Church

Christians Need Apologetics

Brett Kunkle — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 13:49:26 -0800

“Just some ordinary conversation over dinner.” At least, that’s how my host described this event. In January, I was invited to have dinner with a couple of dads and their sons to facilitate a discussion on the problem of evil. It was a spur-of-the-moment request and details were a bit fuzzy, so I met my host Jon 30 minutes prior to talk specifics. He informed me that not only would Christian dads and sons participate, but his 60-year old parents, both skeptics of Christianity, would join us as well. That night’s conversation turned out to be exceptional. Why? Because of apologetics.

For too long, apologetics has been given a bad rap. Too many Christian voices point to a few poor apologetic examples, extrapolate them to every apologist and apologetic encounter, and then dismiss the entire enterprise. But in doing so, Christians abandon one of our greatest tools to engage the world for Christ. My recent conversation demonstrates why.

(1) It was intelligent. Any robust discussion of the problem of evil will include a host of issues. We covered almost all of them, exploring objective and subjective views of morality, the definition of evil, human freedom, moral intuitions, the soul, and more. It was a rational, well-informed dialogue between Christians and Jon’s skeptical parents. And it was my apologetic training that enabled me to lead an intelligent discussion.

(2) It was gracious. The apologists I know take I Peter 3:15 seriously. All of it. We are not to be defensive with our defense, but gracious. Apologetics can give you confidence that what you believe is actually true and reasonable. That kind confidence can keep you from getting defensive. And when you’re not defensive, you can relax, give others space to question and doubt, and even enjoy the challenge of a tough question. My apologetic training has done just that for me.

That night there were no raised voices. No frustration or irritation. Not a hint of defensiveness. Rather, the entire group was cool, calm, and collected. Yes, this occurred in the context of a religious discussion, where participants held diametrically opposed viewpoints. Jon’s parents raised serious intellectual challenges to God from evil, but heard a defense that was gentle and respectful.

(3) It was patient. Beforehand, Jon was clear with his instructions to me. He wanted a methodical discussion, walking carefully through the arguments and objections. No jumping to unjustified conclusions. And there was no pressure to “close the deal.” Rather, his stated goal was to leave a stone in his parent’s shoes, an approach he picked up from Stand to Reason. He was patient with their skepticism, knowing there were many barriers to be removed before Jesus ever came into view. Apologist Ravi Zacharias puts it this way:

“The longer I am in this work, the more I realize that intellectual struggles are merely the hazardous waste of life, blocking the heart from truth. The task of apologetics is to carefully remove that hazardous material and keep it from igniting into a destructive fire. Once that is done, the way to the heart is always through the way of the Cross, God’s love for each and every one of us.”

I wanted to use apologetics to move some of that hazardous material away from Jon’s parents’ hearts, but my apologetic training helped me to understand this approach takes time and requires patience. That night, his parents were able to air a few of their intellectual grievances, which were met with listening ears and patient answers.

When you pay careful attention to what most Christian apologists are saying today and you avoid the temptation to demonize the entire apologetic endeavor because of one or two bad examples, you’ll be open to one of the great tools the Church has employed for 2,000 years. When I teach apologetics, this is the approach I commend. It’s the Stand to Reason way, the Ambassador’s way. Of course, it’s always nice to be reminded it’s also an effective way.

What was the result of that night’s intelligent, gracious, and patient conversation? As we said our goodbyes after dinner, Jon’s skeptical dad shook my hand, looked me in the eye, and with a smile said, “Let’s do this again.”

The Music Industry and The Church

Phil Towne — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 15:33:15 -0800

Derek Webb posted a blog today about the music industry and giving music away for free. He maintains that the relationships build over the long term by giving music away for free is actually much more profitable than music services such as Spotify (or even iTunes). His blog was very thoughtful and caused me to think through the way the music industry has functioned.

Webb tells a story of a young Johnny Cash nearly being disallowed entry into a studio to record. He made it in only by playing something "worth the legacy of the historical room." Webb goes on to define the ways in which the music industry has changed from focusing on the huge money making artists to being undermined in the last few years. He claims that the gatekeepers are no longer standing at the door, but new communication technologies brought about by the internet can connect artist with fan, as well as produce music relatively cheaply and easily.

As a musician, one who is certainly far from professional, I enjoy the ease of making music on my home computer, and distributing it for free through a variety of music distribution sites. As an aspiring media scholar and theologian, I can't help but notice the parallel's between the music industry and the religious industry (he says, tongue in cheek).

