriage. Yes you’re called to lead your wife and serve your husband, but that person isn’t supposed to be your entire world. Place singles in real community groups with cross generational members. You really want to focus the singles on Jesus Christ take them out of an arena which focuses them on the opposite sex, lustful thoughts, selfish actions and improper/unbiblical perspectives of marriage. “But that’s not our intentions. We are trying to focus them on Jesus Christ through teaching”. What do they say? The path to hell is paved with good intentions. When you put a bunch of single people together what do you think you’re going to get? And why do singles need yet another monologue? We need fellowship, encouragement and discipleship. We need to feel loved and we need the church to really reach out to us instead of placing us in foster care until we’re old enough or well enough to be married. Of course this can’t be done at once, but this should be the goal. If implemented in a gracious way you won’t lose any of the folks God wants you to have. The other benefit is that you won’t need yet another pastor and more money can go out to reaching the community and supporting missionaries. There are many roles in the church which are currently occupied by paid staff which could very easily be done by laymen, deacons or elders, but that’s another article.
Finally, to my single bros and sisters in Christ:
Give your church a chance. I mean a real chance, not 3 strikes and your out. Check out the men’s/women’s fellowships, the missions ministries, the youth groups. Check out any and all of the ministries in the church. God blessed me so much in fellowship at my old church in Charleston. I’ve probably never felt closer to a church family then I did at this church. I’ve heard several of my friends chastise this church and its leadership and they’re welcome to their opinions. Is the church perfect? No, but what church is? It’s too easy to divorce ourselves from marriages, friendships, family members and churches when things don’t go our way or we get hurt. Let me tell you something… It’s this type of mentality which is tearing this country and our churches apart. I’m not innocent of this type of behavior by any means. I’ve been aching to check out another church and I’ve been somewhat chastising the church I’m currently attending. It would be very easy for me to simply leave this church right now and remove myself from the single pastors leadership. However, I want to see what his verdict will be. I want to see how God works in His heart to do His will in my life. God knows I’d love to have more direction in my life and this is one way to possibly get it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)