Independent Baptists or Interdependent Baptists?

January 27th, 2012

This post will apply directly to Fundamental Baptists, but can have an application to many others as well. The title of the post speaks concerning who we are as well as what we are. This post came to mind while doing a study of 1st Corinthians chapter 7. Now if you know anything about that chapter you would logically ask why I would ever come up with the topic from that passage. But it was regarding a related study that this came about.

If you have read my posts you would know that one of my burdens is to see the church go back to its Biblical roots. I also am burdened regarding our Bible. In a recent post I playfully offered the idea of a revision to the KJV. A few days after the post I began to think about how many Godly pastors I had the opportunity to speak with over the years while on deputation. In many of our conversations (keep in mind that they were all with IFB pastors) the topic of the Bible came up. We were always in agreement that the KJV was the truest available Bible for our use today. But we were also in agreement, albeit carefully, that a better version could be created based upon the same texts. Through all of our conversations we eventually came down to a common point. It seems that we always ended in “but it would be hard to get everyone to use the same Bible”.

But just what did that mean? Did it mean everyone in the local church to use the same Bible? Or did it mean something far more revealing? My conclusion came from my Bible passage that I previously mentioned. In studying that passage I thought I would experiment and try to see what changes if any would help clarify that passage due to the Elizabethan English’s peculiarities. In doing so I began to bandy about the idea of another version true to the text and using the KJV as a guide. It brought me back to the phrase “but it would be hard to get everyone to use the same Bible”.

But if we are truly “Independent” why would it matter outside our local church what we choose to do? Is it that we are really not as Independent as we like to say? Or is it that instead of being “Independent” we are actually “Interdependent”? If indeed we are “Interdependent” then are we not a convention without the title? I have been warning for years that IFB churches have been travelling a slippery slope in this area. We already see the “interdependency” in regards to Bible Colleges, Camps, Music, VBS, Evangelist circuits, etc. We are now interdependent in general as well as within camps.

I am afraid that we are no more than a decade or two away from truly becoming a convention. So what will become of our “distinctives” or perhaps better asked what has become of our distinctives? No one is saying we must be different for the sake of being different, but we also must not be the same for the sake of being the same. If we are, then we are no longer Holy Spirit driven, but man driven. It would seem that we are far more concerned with not offending those within our “Interdependency” circles than offending God. It is more important that we fit in rather than accomplish more for God. We have basically converted Independent churches into local franchises. Much like franchises we have the same commercial/publications, use the same suppliers/colleges, etc, use the same products/Bibles, Hymnals, use the same stores/buildings, and even swap the same Managers/Pastors.

And worst of all, we refuse to even consider the possibility of creating a Bible revision based on the correct texts, privately admitted to that is needed, out of fear of offending man. We refuse to remove a stumbling block in reaching people for Christ out of a selfish desire to fit within the box and not become alienated, and risk being outside the box/circle of influence. As for my 1 Corinthians chapter 7 project, it will come soon enough. For right now I would like the readers of the post to prayerfully consider just what it is you want to accomplish. Do you want to do great things for God, or just be seen as great before men?

One matters forever, one matters for today only. Let us re-evaluate our homes, churches, and ministries and see if we are serving God or man. It won’t be hard getting everyone to use the same Bible as long as everyone means the local church. Are you an “Independent” or are you “Interdependent”? I think we know the answer. The key is if are we willing to change for God.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in General, Ministry | No Comments »

KJV or EDV?

January 20th, 2012

What a dilemma, whether to use the KJV or the EDV. I have long been a proponent of the KJV, but the thought of an EDV interested me. Now for those who have come to the conclusion that I am a heretic let me put you at ease. There is no EDV nor has there ever been. I am having a bit of fun over a thought that crossed my mind during my devotional time. I was studying Proverbs 4 when I came across verse 12.

“When thou goest, thy steps shall not be straitened;…”

At first glance it is quite a confusing verse. I, as many others, have discussed how confusing the King’s English can be at times. Fortunately having studied a bit about Hebrew poetry and its parallelisms as well as contrasting parallelisms I am able to decipher the verse. But I thought to myself regarding the new believer who without a concordance would not make heads or tails of what is being said.  I thought about how antiquated many words are and how this is not an exception, but a rule for many.

It would seem that our loyalties are with the King’s English over people understanding what God has to say. Let me clarify that I only use the King James and my reasoning is due to the proper texts used. But should someone need a concordance to understand what God is trying to tell them? I caught myself envisioning the Sermon on the Mount as well as the many places where our Lord taught. In my mind’s eye I can see Him facing the people and sharing the heart of God with them. What I cannot envision is the thousands sitting and listening to Him also holding a reference book in order to understand what Jesus was saying to them. I am sure there were plenty there not versed in the intricacies of the faith. Yet through all of that the Lord spoke to them and they understood. So why do we need reference books in order to understand what God has to say to us?

Some will argue that the Holy Spirit will help us. To that I answer that the Holy Spirit will help our hearts understand what has passed through our minds. To suggest that the Holy Spirit will serve as an interpreter of the King’s English is ridiculous. So why then do we want to burden baby believers to become students of the King’s English in order to understand their Bibles? It would seem that some are far closer to Ruckmanism than we care to admit. I am not advocating the use of inferior translations or versions. I am advocating a KJV 2012 that uses the correct texts that the KJV uses yet not use archaic words that only serve to confuse.