As I have said before, the gatekeepers within religions are holding tight to their control, as the music industry has attempted to do. The huge artists are prized for their performance, and yet the smaller voices are now capable of being heard. (In some cases this may not be a good thing, such as this guy.) As these new and different voices are heard, will this cause a fracturing of the ecosystem of our church culture or can this lead to new and creative expressions of what the church can be?

It remains to be seen how all this will shake down to the average congregation, but I can't help but see that changes are coming. At any rate, just a couple quick thoughts after reading Derek Webb's blog. I encourage you to read it, it is thought provoking. Do you see the parallels I am making?

Neo-Denominationalism: Sizing up the Multi-Campus Church Movement

Adam Stadtmiller — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 14:29:40 -0700

The church has had a lot of latest things. In the 80’s it was the discipleship movement and seeker friendly services. The 90’s were all about men keeping promises and reaching Gen X. In the early 2000’s we focused on worship, Jabez and social justice.

This brings us to now, the age of the multi-campus church movement. If you are not aware of what that means, think franchise, but with a church planting twist.

In the thirty or so years since I have been Christian, I have seen a lot of these shifts. Some have been the authentic breath of God on his bride. Other times, not so much. Even then, God seems to have the ability to work all to His glory. So what about the multi-campus church planting movement? Is God on the move?

While we are too close to its genesis to answer that question, I think we are far enough in to dissect it a bit. Let’s start by looking at what it might possibly be.

While I’m only a novice church historian I would assert that the multi-campus movement seems reminiscent of classic denominationalism. This is the tendency to form distinct groupings based on common socio-religious practice.

Since the 80’s and perhaps before, the American church has been moving away from denominationalism; First Baptist and Main St. Presbyterian have been replaced by congregations with names like Journey, Solomon’s Porch and Sanctuary.

According to the 2006 Annual Church Profile (ACP), there are 44,223 churches in the Southern Baptist Convention. The Southern Baptist Convention measures church growth by the number of baptisms. In 2006, 10,449 churches baptized no one; 3,312 churches baptized only one person; and 13,760 churches baptized 1 to 5 people. A total of 27,521 churches in the SBC baptized five or less people for an entire year, which is 62 percent of all SBC churches. Furthermore, at least three of four churches are plateaued or declining. Or consider the Presbyterian Church USA. In 2 years, the denomination shrank by approximately 94,000 people. In 2006, this church saw a net loss of 56 congregations and a membership decrease of nearly 46,000 people.[1]

This shift reflects a greater cultural transition to post-modernist ideals that wanted to move away from some of the forms and absolutes of their modernist roots. As pastors we were told that people no longer wanted to be labeled. It was all about God and not sectarianism. Fair enough.

In the denomination heyday, Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterian and others struck out in true evangelistic, expansionist form to reach as many people as possible with their brand of Jesus. Once people bought into membership they were branded. Congregants had a theological and socio-religious identity. Each of these brands had their own unique way of reaching the culture. Some used smells and bells while others focused on fundamentals or charismatic giftings. Like most everything, this had some real positives for the church as well as drawbacks.

When I think of the multi-campus expansion movement, I see a lot of similarities to the churches denominational roots. I would actually call it neo-denominationalism. The one major difference would be that many of those planting these new brands would probably have an aversion to denominationalism. This might be a broad generalization, but it is my experience.

If I understand the multi-campus movement, the purpose of it is to reach people and the culture with the gospel by expanding your method and ethos to a greater number of people by recreating what is currently working at your alpha campus. There is nothing wrong with that, especially if it works.

This is being done in a few different ways. One model is the video café route. Here, everything is live except the preaching that is piped in from the main campus. In this model, there is a high value on the teaching of a particular individual. Thus, all campuses get that pastors teaching.The other model I have seen is the team approach. Here the entire service is live and a campus-teaching pastor or team does the preaching. There is often a commitment by all the campuses to be on the same page in regard to what they are preaching and teaching that weekend. Catholics have perfected this model.

So why is it reminiscent of denominationalism? It’s goes back to a common slogan I have been seeing at many of the churches pursuing this model. It reads, “One church, many campuses”

If you are going to be part of a movement like this, it will need to have its distinctives. There will have to be certain values, a certain flavor that is in common to all the campuses. This flavor or culture will need to be regulated to some extent. Campuses need reflect the great vision and ethos to be considered part of the “One Church” they are representing. This is pretty much a loose definition of what a denomination is; a group of churches all holding to a particular model or form. The question for the campuses is how far can you deviate from the form before you are no longer part of the "One Church"?

