The role of prayer in our church

This past Sunday night Jason taught from 2 Corinthians 3 & 4. It seemed to me that the crux of the passage, and the evening, came with verse 4 of chapter 4: “In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.” I think that God wanted us to camp out on that verse for a little while. Do we believe this verse? If so, what do we do?

First and foremost, it heightens our awareness that we are totally and completely dependent on God for salvation. Verse 14 of chapter 3 says that only Christ can remove the veil. There was a sudden realization within our group that we don't really pray, or at least we don't pray as we should. How desperate are we to see the veil lifted so that our friends can see "the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ?" The good news is that God wants this desire to grow in us. I thank God for reminding us of this.

The second thing I came away with was that though darkness is all around us, God has created us to be light in the darkness: "For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ". A room can be completely dark, but one small light can penetrate this darkness. This again is God's grace. We may not be much, but we are light. We may not be many, but we are light.

In Matthew 5:14-16, Jesus said, "You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden. Nor do people light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven."


If you want to read more on this passage, here is a great sermon by John Piper called "What Makes the Good News Good?"

A Gospel that Produces Holiness

By Theodore Jennings, Jr.

If the gospel is about transformation, how is it that two thousand years of proclamation have had so little effect? How is it that the gospel of Jesus Christ, so far from producing radical change, has instead become a cloak for avarice and arrogance, for a willful deafness to the cry of the poor and of the earth itself? … It is only possible to speak of the gospel as a source for a remedy of the planetary crisis that we face if we are talking about a gospel that makes possible, indeed requires and in fact produces, a radical and visible transformation in all dimensions of life. Only a gospel that produces holiness, scriptural holiness, can transform the economy of death - or rather, abolish it and give in its place something that can really be “good news to the poor.”

Source: Good News to the Poor

Church & Culture Pt. 3

Catalyst just posted a link to the article I blogged on last week. There are some other pretty good articles as well. Here's the link.

Church & Culture Pt. 2

"...over the next decade, the two most effective expressions of the Gospel will be through social justice and environmental justice."

This statement was made by Clint Kemp, the pastor of New Providence Community Church. Yesterday Jason and I were talking about both of these issues. As I've said before, there was a time when neither of these issues were even on my radar. I'm thankful to God for changing that.

I've often wondered what it would be like to gather a group of friends together and imagine what it would be like to begin, as a community, making a difference, both here in our neighborhood, as well as throughout the world.

In today's paper, there was an article in the Life Magazine pullout section called "What I Prayed For." A fourth grader wrote this: "I'm praying for Darfur. For the people there to get clothes and food and beds. I learned about Darfur on Oprah, and I read books about Africa." Yeah Oprah, and yeah fourth grader. As a side note, I don't remember what kinds of things I prayed for when I was in fourth grade, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't for anything like this.

Church & Culture Pt. 1

I recently read an article about a church in the Bahamas (the island of New Providence) . A few years ago this church, New Providence Community Church, decided to get involved in their community. Before this time they had spent most of their time, energy and money on designing an excellent Sunday morning service that people could bring their friends to. After a few years of doing this, though, they realized that it "was not creating the kind of Christ-followers that could revolutionize the island." They first opened their building up to the community, and began offering Taekwando classes, gymnastics, art lessons, etc. They then decided that they needed to begin doing something about the AIDS crisis on the island. (Nassau has one of the highest concentrated areas of AIDS cases in the first world).

Next, they adopted a section of beach that had been turned into the island's dump. "They believed that as followers of Christ, they had a responsibility to redeem this hideous, corrupted area of the island." They spent two years cleaning it up, then invited local artists from the island to come and help transform this space into something beautiful. They call it Sacred Space. (You can see pictures, along with a five minute video, here). "The breathtaking sunset views create an amazing spiritual experience - but more than that, it's a testimony to the leaders of the Island of how a community can be a significant part of th restoration of all things within their society."

This article was written by Gabe Lyons. It's not currently online, but hopefully will be soon.

Here's one final quote from the article:

"New Providence Community Church is shaping the culture of the Bahamas because they have approached their mission with the belief that they are called to be the Gospel in the context of their community. By deciding not to make their church a place for people to come and see, they have pushed their people to go and do. And they clearly illustrate the influence one church can have when it takes this mission seriously."

What happened in New England?

Mandy, Adam and I spent the last few days in New England. In the next couple of days I'll be posting pictures on my other blog.

We spent a lot of time on the road, and passed through some really beautiful places. In just about every town we came through there was a church at the center. Most of these were congregational churches. I was fascinated with these churches. It struck me that today we think of New England in many ways as a mission field, yet this was the site of the greatest revival that this nation has ever seen. It caused me to wonder what happened.