I know that even suggesting this is akin to blasphemy in the eyes of some, but if that is the case then those who believe so are basically Ruckmanites and they do not know it. We do not need to preserve the King’s English which is what brings me to the EDV. What is the EDV? The EDV is the Eliza Doolittle Version. I thought to myself what would have happened if the writers of the KJV wrote the translation in Cockney. If you have ever watched the movie My Fair Lady you would recall a flower seller with a strong cockney accent. Her speech was what some would call crude, but had the translators used Cockney would we then today be quoting the Bible with a Cockney accent? I dare say we would. But the thought of doing so would hopefully be ridiculous to many. So I ask, what is the difference between absurdities?

Until the day comes that someone steps forth and introduces an updated KJV using the right texts we will continue the struggle. So in keeping with the post I say g’bye blokes and ave a g’day governor. After all I want to remain true to the EDV. That is what is most important, right?

(Wife update….. After reading this to my wife she asked a profound question that never crossed my mind. Did not the writers of the KJV translate the Bible into the language of their day? Why did they not write it in a more archaic English? A new question is why do we not still use the 1611? If a revision was right from the 1611 why is it not right today?)

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Devotionals, General | 1 Comment »

Family Integrated Church – A creation of an organization or of God

December 29th, 2011

I was prompted to post the following in response to an article by David Cloud. It is an open response only due to the fact that his was an open comment. I have a great deal of respect for Bro. Cloud and must say that I agree with him in many areas, but in this one I must say that I disagree. I felt a need to post as this topic is one that is quite abused by many in the IFB movement. As the title states there seems to be confusion as to the origins of family integration within the local church. It is ironic that one must defend worshiping with the family as though one were breaking the law. There is nothing more natural and Biblical than worshiping as a family, but it would seem that even this is under attack. The following is my reply to his article.  The points from his article are boldly highlighted as well as underlined.

Regarding the Integrated Church and Vision Forum

Brother Cloud,

I hope you have the time to read and consider my comments as I have taken the time to receive and review yours. I must preface my comments with the understanding that I am adamantly against Vision Forum for doctrinal reasons yet I believe that integration of the family is far more Biblical than segregation of the family in the local church. My issues are primarily due to the use of the broad brush as well as assumptions that are made to be exclusive to churches that do not choose to segregate the family. I will deal with them point by point and invite your comments. Please forgive me in advance as I am very passionate in regards to this topic. My comments are not meant to be inflammatory, but I do wish to directly address what I consider to be error.

“I am writing about the Integrated Church Movement and Vision Forum in one report, because they are so closely tied together. While the Integrated Church Movement is larger than Vision Forum, Vision Forum is probably the most influential part of it. “

 

I do not see that they are tied together. I am a member of an Independent Fundamental Baptist church that believes in allowing the family to remain together. We are not influenced in any way by Vision Forum. I also personally know of several churches across the country where we have friends who are members of those churches and they have no connection with Vision Forum either. While Vision Forum may be the loudest voice due to resources, by no means are they THE voice. It would be like saying that The Sword of the Lord is THE voice of all IFB churches only because they are the loudest. So I must disagree with your assumption. The errors followed and promoted by Vision Forum sadly exist in many of our segregated IFB churches. I will address those as I go.

 

In regards to the “dangers”:

“The Integrated Church has often led to the downplaying of the importance of the biblical church.”

“This warning is an admission that this is a problem.”

I have heard this warning many times in segregated IFB churches and never considered it an admission to the problem there so why would it be assumed to be a admission elsewhere. Rebellion in regards to the importance of the local church is not an issue exclusive to family integrated churches.

“The Integrated Church lacks understanding about the danger of New Evangelicalism.”

“The Integrated Church is largely an evangelical movement rather than a fundamentalist movement.”

Again I would have to disagree and I would base it upon your very articles exposing the rise of evangelicalism within our own IFB churches that happen to be family segregated.

“The Integrated Church neglects the Great Commission.”

As a missionary who worships within a family integrated church as well as plants churches that function allowing the family to worship together I would have to strongly disagree.

“The Integrated Church has gone beyond the Bible in making rules about family and church.”

Yet you go on to say in regards to the issue of segregation “The Bible says nothing about this one way or the other.” If this is indeed your belief then has not the family segregated church gone beyond the Bible in making rules about the family and the church? I personally know of many IFB churches that practically forbid family integration and if they do indeed allow it the church members that do so are shunned. So should I make a broad statement that segregated IFB churches are violating or going beyond God’s Word?

“As the pillar and ground of the truth and possessing the Lord’s commission to teach them to observe all things whatsoever I have taught you,” the church has the authority to teach children and young people as certainly as the home has (1 Timothy 3:16; Matthew 28:19); and the church has the right to decide how to accomplish this in a practical sense.”

I do not see either of these verses addressing your point in any way. Our guide is the Word of God and if we are not careful we create a popery that you know well and good exists within our own IFB churches.

“I believe there is a great benefit in having Bible classes for children and youth. The Bible nowhere says that they must always be with their parents. That is to make a law out of the Bible’s silence.”

You just said that “you believe”, but what if the parents do not? We do not see any examples in the Bible of segregating the family. We do see examples of the families praying together, worshipping together, of letters being read addressing all groups, etc. So if anything we have made the segregation a law out of the Bible’s silence regarding segregation.

“If mom and dad want to keep their children with them at all times in church, and if they don’t want their children to participate in youth activities, that is their prerogative before the Lord, but to go beyond this and make such things a law for everyone is to go beyond Scripture.”

Sadly, as I previously stated, it is really not their prerogative to do so as they are labeled as “mavericks” and “rebels”. I can attest to this first hand in several churches. Also is not segregating and making such a law going beyond Scripture?

 

“Another example of the legalism of the Integrated Church movement is its teaching that daughters must remain under the father’s roof until marriage.”

