Category: hmm… thoughts

This is a developing thought. Not perfect, just capturing a thought for later use.

All of my formative training centered on the idea that the ideal church emulated the early church. Obviously, Christianity was born out of Judaism, so the early church took on a structure they knew.

the synagogue, at the synagogue you went to hear from the rabbi. He was the local expert on the faith. So, in early Christianity, pastors took on a similar role. As modern churches have tried to emulate how the early church operated, it’s been expected that church would work this way. The people come to their pastors to discuss their faith, their practice, to learn about God, etc. In the ancient world, the synagogue and the rabbi were pretty much the only access point to "know about God." And today’s modern church has some remnant of that in their assumptions. (We assume that people primarily come to us to discuss what they don’t know about God/the Bible.)

But I’m wondering how that works in the day we live in. The question right now isn’t access, as it was in the ancient world, as people can go pretty much anywhere, listen to anyone, read anyone’s messages, and even get online degrees in theology on their own without their local church. I wonder if the metaphor for the ideal church in the near future won’t be the synagogue, it will be agora.

The agora, in the Greek city state, the agora was the marketplace and forum. It was an open air place where people from the town gathered to shop and discuss everything.

I wonder if in today’s digital age where people have access to all sorts of ideas, if the ideal metaphor for church will shift from the synagogue to the agora. If it is, it drastically changes how we train ministers. It drastically increases the amount of apologetics that we do as we help people sort out the difference between what they hear in the agora and what the Bible says. (For fun, start listing out syncretisms of American culture and the Bible)

Can the church exist in the agora? It certainly did as Paul traveled in the ancient world and it would today.
Just read Acts 17.

Still a developing thought, it is rich with theological questions, but it has me wondering this Thursday morning.

Last night I was talking to someone and the word "saddleback" was used in an almost cuss word kind of way. It was like, "We aren’t that, are we?" (As if the purpose driven model was created in the pit of hell by satan himself.) While I was talking and reassuring this person that our ministry model isn’t like Saddleback’s at all, I started thinking to myself internally… "I actually know people at the church this person thinks is bad, and those people aren’t bad people, in fact they are great people. They love Jesus as much as I do."

So I want to be 100% clear. There really isn’t any doctrinal difference between what Saddleback believes and what Romeo believes. At least not significantly different, maybe like 1% total. (While I’m at it, I can say the same thing about Willow Creek, I know people there too! I couldn’t tell you a single difference between their doctrinal statement and ours. They believe what we believe.)

So, what’s the difference? Why is it that people look at those two churches and say their church names as if they are a cuss word?

1. They are doing church in a model that is different than ours. Not a little bit different, but a lot different. I wouldn’t classify either of their church models as "bad" (though some obviously do) and I certainly wouldn’t consider their church models "wrong." (How can you say leading thousands of people to Christ, with a doctrinal statement strikingly similar to our own as "wrong?") They are simply addressing their communities needs in the most culturally relevant way they can in their community as the Bible instructs us to do. It’s fine with me that people in our church look at their model and see it as too uncomfortable for them, it wasn’t a model designed for them! It was designed for the people of Lake Forest, California and South Barrington, Illinois. Fall in love with the model that we’ve designed for Romeo. It was designed by our leaders, especially for our needs.
2. People in small churches tend to look at bigger churches and think "If they are that big, certainly they’ve done something wrong." I can’t explain that thought but as I mentioned in a message 2 weeks ago, I think it’s rooted in two fears. First, it’s a fear that God can’t do that with the people you know. Second, it’s the fear that if God does that our church will grow and "feel" different.
3. There are people who think that how those churches reach people is wrong, and those people are vocal. I won’t provide links, but there are many very conservative church leaders who very vocally oppose the methods these churches use. I simply fail to see why these people attack other churches. Perhaps if they focused on their own ministries more, they too could be as effective?

So, as that phone call ended I couldn’t help laughing at myself. What if there are people who say my name or our churches name as if it’s a cuss word. How would I feel about that?

Yesterday I had the pleasure of talking to some more people about retreats. About 6 months ago I challenged Jason Raitz to an "article debate" to discuss the topic of retreats in youth ministry. It wasn’t all that heated of a debate and it really didn’t generate much of a response on YMX.

Then in December, a website for Christian Camping picked up my side of the debate and sent it around to a thousand or so camp directors with an admonition to "talk about this article with your staff." So several hundred did just that… and a few people contacted me. (Which were mostly fine and positive.)

The point isn’t the article. The point is that the internet is powerful. I have rules for this very purpose. Rule #1 is "Don’t publish anything you wouldn’t want your mother to read." See, I’m ok with what I wrote about retreats. I’m not ashamed of a single word I published.

But there are things written and talked about on the internet all over the place that could cause people to lose their job, lose their status, or otherwise cause harm to themselves. See, when someone presses that "publish" button it’s not reversible. The internet is powerful, it spreads and multiplies. There really is no such thing as "internet privacy" for blog posts, myspace, facebook, xanga, livejournal, wordpress, typepad, blogger… it’s all "findable" and it all will one day be found. Even deleting it really won’t work since you can always use other sites to go backwards… most people don’t know that.