One problem for the multi-campus movement is going to come when the amount of campuses becomes unsustainable for the alpha church to manage. I recently met with a church that had planted seven campuses in two years. The new problem was that the alpha campus was now suffering for it. All of its best people and resources had been sent out. People at the alpha campus were feeling drained and uncared for; the staff at the alpha-campus was being exhausted.

Another challenge for the multi-campus movement is something that in innate to all Protestants. Protestantism was built on protest and division. Yes, it was for just reasons, but the tendency to divide and split is as innate to Protestantism as it is to nuclear fission.

Eventually someone is going to “feel led” to branch out beyond the Alpha campuses lead or direction. This might happen when one of the campuses achieves greater success in their mission field, thus sub-planting the alpha campuses effectiveness and or lead position.

So let me put on my church historian hat again for a minute and tell you where I think this is going. If the multi-campus movement catches on, in about ten years we will have 4-7 major churches that have been successful at recreating their brand of church in American culture. Hopefully this will lead us into a fresh wave of revival.

These churches will most likely require that there be some essentials that you must follow to be part of that group. When that happens the pendulum will have swung and we will be back to the denationalization of the church. The only difference is that we will have cooler names.

[1] http://enrichmentjournal.ag.org/200903/200903_022_Unmarried_Am.cfm

You Lost Me: Why Young Christians are Leaving Church

Sean McDowell — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 13:22:26 -0700

You Lost Me by David Kinnaman is the book I have been waiting for (Baker, 2011). I found myself reading it saying, “Yes, Yes, YES!” There has been much talk recently about the phenomena of young people disengaging the church when they leave high school, but now we have some substantive data as to why this is happening and what we can do about it. Kinnaman is the president of the Barna Research Group, so he backs up everything he says with research.

According to You Lost Me, 59% of young people with a Christian background report they have dropped out of the church after going regularly. Interestingly, Kinnaman notes that they are not necessarily leaving the faith. In fact, he says, “Most young Christians are struggling less with their faith in Christ than with their experience of church” (27). While historically young people often return to the church when they have kids, the new social and spiritual realities of this generation makes it less likely they will come back in the same numbers.

Kinnaman notes three key realities that describe this generation. First, access to information. This generation has unlimited access to non-biblical worldviews at their fingertips, which has caused many to question the nature of truth. For better or worse, they largely perceive the world through screens. It invites non-linear thinking and it empowers them as content-participants not just consumers of media.

Second, this generation is relationally alienated. In the 1960s only 5 percent of live births were to unwed mothers. Now that percentage is 42. Youth are maturing later and few churches today are equipped to minister to them. According to Kinnaman, “….relational alienation is one of the defining features of this generation” (45).

Third, this new generation is deeply skeptical of authority. This may sound familiar, but Kinnaman notes how the cultural structures that enabled faith—school, media, community, and stable family structure—are no longer available to the church. Everybody has an opinion so it is hard to know who is trustworthy.

One of the most helpful features of You Lost Me, was the six top reasons Kinnaman cited for why students leave the faith. Here they are:

(1) Overprotective—Young people have been so overprotected by our “helicopter” culture, that many seek risks outside traditional boundaries including drugs, pornography, and extreme thrill seeking. Kinnaman says parents and youth workers should allow young people to take bigger risks.

(2) Shallow—Not surprisingly, research shows that young people do not have a deep understanding of their faith. Yet the shallowness of faith is not restricted just to youth, but among all adults. Kinnaman says that our industrialized, program-driven ministry approach has failed to produce deeper disciples. He says, “We need to change from an industrialized, mass-production, public-education approach and embrace the messy adventure of relationship.

(3) Antiscience—More than 50% of churchgoing youth want a career in a science-related field. Yet only 1% of youth pastors report addressing a scientific issue in the past year. Kinnaman wonders how we can prepare a generation to follow Jesus in our science-dominated culture when only 1 in 100 youth workers are even talking about it.

(4) Repressive—The truth is that 4 out of 5 evangelicals 18-29 have had sex. The problem is that sex in our culture defines individualism: Sex is about me. Kinnaman notes that Christian teens have more conservative behavior than others but not different behavior. He is concerned that abstinence talks are
too focused on individual benefits rather than the teaching that sex is about selflessness.