“The Bible is our sole authority for faith and practice. “

You say that the Bible must guide, but where does the Bible teach that they should not stay under their father’s roof? We do indeed see daughters in the home with their parents in the Bible, but we see no examples of any daughters away from their parents.

 

“Is a young woman to be treated as a child?”

You are making an accusation here and I want to assume you do not mean to. To follow God’s leading in a matter does not dictate demeaning another.

 

“For a young woman to go to a godly Bible College and even to become a single missionary within the ministry restrictions of the New Testament Scripture (e.g., 1 Timothy 2:12) is not unscriptural.”

Within the ministry restrictions she cannot be a missionary. The issue at hand is the definition of a missionary. If we indeed follow 1 Timothy 2:12 then how do we justify a female missionary in the same sense as a male missionary? The reality is that for many women in Bible college their intent is to obtain the “MRS” Degree. For others it is to fulfill roles that are man created and not God ordained.

 

 ”My wife was saved as a teenager when she was living in home broken by divorce. Her father and step father were unbelievers so she had no earthly father to help her spirituality. She faithfully attended the best church in her area, and after she graduated from high school she attended a godly Bible College, worked in a church, and was called to be a missionary.”

In regards to a “call”, please explain this scripturally and give a Biblical example of this occurring a woman.

 

“Before we were married, she worked as a nurse at a missionary hospital, and I do not believe that she was disobeying the Bible.”

Then in fact she was a nurse and not a missionary. We have gone very broad in our definition of a missionary throughout the years.

“A single woman can operate under the authority of the church as surely as she can under the authority of a father. Consider Phebe (Romans 16:1-2). She was sent by Paul on a ministry journey to Rome and Paul instructed the church at Rome to assist her, yet no father or husband is mentioned.”

You are making an assumption here that she is not married, widowed, a daughter of another in the ministry, etc. You are also assuming that she did more than just deliver the letter. A servant of the church is a description that any church member should strive to fit within. Is it possible that she went to visit family at Rome and thus on her way delivered the letter? Of course, but we cannot assume anything. God did not choose to elaborate further so we cannot assume that she was a missionary. All the Bible says is that she delivered the letter. There is no mention of being a missionary. If we do assume she was a deaconess as some do then why do we not have them today? We see no Biblical qualifications for a woman deacon, pastor, etc.

“The Integrated Church will bring you into association with heresy.”

Neither Jack Hyles or Peter Ruckman are family integrated and they are rife with heresy. So if you wish to say that Vision Forum will bring you in association with heresy is one thing. To lump them in this statement with family integrated churches would be improper. While as a Bible College student years ago the ugly heresy of Calvinism crept in and there was no family integrated influence causing this. As a matter of fact Calvinism is one of the greatest dangers infecting our IFB churches today. It would be wrong of me to assign this due to the segregation that exists in IFB churches just as it would be wrong to assume heresy due to family integration.

 

I agree that Vision Forum has many grave errors. But I would disagree that it has any direct correlation with family integration. I see many grave errors eating away at fundamentalism and that from segregated churches. Sadly we have created many church officers due to family segregation.  We now have besides the Biblical pastor associate pastors, youth pastors, Senior’s pastor, shut in pastor, etc. None of which are found in the Bible. In essence we have introduced elder rule to IFB churches through our many programs including the Sunday School. So if anything is propagating error it is the segregation rather than the integration. I am sensitive to this topic as I do not see a danger to the local church with integration. God made the family who are we to segregate that family within the local church? We IFB believers are known for being faithful to Scriptural context. Why is it that we violate that in attempts to justify family segregation.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in General, Ministry | No Comments »

Christian Insanity

November 1st, 2011
 
 
 
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein

 
I often refer to this quote for various reasons, but most recently it hit home not only in the state of the local church, but in my own life at times. I recently was listening to a preacher that was dealing with Christians not breaking free of habitual sin and the light came on. It is such a simple truth that we can easily pass it by.
As Christians we often expect complicated solutions for our seemingly complicated problems. Over the years ridiculous solutions such as un-biblical spiritual warfare, Christian counselors (not against theophostic counseling conducted by a believer, just the extremes), addiction ministries, etc. have been offered. Yet through it all the bottom line is simple Biblical truths.
 
2Co 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

 
Eph 4:28 Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth.
 
Eph 4:22 That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;

 
Do you see the trend here? If you are a new man then you do new things! It may sound simplistic, but it is really that simple, but in order for it to be simple it requires another requirement.
 
1Co 15:31 … I die daily.
 
The answer for the believer is death to self. The insanity is that when we struggle with sin in our lives we try over and over to deal with it in the same manner and then get frustrated when the sin remains. Without dealing with the sin in a truly Biblical manner that sin will never go away. So the bottom line is death to self and doing so daily. Now this may seem a bit short and simplistic, but as usual I have an ulterior motive. Lets now apply this to the local church. For the last few hundred years we have been so concerned with being affiliated with one group or another that we forsook the most important affiliation. That affiliation is being a blood bought born again Bible believing Christian.  We often play church and have been doing so for hundreds of years. We meet at the same times, build the same buildings, use the same furnishings, read the same books, etc. But through this all we are accomplishing little. I am sure that many will boast of their bus ministries that bring in hundreds and keep few if any. They will boast of their social organizations, Bible Colleges, etc, yet none of these things are found in the Bible.
 