Ed Stetzer says that the church must contend for the Gospel as well as contextualize the Gospel. The first part of this, Contend, is found in Jude 3 (I urge you to contend for the faith that was once entrusted to the saints). The second part, Contextualize, is found in 1 Corinthians 9:19-23 (I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some).

Using Stetzer's logic, it seems to me that one of the main reasons the church in New England is in the state it's in is that they failed to contend for the Gospel. Since I've returned I've been reading a little on the Great Awakening and the history of the churches in New England. It's pretty obvious that many of the churches shortly after the Great Awakening went in some bad, theologically speaking, directions. Many evangelical churches, and especially my denomination, fight very hard to contend for the faith. We truly want to stay true to the Gospel of Jesus. However, I wonder how good we're doing at contextualizing the Gospel. What is the church in the south going to look like in 100 years? The culture is changing all around us. If we only contend for the Gospel, and fail to contextualize, could we end up looking like New England?

I'm planning on studying this more over the coming weeks. I'll post if I find anything interesting.

Confessions of a Reformission Rev

I finished up Mark Driscoll's newest book a few weeks ago. Here are some great quotes from the book.

Characteristics of the emerging and missional church (19-20)

• Missions is every Christian being a missionary to their local culture
• The church accepts that it is marginalized in culture and holds no privileged position of influence but gains influence by serving the common good
• The primary culture to reach is postmodern and pluralistic
• Theology ranges from ancient orthodoxy to heterodox liberalism built on postmodern denials of true truth and known knowledge
• Churches are the people who love Jesus and serve his mission in a local culture
• Churches grow as Christians bring Jesus to lost people through hospitality
• Community means the church is a counterculture with a new kingdom way of life through Jesus
• Pastors need not be ordained or formally educated in theology and are trained in the church
• Pastors are missiologists who train Christians to be effective missionaries
• Lost people are saved by the Holy Spirit when and how he determines
• Faith is lived publicly together as the church and includes all of life
• Worship services blend ancient forms and current local cultural styles
• Church buildings are sacred, as is all of God’s creation

Attractional churches need to transform their people from being consumers in the church to being missionaries outside of the church. Missional churches need to gather crowds to their church so that hard words of repentance can be preached in an effort to expose people’s hearts. Those whom God saves can then be trained to go back out into the culture as missionaries to gather more people to repeat the process. Simply, the goal of the church that is both missional and attractional is to continually follow Jesus’ example so that more people are saved for God’s mission and more influence is spread for God’s kingdom, without rejecting one aspect of Jesus’ ministry in favor of another (27).

One of the greatest inhibitors of keeping a church on mission is the erroneous spoken and unspoken expectations people have for church leaders and their families. In a missional church, the lead pastor is the architect who builds the ship more than he is the captain who pilots it, the cook who washes dishes in the galley, or the activities director who coordinates the shuffleboard reservations. The role of architect is incredibly important because most pastors have been trained how to work on a ship instead of how to build a ship (34).

Ed Stetzer on the Emerging Church

This article came out a few months ago, but I just read it today. In it he separates emerging church leaders into three categories:

Relevants - those who are simply trying to contextualize the gospel in their communities
The churches of the “relevants” are not filled with the angry white children of evangelical megachurches. They are, instead, intentionally reaching into their communities (which are different than where most Southern Baptists live) and proclaiming a faithful biblically-centered Gospel there.

Reconstructionists - Here he is referring to those who think the models that have worked for so long but now no longer work. They therefore are trying to get rid of structures that prohibit the gospel from spreading.
The reconstructionists think that the current form of church is frequently irrelevant and the structure is unhelpful. Therefore, we see an increase in models of church that reject certain organizational models, embracing what are often called “incarnational” or “house” models. They are responding to the fact that after decades of trying fresh ideas in innovative churches, North America is less churched, and those that are churched are less committed.

Revisionists - those who, in trying to contextualize the gospel, have moved away from the gospel.
Revisionists are questioning (and in some cases denying) issues like the nature of the substitutionary atonement, the reality of hell, the complementarian nature of gender, and the nature of the Gospel itself. The revisionist emerging church leaders should be treated, appreciated and read as we read mainline theologians -- they often have good descriptions, but their prescriptions fail to take into account the full teaching of the Word of God.


I think this article is very good for someone who is trying to understand why there is so much controversy over the Emerging Church. I'm just not sure if it is this cut and dry. That would be my only hesitation with it. For example, many would not lump the nature of the Gospel and complementarianism into the same "heresy" category. I know he was just giving examples.