(5) Exclusive—This generation tends to read the Bible through a pluralistic lens. They tend to base their morality on what seems fair-minded, loyal, and acceptable to their friends. They have more non-Christian friends than previous generations as well as relationships with people of differing sexual
orientations. These relationships inform their approach to truth.

(6) Doubtless—According to Kinnaman, “Doubt is a significant reason young adults disengage from the church” (187). There is both intellectual and emotional doubt that plague young people. This is why Kinnaman says our teaching ought to be more Socratic and process-oriented, allowing kids to
live with their questions.

What I appreciated most about You Lost Me, is the balance Kinnaman brings. He recognizes that the core issues of why kids are disengaging are both truth-related and relational. He says, “I think the next generation’s disconnection stems ultimately from the failure of the church to impart Christianity as a comprehensive way of understanding reality and living fully in today’s culture” (114).

We have failed to help people develop a biblical worldview. Kinnaman says, “It is a modern tragedy. Despite years of church-based experiences and countless hours of Bible-centered teaching, millions of next generation Christians have no idea that their faith connects to their life’s work” (207).

But Kinnaman also emphasized the importance of mentoring this generation. Sadly, a majority of the youth he interviewed reported never having an adult friend other than their parents. More than 80% never had a mentor. Kinnaman says truth must be passed relationally to the next generation through the same discipleship model of Jesus. Amen.

The Future of Church and the Full-Time Pastor

Phil Towne — Wed, 13 Jul 2011 16:57:08 -0700

I read an interesting blog today, written a couple weeks ago here on the homebrewedchristianity.comblog on the future of the church. I have been thinking and talking to a number of people about this topic a lot lately.

The author of this blog (Deacon Bo) concludes that within the next 50 years there will be a 50% decline in Christians in North America. Obviously this is speculative, but the reasons he lays out are:

• The majority of our church structures are carry over from a Christendom paradigm, combined with a lack of self awareness of this fact.

• Many Baby Boomers are retiring, and so no longer funding ministries.

• The Internet (making resources and connection freely available).

• The Browning of America (which has previously been mostly White dominated).

• Internal fighting amongst Christians.

• Dissappointment from unfulfilled rapture expectations.

Please read his blog to get a further explanation of these reasons, but I find a couple of them especially compelling for a conviction of mine that has been taking shape for a little while now. My conviction is that in the fairly near future (I would suspect in about 15-20 years) there will be far fewer full-time paid pastors. Some of the reasons he lists above are the same things I have been speculating about.

First, I believe that the Christendom model of purely top-down leadership is being questioned and by some dis-regarded. Many simply do not accept pastors as authorities any longer. They question why they should listen to a "sage on the stage" type of personality when they have a combination of friends who speak into their lives and google that can give them the information they desire much quicker. One can argue whether these sources are adequate, but at least anecdotally, I have certainly found this to be the case.

Second, as Bo mentioned on his blog, Baby Boomers are retiring, and there is a drastic reduction of young people in most churches. I imagine 15 years down the road the funding for ministry projects being far less, because the current generation of young adults is either not in church, or has a different perception of what church is and how the church should be spending their money. I know personally, I am not in favor of giving money purely to a local American church to help fund the ministry it does when there are seven other churches down the street. I would much rather send my money overseas to help either missionaries in other countries, or just helping people get food or fresh water.

Finally, the Internet. This is an area of particular interest to me, but I speculate that in the future, authority and powerful leadership will continue to be questioned and alternative authorities sought out. The default authority of pastors (and educators as well) will no longer be accepted, but instead will be challenged.

The other reasons Bo goes into may also figure into this equation, but I haven't thought about them much yet. I do think the infighting he mentions is a huge deal. There seems to be a modern neo-fundamentalism arising in some folks who are unwilling to accept or entertain any view other than their own. Some of them also tend to be very abrasive. The internet also plays into this factor, as it is easy for people to bash others anonymously and unintelligently with no backlash or recourse.

At any rate, all of this adds up to a feeling (or I would even call it a conviction) as to how we should posture ourselves as church leaders and as people educating future church leaders. Can I in good conscience teach future pastors without telling them that they may have to get another job while being a pastor? Should we as Christian Colleges and Universities be helping people become bi-vocational? What about those already in ministry? Do we hope they can all ride out their chosen careers or do we help re-train them? What role does the local church body play in all of this?