We hear of pastors claiming that they are spiritually starving and need to “get away” and “get fed”. One of the few programs that I can watch as a believer on TV are cooking shows which I love to watch. I love to watch because I love to cook. I love to cook because I love to eat.  I would be very wary of a cook who doesn’t eat his own food. What am I getting to here? When I prepare a message to preach it is regularly a message that the Lord has preached to my heart in my personal devotions or studies. I have been fed and now I am feeding others from the portion that I received. We have forgotten that as preachers that if we won’t eat it we should not expect others to. I have never felt preaching to be a horrible burden, but a privilege and regret that I do not preach more often. I never feel I need to get away from my spiritual kitchen because that is where I love to be.  Okay, enough of this rabbit trail, but it does apply to the rut the local church and its leaders are in.
 
Why? Because we keep doing the same things over and over and over and expect a different result. Do you remember the above definition of insanity? It would appear that both Christians as individuals as well as corporately are a bit insane. It is time to quit repeating our tried and failed methods and return to our Christian roots.   Rather than trying to be known as the biggest church, the most publicly acknowledged Fundamental, a carbon copy church, the fastest growing in the Sword listing, etc. we would be better served simply being obedient to what we KNOW God has told us to do.
We need to come home to Christ. To preach the Word not just about the Word. To be the church that Christ established. To perform what He would have us to perform. To quit trying to be a church with a flair of the world or a copy of other churches. To stop using worldly techniques for spiritual issues.
 
If Christ and His Word are not enough then we have no hope. Are you doing the same thing over and over? That is insanity and it can be cured. How? Do it God’s way and you will be delivered!

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in General, Ministry | 1 Comment »

Is Your Church Too Busy To Listen To Jesus?

October 7th, 2011

Luke 10:38-42  Now it came to pass, as they went, that he entered into a certain village: and a certain woman named Martha received him into her house.  And she had a sister called Mary, which also sat at Jesus’ feet, and heard his word. But Martha was cumbered about much serving, and came to him, and said, Lord, dost thou not care that my sister hath left me to serve alone? bid her therefore that she help me. And Jesus answered and said unto her, Martha, Martha, thou art careful and troubled about many things: But one thing is needful: and Mary hath chosen that good part, which shall not be taken away from her.

I was preparing a message about the topic of what the church should and should not do and the Lord brought the above passage to mind. Now I know what the direct context is, but this verse does apply in application as well as somewhat within the context. In the passage above, good old Martha is busy doing good. From all we can gather from the narrative her intentions are good. We can only assume she is doing what she feels is right as the Lord does not rebuke her from that perspective. What the Lord does deal with is if what she thinks is right is indeed right.

It is ironic that Martha is upset with Mary because Mary isn’t doing what Martha THINKS is the thing to do. I mean who can argue with serving? She saw what she PERCEIVED was a needful thing.  So she went ahead and addressed the need as well as tried to pull others into her project. Maybe we can even say she wanted people involved in her PROGRAM and was upset that others were not participating. Can you see where I am going with this yet?

Much like Martha, the local church oftentimes sees what it perceives to be a valid need. It THINKS that there is a need so it attempts to fulfil that need. Much like Martha it gets upset when others do not see the perceived need as a legitimate need. It also gets upset when others do not participate or even dare to question the need. Once again, it is not an issue of motive, but of the necessity based on God’s plan.

Jesus had a plan that day. His plan was for people to sit at His feet and hear His words. But what about those that needed to be served? Didn’t Jesus realize that there was still a need that needed to be met? Obviously the real need was being met by Jesus. The other perceived need was in all actuality busy and self-fulfilling work. Again I make the comparison to many of our programs. Are we not keeping people from God’s designed plan and thus re-directing people to our plan?

Jesus dealt with Martha when he told her…. “Martha, Martha, thou art careful and troubled about many things: But one thing is needful: and Mary hath chosen that good part, which shall not be taken away from her.”

You see, Jesus not only told her that Martha’s perceived need was not indeed needful, but that it was bad. You may ask how in the world I derived that it was bad. Note that Jesus says with a contrasting conjunction that “one thing is needful” thus we can derive that anything outside of that one thing is not needful. He also adds that Mary has chosen “that good part”. Those three word, two actually in the Greek, speak volumes. Good is simple enough to understand, but the word “part” denotes a part distinct from the whole. In essence as there is only one needful thing there was also only one good thing. That good thing was what Jesus wanted and not what Martha wanted to do.

So I pose the question regarding the church program you WANT to do. Is it needful and good in the eyes of God? The only way to know is if it is God commanded and does not contradict any of His teachings as well as one other thing. Does it keep people from sitting at the feet of Jesus or in the chairs in the church gathering place and hearing the Word of God. After all, that is the NEEDFUL thing for a church. That is the GOOD thing.

“thou art careful and troubled about many things: But one thing is needful”

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in General, Ministry | No Comments »

The Missing Programs

September 28th, 2011

If you have read anything which I have written over the years it would be obvious that I am anti-program. It’s not that I do not like programs per say, but that I am against un-Biblical programs. Recently during my devotions it struck me that there are some very Biblical programs. Not that I didn’t know it, but that I never saw them as programs as I will explain it in this post.

In our day and age we have countless programs for countless people groups. We see Children’s Church, Sunday School for various ages, social classes, marital status, educational status, and so on. Churches offer addiction programs for everything from drinking, drugs, and even credit card usage. Youth groups, senior groups, semi-senior groups, and who knows what other concoctions they have come up with.  I could go on for hours listing the programs in our program driven churches. I stress program driven as they cannot be Spirit driven if they are not doing what God wants done.

But through all these programs there is an obvious omission of two of the very few programs that the Bible does speak of. And what are these two programs?

Jas 1:27 “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, …”

Ac 6:1 “And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration.”

These two programs are to take care of the widows and fatherless. Isn’t it ironic, or maybe just plain sinful, that the people God did tell us to work with we have nothing to do with. We hear the excuse that they are already being taken care of by the government. So since when did the government become the surrogate church? God said that we should take care of the widows if they were widows indeed. He never said to do so unless the government does it. So will the church now surrender anything that the government is willing to do? What if the government says that they will be in charge of religious education? Will that be so easily surrendered as well?

Sadly we have endless numbers of programs, but few of which are God ordained. If we were to evaluate what the church is to do versus what we currently do I am afraid that we would not recognize the church any longer. On a recent evening during family devotions I asked our children to tell me, based on what we have been studying from God’s Word, what were the only things critical for the existance of a church. I will use some of their ideas to the list below.

God
Pastor
Believers
God’s Word
Worshipping of God
Taking care of widows and orphans
Taking the Gospel home and abroad (local and foreign missions)
Exhorting one another
Tithing

While I may have missed one or two other items, these are the key ingredients. All else is fluff and window dressing. Now stop and think that if we were to only meet the needs above how many resources we would have available to do so. But instead we are burdened with the non-essentials. We build buidlings, buy furnishings, have the latest technologies, afterglows, plays, etc. This caused me to think about the fact that we may have come full circle. We now refer to the building where we meet as “church’ or “God’s house” when in fact it is neither. The believers are the church and God’s house as well. Perhaps we have slid into the same thing as others did in the Old Testament when they built the Temple.

Acts 7:47-50  But Solomon built him an house. Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet, Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool: what house will ye build me? saith the Lord: or what is the place of my rest? Hath not my hand made all these things?

What a stunning rebuke as we think today that we can build for God what we think He needs rather than do what He commands. But when we bring these and other errors to light we are met with much of the same opposition that Stephen was met with.

Acts 6:14  For we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered us.

I know that these were false accusations, but what stands out is the word “customs”. It would seem that they were more concerned with what they were doing than with what God would have them to do today. God had a new plan for them. And while what we are omitting is not “new”, it is what God would have had and does have for us to do today. So let me ask you church member or pastor, what does your church have that is not on the list? How much of your church budget is for fluff and personal preference and how much is ordered of God? It seems that we have built temples for self and have omitted the weightier things.

There is still time for the church to return to its roots. It is there that we will discover what a church should indeed look like.

Once we do, we may not have to knock on doors to tell people of Christ. They may well be knocking on our’s when they see His work done in His way.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in General, Ministry | No Comments »

CHURCH – THE OTHER DAY CARE

September 23rd, 2011

 

Years ago the world offered day care centers such as La Petite Academy as well as many others. Today, even casinos offer day care so that so-called parents can fulfill their lusts as well as shirk their responsibilities as parents. We as Christians will talk about the lack of parenting and how institutions such as the public school and day care centers are raising the children. But as usually is the case, the church will create an “alternative” to the world rather than discern if what they are creating an alternative for is even necessary. We are instructed in the Scriptures to…..

1Jo 2:15 “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.”

2Co 6:17 “Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,”

In both verses it is obvious that what the world has to offer is not for us as believers. But rather than disassociate ourselves from those things we offer an alternative. We stamp the word “Christian’ on it and we can then do what the world does and have an alibi in order to do so. This happens in many areas besides our topic today so I will leave that rabbit trail for another post.

In another book that I am working on I make note of the miniscule amount of time that the average parents spend with their own children. It is bad enough what lost people do with their children, but what about Christians?

De 6:7 And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.

Lets take this verse apart and apply it to our lives. The first part says “thou shalt teach….thy children”. Teach what? God’s commands. It doesn’t speak of a surrogate such as the Christian school, Sunday School, Children’s church, Patch Club, AWANA, etc. On that note here is a perfect example of our substitution policy.

World                                      Church

Public School                         Christian School

Boy Scouts                              Awana

Day Care                                 Christian Day Care
Sunday School
Children’s Church

The examples are endless, but back to the topic. The verse said we as parents are to teach the children. So why don’t we? Because we have adopted another form of the world and that is sending our wives and daughters out into the workplace rather than being keepers at home as the Bible teaches. We send our daughters to Bible Colleges to earn/buy their MRS Degree and train for a “ministry” when their God given ministry is their family. So we see that due to our lusts we have forsaken the first part of the verse and have delegated our God given command to teach our children to others. Incidentally I find it almost humorous that the same people that will say that you cannot teach your own children like the Sunday School can would recruit you in a heartbeat to teach a Sunday School class that your own child may be in. Ironic, isn’t it? We will skip over the word “diligently” as it is impossible to do so if you have farmed out your child to the surrogates.

Here is a tough pill to swallow “and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.”

The above verse is now an impossibility because we have forsaken our Godly roles. When do your kids sit in their house with you? After all, you have a job now mom. The kids have activities. Let’s look at a typical schedule.

Mon -Friday

6-7am Mom and Dad need to leave to be on time for work. Pour a bowl of cereal for the kids then they wait for the bus or get a ride to school. After school the kids are either latch-key or stay at school for activities. Mom and dad get home around 5:30 or 6PM and it is time to throw some dinner together. Maybe they finish dinner by 7pm. Well it’s time for homework and mom and dad to hit the TV or Internet. Maybe junior gets the homework done and will watch some TV or play his Wii. Now it’s bedtime so lights out until the next morning and begin the cycle all over again. Keep in mind that Wednesday night they will break the routine and go to “prayer meeting”. But don’t forget the junior gets separated from mom and dad and is sent to the Wednesday night version of daycare called Awana or Patch Club. See you mom and dad. After service it’s late and time for bed.

Saturday

At last a day off. It’s time to go shopping, play with friends, mow the lawn, etc. Worn out by the afternoon and let’s call it an early night as tomorrow is “church day”.