At any rate, what do you think? Do you see the number of Christians declining in the future? What about paid pastors?

I would love to hear your responses. I will likely follow this up at some point with some more thoughts as they develop. This is a very important topic for us to think through.

Book Review- This is My Body: Ekklesia As God Intended by Keith Giles

Crissy Brooks — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 10:11:00 -0700

Recently a great friend asked me to review his latest book. If you have questioned anything about Church, you will find truth, solace, and guidance in this book. You can download it for free at This Is My Body

Here's my review:

Keith Giles’ latest gift, This is My Body Ekklesia As God Intended is an invitation to be the family that The Church was meant to be. In a time when it is hip to be down on church and many of us are sure we can plant the next great congregation, Giles speaks softly, calling us back to the Scriptures and the One who first invited us to partake at the table together.

In the last decade we have been barraged with well-intentioned models and plans to get Church right. This book is not another model. It is an important reminder to the people of God of who we are to be as His people and how we are to act in the world. This book is a gift from a prophetic leader who has lived out the teachings of Jesus for decades and lucky for us, shares his discoveries here. Had this book been written by anyone else, I am sure I would not have picked it up. But I know Keith Giles. I have seen him make intentional choices to be The Body with and in his community. I have witnessed his Spirit inspired creativity and experienced his empowering influence.

When the temptation could have been strong to breakdown all that is wrong, Giles instead leads us with grace and gentleness through the Scriptures outlining the design of the Body of Christ. When it could have been so easy to be sarcastic, Giles instead points out what should have been obvious as if opening a door and letting light in. While there is plenty of material to bash church leadership, Giles instead invites us to imagine what leadership in the Body could be when we fully understand the Word and stop justifying our misguided traditions.

While Giles’s style is one of grace and invitation the book does not shy away from the controversies that have torn Christ’s Body a part in the past. With clear truth and studied evidence, Giles calls out the abuses and selfishness that have worked in our favor and harmed so many. He challenges the hierarchy and business we have come to accept as necessities and in the process holds up the good we should cling to.

This is My Body gives a clear call for us to “go out of business” and be the Family outlined in the New Testament. Perhaps the most beautiful part of this book is the invitation to live in the mystery of The Body of Christ. Giles fully challenges us without sending us running. He sheds light on such a beautiful Bride that I am drawn in more deeply and vow again to live in a mystery of family, love, submission, provision, grace and healing. This book gives me courage to hope that the Body of Christ really can transform our world.

Our Prideful Leaders & The Crack We Give Them

Christian Buckley — Wed, 18 May 2011 16:41:09 -0700

Why is it that, for the most part, you don’t have to look any further for a great example of prideful leadership than the largest church on the block? We like to criticize our politicians and business leaders for their unchecked egos and unrestrained power, but the truth is we are growing the same kind of crop in our own backyard.

Now if you are already thinking of a way to condemn that first sentence, please take a pause and hear me out. I am not saying that all “mega” churches are being led by “mega” egos. I am also not saying that it is impossible for a large church to be properly run by a humble pastor who is being held accountable by humble men and women.

What I am saying is that pride, in its purest form, is the crack of modern Christianity – it invades, seduces, and destroys everything in its path.

What I am saying is that pride, in its purest form, rather than sex, drugs, liberalism, homosexuality, etc., etc., etc. is the great evil facing the Church in modern America and it seems like we just don’t care.

I have had the privilege and sorrow of attending, supporting, and at times helping to lead very large powerful churches in Southern California. I have seen churches grow and expand to the rafters after which buildings are built, barns are added, and egos swell. More than one of them is now collapsed and I have knowledge, which I would gladly not have, that numerous huge American churches are hanging in the same peril. At the helm of each of them is a powerful, insulated, unquestioned pastor.

Pride is leading to our destruction. What starts as pure motivation followed by response, blessing, and growth leads inevitably to power and stature. Men and women who once listened and submitted to counsel begin to shrug it off and take offense. We begin to think that we – I – know what God wants and that I am the appointed one – the anointed leader – the one that God is speaking to. We begin to believe that those that dissent are less spiritual and those that support are clear minded. Pretty soon there is no one within earshot that has any ability to bring corrective wisdom and no one within reach who can reproach.