Sunday

Wake up the family, grab a quick bowl of cereal, and load the family together into the car so we can all go and worship together. That is until we get to church. It’s the Sunday School hour where we will segregate into groups only imaginable to Mr. Dewey. Kids are in “their place” for the morning. After Sunday School comes the “worship” service where some children are allowed back into the same building with their parents, that is if they are teens and they do not sit with their family, but with their teen group. The rest of the children will be sent to “children’s church” where a watered down message will be preached on a totally different topic. I am still looking, but I have yet to find any of the original texts written in a watered down version for kids.

So service time is over and after a bit of fellowshipping in the foyer they are headed home for the quickee lunch before a brief rest before leaving for Sunday night service. Once back at church its dividing time again. Some churches may allow the younger children with the parents and some will have yet another club. What is ironic is that the same churches that allow the children into the evening service no longer feel that the preaching is over the heads of the kids. One thought is that if the preaching is that far over their heads maybe the message is wrong to start with.

So the week is over and the verse was not fulfilled, not because it could not be fulfilled, but because we had other priorities that we felt were of more importance than God’s commands. This topic, like many others, are things that the local church has chosen to do with no mandate from the Scriptures. If you were to ask a pastor why he does what he does as far as church programs it would be likely that the answer would be “well, the pastor before me put it in place” or “we have always done it that way”. But can a pastor honestly say that “I have searched the Scriptures and this is commanded of the Lord”. I must say that the latter could not be true.

We are clearly instructed to train up our children. We see in the Epistles that people from all ages are spoken to. I seriously doubt that the readers went running room to room in order to address the husbands, wives, servants, children, etc. We have no mandate in the Bible to have a Sunday School, Children’s Church, or any other of the multiple programs that exist today. We have once again bought in to the world’s methods such as age segregation, snacks as bait, extravagant furnishings, worldly dress and music, etc. We also see the popularity of trips to Israel. We now have our own Mecca Pilgrimages. The message I am trying to send is a simple one. We need to go back to basics and do what the Bible instructs and nothing more. When we do more than or change what has been given for us to do, we then are saying that God’s way is not good enough or that we know better than God.

I believe that all this is once again a result of being more concerned with results rather than obedience. So what about you? Will you train up a child in the way they should go? Or will you check your children into the Church daycare? It’s just an issue of choosing to obey God or yourself.

Tags: , ,
Posted in General, Ministry, Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

Married or Cohabitating

August 16th, 2011

Recently I had a thought regarding the correlation between human relationships and church relationships. In a normal human relationship we see marriage between a man and a woman. I stress the use of the word “normal” as we have many abnormalities it that area. But within that realm of normal we must differentiate between Godly normal and worldly normal. Godly normal is marriage where worldly normal is “cohabitating” or living together. Godly normal involves a commitment between two parties. There is a binding tie and that is God. In the worldly normal there are many similarities to the Godly normal. They live together, become parents, share expenses, etc. But one glaring difference is that worldly normal has no binding tie. One may walk away at any time. There is nothing that keeps them together. On the surface you would have a hard time seeing the differences between the two if you saw them in public. They would likely dress the same (sadly that is the case in that the supposed Godly dress like the world), they might shop at the same stores, drive the same cars, and basically be similar in all areas except for commitment. If you wanted to discern between the two you would probably have to ask them what their status was. For all intents and purposes there are no glaring differences.

This brings us to Convention Churches and sad to say many Independent Fundamental Churches. In this analogy
the Convention Church would be the “married” couple while the IFB Church would be the cohabitating couple. Obviously the Convention Church has its relationship with other churches within the Convention. They might dress alike, sing alike, act alike, and pretty much have a spousal relationship with other churches. Those churches within the convention would be told to do things the same, report to one body, give to one body, and be known as one body. As we know there would be no autonomy as the two have become one.

Now we come to the IFB churches. First let me say that as the “cohabitating” church there are some very confusing aspects as there are with “cohabitating” couples. In many countries the cohabitating is actually considered as good as married. In Cuba, and I
assume other countries as well, they use the term “spouse” to describe their cohabitating partner. They actually have the structure as a married couple. Even to the point of submission to authority. So it is becoming in the IFB churches. There is an alarming pattern of the development of a convention without the commitment much like a cohabitating couple. We have seen this through special associations known as “fellowships”, Bible College affiliations, Christian Camp affiliations, Evangelist networks, etc. We have even seen it to the point of central figures as was and is the case with people like Jack Hyles and many others in IFB circles.

Many IFB churches will use the same hymnals, Bible Colleges, Evangelists, Camps, Fellowships, and even look down on
those outside their convention. I intentionally used the word “convention” as we have become conventions in the cohabitating sense without the marriage commitment. We have digressed into a mutual admiration society where we will glad hand, back slap, vacation, golf, etc with our “networks. We will not only use the same hymnals, but sing the same number of songs, have the same church order, and meet on the same nights (heaven help those that do not have prayer meeting on Wednesday). We will use the same mission programs, take the same trips, and even schedule VBS at the same times, of course using the same materials.

So is this wrong? In a sense the answer is yes. We basically conduct ourselves in the same manner as a convention system and have practically lost our Biblically commanded autonomy. This extends to doctrine as well as practice. Our doctrine will be tweaked by whatever the most popular man in the group does. Erroneous doctrines will be introduced without anyone daring to question as we are only allowed to question those outside our network. This applies to rebuke and correction as well. We dare not
speak against our local popes yet we may openly criticize (and rightfully so) the Catholic pope. We dare not speak against the “heroes of the faith” as some are referred to in spite of the fact that they were human and erred as anyone else. But we will excuse all this away much like the cohabitating couple and say that we are free to walk away.