The problem is that we like it. Big churches and big leaders get to do big things. When asked where we attend church we like to name off the big church – followed almost immediately by the famous pastor at its head. We like that it somehow reflects positively on us – like we should be applauded for being in the right place.

The problem is that we like the crack because it makes us feel good and we are more than happy to let our pastors have it as long as the good times role. But pride leads to the exclusion of accountability and the exclusion of accountability, in our lives and the lives of our leaders, ends inevitably in destruction.

But don’t take my word for it – take it from the leper, or should I say, King Uzziah. (2 Kings 15; 2 Chronicles 26)

King Uzziah took the throne of Israel at the age of sixteen and reigned as king for about fifty-two years as one of the greatest kings in the history of Israel. When he was young he sought the Lord, did right in His eyes, and listened to the counsel of the prophet Zechariah and others. Because of this, his fame spread far and wide and he was greatly helped by the Lord. But when he grew strong, he grew prideful and stopped listening to counsel. He became unfaithful to God. When he was confronted by the priests, he raged against them and the Lord because they called him out – they tried to make him accountable. The result -- he was immediately struck by leprosy. He was sent away from the temple, lost the throne to his son, and lived alone in a small house until his death. He was remembered as a leper rather than a great king.

“As long as he sought the Lord, God made him prosper. But when he was strong, he grew proud, to his destruction.”

Perhaps the single greatest moment in American history was when President Washington gave up the keys to the presidency. We didn’t want him to. Heck, we would have made him king if we could of. But Washington said no and walked away. A self imposed limit of accountability that changed the face of America forever.

The second question is this: Who are you accountable to and who is accountable to you?

And the first?

Am I really willing to choose humility and accountability over power, fame, and success if the Lord wills?

If not, we have no hope.

And if the World Ends May 21...?

Richard Dahlstrom — Wed, 27 Apr 2011 08:04:08 -0700

"There is no doubt that the Antichrist has already been born. Firmly established already in his early years, he will, after reaching maturity, achieve supreme power." Martin of Tours - 4th Century AD

I've always had friends who are "into" Biblical prophecy and finding the dates of Christ's return. In the 70's, I saw charts and graphs predicting the end of the world would happen in the 70's. The same thing happened in the 80's and 90's. And who among us could forget Y2K and the great apocalyptic threats of that time as people ran for cover, taking their guns and bags of rice with them just in case.

Now there's a lot of chatter about May 21, the day believers will exit, plucked out of here (raptured) by Christ, so that hell's fury can be poured on the rest of the planet, which will be destroyed on October 21st. You can learn all about it here, complete with charts, though they're different than the charts of my youth, by 15, 20, 30, years or more.

My response to all this is a simple question: So what?

Don't get me wrong. I believe in the day of the Lord, and a final judgment. It's hard to read the Bible and come to the conclusion that history won't have a terminus. Commerce, wars, nation states and family life, everything as we know will come to end some day - and maybe that day will be soon. Sadly, though, the predicting of dates has had a long, tired, embarrassing history in the church, enough that I'm sure some people view all of us as quacks because we've gotten that guessing game wrong so often.

The reason I say "so what" in response to the latest educated guess has nothing to do with this group's chart. Anybody can make a cool chart. Anybody can start with certain assumptions and find the final hour of history. It's the assumptions, though, that need to be challenged because wrong assumption in an argument will always lead to wrong conclusions. But never mind that - even challenging the assumptions misses the main points, and there are, it seems to me, three main points.

1. Prophecy was given in the Bible so that AFTER things happened, people could say, "this is that of which the prophets spoke...". I'm having a terrible time finding clear dates, most likely because what Jesus said here. In spite of this, people love to guess. Fine. Guess if you must. But call it that, please. We've been down this tired road too many times.

2. Whether Christ returns tomorrow or 1000 years from now, our calling is the same. In this parable we come to see that Christ has given us each of us some resources to carry out the work of His kingdom until He returns. We're called to be salt and light, yeast and mustard seeds, making the presence of God's good reign known in small ways, "until He comes back". The tragedy of the guessing games is their diversionary power: we think we're being really holy, and on the 'inside' because we've done our homework and have secret knowledge. God cares more about whether we're loving our enemies, sharing our wealth, and living with contentment. Those things, however, sound like work. Far easier to view the Christian life as a cosmic game of "Clue" and busy ourselves with trivia.