So then just what is it that is wrong with Convention Churches? Is it only not having the freedom to walk away? I dare say there is more than that wrong as they have many other doctrinal errors as well. But are we not seeing the evolution of IFB churches into a cohabitating convention? No one would say we should not fellowship, but neither should we indirectly, or in some cases directly, lose our autonomy as well as our discernment. This happens when we allow those outside the local church to influence what we do as a local church. We have indeed become that cohabitating couple. Is there a problem with that? The answer is an absolute yes, because we are supposed to be the bride of Christ and not the partner of another church. A test of this would be to ask yourself why your local church does what it does. Years ago I challenged some young Bible College students that when they were to go out and start a church to solely do so according to the Word of God. I told them not to model themselves after their home church, not after their local pope’s church, not after their favorite Christian publications advice, but to solely model it after the Biblical model. I always wondered what that church would look like. I have yet to see it, but I hope that someday I will. It is time to break up with the cohabitating partner and get married with Christ. After all we are His bride, or at least we are supposed to be.

Tags: ,
Posted in General, Ministry | 3 Comments »

What a Shaker of Salt!

March 27th, 2011

Why do you have a shaker of salt in your kitchen? Why do you keep one at the table? Is it because it looks good? Is it big? Is it pretty? Does everyone talk about your shaker of salt? Maybe the biggest, or rather the most important question should be, is if there is any salt in the shaker. So is there? If there is, is it any good?

A salt shaker was originally just a place to keep salt in order for the salt to be used. It slowly evolved into a decoration. We have daily shakers, holiday shakers, celebration and special event shakers, etc. We have that famous Thanksgiving shaker that perhaps looks like a turkey or a cornucopia that gets out once a year. Perhaps we occasionally forget to use it and the salt inside of it gets ruined. Maybe it got humid and the salt got hard and clumped. Maybe dust settled on and in the shaker. Maybe the salt just got old.

What does any of this have to do with Christianity? The salt and shaker are a direct reflection of churches and church buildings today. Note that I differentiated between churches and church buildings. One can have a church without a building and still be a church, but a building without a church is just a building. As a matter of fact a building with a church inside is still just a building. Over the years we have spent more of our household budgets on salt shakers than on salt. In writing this post I decided to do a very brief search on salt and pepper shakers. Below is a very interesting sample.

(50) Heart Salt & Pepper Shaker

$950

What a shaker of salt? Imagine spending $950 dollars on heart shaped salt and pepper shakers. Imagine the oohs and aahs when people sit at your table and see the fine shakers. These shakers which cost more than a lifetime supple of salt and pepper and will be sure to get people’s attention. They will surely think that you are a person of means. They will think that you must be someone special to be able to afford such fine trinkets. It will definitely please those watching. As a matter of fact it will totally take people’s minds off of what, if anything, is contained inside of the shakers. It will basically become more important than the contents. After all, the salt was fifty cents or so and the shaker $950. You will no longer even think about spilling the contents or keeping the contents fresh. Your main concern will now be to preserve the shaker. You would care for it, keep it in a safe place, not allow it to tarnish, not allow it to get dropped, etc. Not because you care for the contents, but because of the value of the container.

I am hoping you have made a connection by now of the analogy between the shaker and the church building/budget. I was recently discussing this topic with my wife when she aptly said that if we would spend less on churches we could have more churches. I thought to myself just how much we could have accomplished for God had we tried to accomplish less for ourselves. Imagine if rather than spending, let’s say $3 million on one church building, we would spend the same $3M and planted 10 churches? In the conversation she asked why people do not do that. The answer is simple. It would not create the dynasty that so many look for. I know that this is one of my hobby horses, but I cannot help think that the dynasty and self glorification mentality grieves God. How so? Because God’s work ceases to be done God’s way.

Many churches today are not much different that the salt and pepper shakers shown above. They are expensive, ornate, and attention grabbing. But are they attention grabbing because of the inside of the shaker, or because of the outside? Sadly I believe it is because of the outside. Just as we go into debt to buy that $950 shaker on our credit card, we also go into debt for our church buildings and projects. Note that I said “our” as it certainly is not for God. The obscene furnishings and lighting is not for God. The fancy electronics are not for God. The expensive façade and floor coverings are not for God. So one must then ask if the contents of the building are for God.

You can really look at the big picture and see just how much the expensive shaker mentality has ruined our world (caution must be taken also in not making our world’s condition more important than God’s plan). If churches were more concerned on getting more salt then we would see pastors having a heart to plant more churches (yes, even in “their” territory). We would have more money for church planting, funding missionaries so that they do not have to spend an average of 4 years collecting support, as well as one year every five years replacing support. Local church planters would be able to just get up and go and plant a church rather than damage their own families by trying to work enough to get a church started. There would be enough finances to feed the poor, and care for the widows and orphans, which we are told of God to do so. It is ironic that what we are told to do we do not do, and what we are not told to do we do. Our country’s present condition is a direct result of lack of outreach. No one can say if we are in end times as the Bible tells us that no man can know the day or the hour. But we can say that we see the signs of the times.

Sadly we will not be used by God to reach some of the lost because we are too busy caring for the shaker. Many will continue to spend away getting that special church van, youth group activity or trip, church flowers or bathroom border, filling the afterglow pig trough, getting that special projector or giant screen monitor, new pine car track, state of the art sound system, sound room, video room, electronic gadgetry to entertain the teens, summer camp, etc. I know I missed plenty, but I am sure you can fill in the blanks.