Here's what I do know: my call to love God and love my neighbor, my call to embody the hope of Christ in tangible ways, my call to invest the many gifts I've been given in God's kingdom purposes, doesn't change whether Christ is returning tomorrow or 3521.

3. History will end someday. Life as we know it will end. The kingdoms of this world never last. There are lots of reasons for this, worthy of a different posting. Obsessing over dates is one way of missing the point. Pretending that everything will continue endlessly in the present status quo is equally wrong. The formed makes us apocalyptic junkies, addicted to the latest "sky if falling" theory. The latter tempts us to make our home in this world of buying and selling, eating, drinking, and being merry because the promise of His coming is quaint, but not to be taken seriously.

To the contrary, we're invited to keep our lamps lit - which means to be saturated with the fuel of the Holy Spirit that will enable the light of God to shine through our lives. We're invited to abound in God's work right up to the end... whether that means the end of our lives, or the end of history.

The gathering clouds of the middle-east appear darker now than at any point in recent history. Who knows what this means? Maybe May is the end of the world as we know it. But all we know right now is that in a world of shakeable kingdoms, we can have an unshakeable confidence, enabling us to live as people of hope in the midst of it all - come what may!

May 21? It's a Saturday and I'll just have returned from Science Camp (more on that later this week). I'm hoping, on that day, to either be climbing with my son, backcountry skiing with my wife, or going on a long bike ride. And if the world ends? I hope I'll be found loving God, loving the people in my world, and stewarding the precious days and gifts I've been given.

My deepest hope for you? Exactly the same thing!

How does your view of the 'end times' affect your daily living?

Joining the Dodos

Rick Bundschuh — Wed, 23 Mar 2011 11:35:52 -0700

Apparently I and those of my ilk are headed for extinction. At least that is what a group of mathematicians have determined for the “religious” folks of a number of European countries.

Frankly, this doesn’t really bother me. In fact I kind of wonder why it has taken so long?

The stiff and unimaginative way that we Christians have “done church” often makes me wonder why we have any market share at all. After all, boredom and church are many times found intertwined in the same bed.

But while we Christians have been dithering about and majoring on the minors, those who make a buck entertaining and amusing us have been getting better and better at their job.

Not that it is the job of the church to entertain or amuse (although I do think that we have hardly lifted the veil on the immensely entertaining and hilarious nature of God) we Christians have been mandated to offer something to the world that can’t be found anywhere else, something so authentic, so wondrous and so in cahoots with mankind’s deepest longings that it can’t be ignored.

And of course if we are reading the Scripture it is pretty obvious that we should expect to be a minority. We were told that the world would not be our friend (John 15:8) and Christ made it clear that faith would be a lonely journey along a narrow path. (Matthew 7:14) Poor Elijah lived in a culture that so abandoned God it made him think he was the last of the spiritual dodo birds.

It may not be such a bad thing for religion to go extinct. Maybe it has inoculated our culture in such a way that it has made people somewhat impervious to the real message of the Gospel.

Perhaps this is just what God needs to happen in order to break through, fresh, dynamic and wildly unique in a world that has medicated and amused itself into numbness.

I will give Pascal, that witty observer of all these kind of things the last word; “God alone is man's true good, and since man abandoned him it is a strange fact that nothing in nature has been found to take his place."

More Than 40 Days

Chuck Bomar — Thu, 10 Mar 2011 08:36:38 -0800

Today marks the beginning of Lent and many people will begin giving up something they really enjoy as a point of focus and preparation for Easter. Typically we give up things like coffee, television, Twitter, Facebook, a certain food, etc. I think this can be a very good challenge, but let’s not get it twisted.

These are not “sacrifices,” they are setting aside a luxury that few people in the world get to enjoy. They can be a focusing point for us and for a brand new believer this might be a very good first step. But someone who has been following Jesus for a while shouldn’t view giving up these little luxuries as a sacrifice and ought to be very leery of feeling super spiritual because they gave them up for 40 days.

Consider putting forth an intentionally gospel focused challenge for yourself this Lent season. Jesus didn’t say in order to follow him we had to give up a luxury for a certain amount of time. He told us we had to give up all of ourselves, for life. So let’s use Lent as a time to focus on that calling. This is a process for all, so let’s commit to using this season as taking a step in this direction. Let’s give up something that is actually hindering us from following Jesus whole heartily. And, let’s not make the challenge for ONLY 40 days….let’s make these the FIRST 40 days of truly working toward the giving up of our entire lives.