But through all of this we forgot about the salt in the shaker. That is, if there is any salt in it. As is the case with a real shaker, we will add our rice in order to keep it from clumping. But there is a better way to keep the salt from clumping and that is to use it. The shaker is a temporary housing, but for some it has become permanent. If the salt stays in the shaker then the salt is worthless. It will then sit in a pretty shaker and lose its saltiness. God makes mention of that.

Mt 5:13 Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.

So what will it be? Will you seek the oohs and aahs of men? Or will you seek to be used of God?

If you just want a pretty shaker then you will be trodden under foot as God has said so. Could this be what is happening to both mega churches as well as smaller worthless salt shakers? I believe it is. It is time to put the shaker in its place. Take your shaker budget and invest it in salt. It is then that the salt will serve its purpose.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in General, Ministry, Posts | 1 Comment »

The Jerry Johnston inside of all of us

March 20th, 2011

Updated due to a great question. See bottom of post for comment and reply.

Besides the fact that most money spent in churches is spent on ourselves rather than God’s work, I was thinking about an irony that I felt I should share. The title is intended to be a tease of sorts, due to the most recent scandal in Christianity. We are all aware of the Jim and Tammys, the Benny Hinns, etc. and now the Johnston/SBC scandal. I make mention of the SBC as many have overlooked the relationship. But the emphasis of this post is the Jerry Johnston in all of us. How is that you say? Think proportional.

First Family Church boasts of the following (albeit obscenities to God):

4000 members (although we know that membership numbers rarely define church attendance)

$32 million dollar facility

51 acres of land

17,000 sq. ft. Youth Building

52,000 sq. ft. Children’s Building

Let us just begin with that. In order to show that not only is FFC in error, but so are most churches that do the same, we must put it into perspective. I will list FFC’s numbers and then proportionately make comparisons with different sized churches. The FFC numbers will be divided based on membership numbers in order to compare spending and building usage.

  FFC Church A Church B Church C
Membership 4000 500 250 125
Facility $32M $4M $2M $1M
Land 51 acres 6.3 acres 3.1 acres 1.5 acres
Youth Space 17,000 sq ft 2125 1062 531
Children’s Space 52,000 sq ft 6500 3250 1625
Debt $13.7M $1.7M $856,000 $428,125
Pastor’s Salary $400k (KC Star) $50,000 $25,000 $12,500

 

We obviously know that numbers do not justify expenditures as God never intended for Mega-Churches to exist. Mega-Churches are a man made creation and in some cases, a man made business rather than a church. But the emphasis of this post is to show through the chart above that perhaps there is a little bit of Jerry Johnston in all of us. You need to plug your own church into the appropriate column and then compare to what you are spending and doing proportionately. If it is obscene, and it is, what FFC is doing, then logically it is just as obscene if you are doing the same proportionately. A church of 125 being on 1.5 acres of land is not so uncommon. A church of 125 devoting 531 sq. ft. to youth groups is very common. A church of 125 having a debt of $428k is not out of the ordinary either. So in fact the Jerry Johnston scandal is not limited to the confines of FFC in Overland Park, Kansas, but exists in many churches today is a reality. So will we now argue about the comparisons, or will we examine what we are doing and realize that we have lots of fat in the church budget that is being spent on us, rather than God’s work. No one will be saved because of how big our building is, how much youth space we have, or how much debt we have. But the contrary is true. Many will not be reached because of the those very things.

The modern day slogan of “No Fear” exists not only in the secular culture, but in the church as well. The main reason is that the following verse is rarely followed.

1Ti 5:20 Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.

Is your church a mini FFC?

I want to predicate what I am about to say that I believe FFC is in error, and I am in no way defending them. What a disaster!! But as I was reading this post, I asked myself a question. When is a church doing God’s work? Or at what point is a church not doing God’s work? Is it based on which rung of the financial ladder your church is standing on? As I read your post, it seems that is what is implied. As your post says, “…not only is FFC in error, but so are most churches that do the same…”. Yes, I agree. But take church “A”, and let’s say that they are doctrinally in line with our church, are they doing God’s work? Or, take our church, when the Lord allows us to be more blessed financially, will we be doing God’s work then? Are we doing God’s work now? As I understand it, God’s work is God’s work; no matter where your church is on the financial ladder. But as is most often the case, I am probably missing the point. Take me to school brother!! Phil

Phil, No school brother. Its me who did not communicate it well. If the point was missed then that was my error in not communicating it properly. What I wanted to stress is that many churches are abusive of God’s finances whether they be big or small. Whether they are doing God’s work is actually the crux. Being blessed financially at times can actually be a curse, if the finances are spent on things other than God’s work. What I was stressing is that proportionately smaller churches are wasting as much in non-biblically prescribed areas, yet are justifying it because they are not spending as much in total dollars. Should our church be blessed more so financially than we are, it would be our Biblical responsibility to spend it in a Biblical manner which would then be responsible. Small churches such as churches A,B,and C had less than FFC, but did things not prescribed by the Bible, and in some senses against the Bible. So in essence they are just as guilty as FFC. For example, if a church fit in with the Church C example, the questions would beg if they needed 1.5 acres. Should they have a half million dollar loan? The obvious answer is no as the Bible teaches against debt. Should they pay their pastor more? Absolutely! Do they need “youth space”? No. If Church C would have better spent the Lord’s finances then the money from the loan, interest, youth spaces, and extra land could have been used for the Lord’s work rather than man’s desires. So that is why I was making the comparisons between FFC and other churches. Sometimes I know what I mean when I type it and wrongly assume others do as well. So I apologize for the confusion I created, and am thankful for your question that likely others had a swell. Bottom line is that  the churches shown were FFCs as well. Only on a smaller scale. Thanks again for the comment!

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in General, Ministry, Posts | 1 Comment »

« Older Entries