I’m very careful about what I say. I respect the power of the internet to make or break my life. I journal online for a lot of reasons. But I’m always aware that anything I say can and will be used against me at some point.

I was just listening to one of my favorite speakers, Tony Evans. He was preaching on the idea that you can’t buy happiness.

Here are some quotes…
You can buy a vacation, but you can’t buy rest.
You can buy a house, but you can’t buy a home.
You can buy a bed, but you can’t buy a good nights sleep.
You can buy a good education, but you can’t buy intelligence.
You can buy a crucifix, but you can’t buy salvation.

We are constantly being lured into this lie that everything that will make us happy lies on the outside of who we are. For me, it’s a lie that lives below the surface and rears its ugly head when I see someone with something I’d like to have but couldn’t ever have myself. I think, "I’d really like to have a hot tub." or "I’d like to go on that vacation." or "I’d like to repair ____ around the house."

In the core of my gut I know that if God’s truth didn’t dwell in me that I’d be more prone to chase these dreams. I’ve been around long enough to know that if I worked hard enough and if I manipulated my situation enough and if and if and if… I really could have all of those things that I want. I’ve proven that to myself already. I know I could get all of that stuff that I want. But I also have chased that enough to know that happiness is not there. I could chase that entire adventure… but I chose not to for something better.

I think it was learning this simple truth that Tony Evans teaches so well that saved me a world of heartache. True happiness is not found in the Bahamas or in a hot tub or if I have the best looking house on the block. Those are all nice things, but they can’t provide the happiness that comes from contentment.

contentment: noun happiness with one’s situation in life

I may not be the richest or most influential person in the world. I may not be as… whatever… as I had one day dreamed I would be. But what I am is more content than I ever thought I could be. I’m at a state in life where I’m saying to myself… "No matter what people say about me, no matter what happens to me, no matter how good or bad things go in 2007, I’m content."

The next challenge of contentment… how do I lead other people there?

I’m a person who often gets type casted as "negative" about a lot of things. On the recent podcast, Todd jokingly said "Is there anything you do like, Adam?"

Of course, there are a lot of things I like.

In fact, having conviction about what I like and love is what gets me labeled as a negative person. In Christian circles, people go with the flow too much. No one likes to teach critical thinking skills because it’s easier to lead people who aren’t thinking critically. The result of decades of that is that Christians equate critical thinking to negativism. But, can I remind those people that out of great critical thinking and debate the world has seen great reformations? Many of the great institutions of the world resulted in critical thinking and debate which led to action.

So when someone like me comes along and says… "Let’s think about how we’re doing ____." And when those opinions that are expressed are honest evaluations of the status quo, you get labeled as being negative.

The fear is that conviction will lead people to action. And status quo always wants to fight that. In the past I’ve openly questioned some of the biggies in the Christian world.

• I don’t care for Christian ministries involving themselves in politics, like Focus on the Family does.
• I don’t like it that Christians mix consumerism with the birth of Christ, so I get labeled as a Christmas basher.
• I don’t think that the local church should support every thing that is labeled "Christian." So, I get labeled as someone who doesn’t like Christian concerts, events, camps since I’ve found them to be ineffective.

The fear of the status quo is that if people like me begin to question them, it will effect their bottom line. See, everyone has a vested interest… and when people stand up and say, "Hey, I’m not sure we should be doing this." people who make money off of what I’m questioning get upset.

If you’ll remember Paul in Ephesus in Acts 19. Demetrius, the silversmith, wasn’t questioning what Paul was saying, he was upset that what Paul was saying was effecting the local economy. The same thing happens to me. The funny part to me is that the responses I get only prove my point all the more. Rarely do Christians combat someone questioning them with an open debate. Instead, they chose to either write me off or slander me by calling me "negative."

I guess I have to deal with fact that some people will always call me negative. Maybe God will break my heart and I will one day fall in love with the status quo. But until then, as always, I invite open discussion. If there are people who don’t like what I’ve said or written… I like a good debate. The invitation is there.

I’m not a post-modern deconstructionist.  One way I easily get written off is that I get labeled. What does he know, he’s a youth pastor? He’s just idealistic. He’s just another one of those post-modernists.

What’s funny is that I’m not any of those things. While you may see some deconstruction… I like to paint the picture for the better way. I would label myself a biblical reconstructionist. 

In light of the "heavy" post below, this is what happens when you are attracted to someone in ways that aren’t physical. You do stuff that makes no sense whatsoever. You are creative in ways you never saw yourself being creative, and you take wild risks to do stuff… like this.

On behalf of men everywhere… women… don’t expect a custom cartoon as a way to be proposed to. Settle for the diamond.

It’s interesting to me how many students are caught in the allure of vanity.

allure (uh-loo-r) v.

1.	to attract or tempt by something flattering or desirable.

2.	to fascinate; charm.

Did you catch the root word there? Lure, as in fishing lure, the nice yummy shiny object that makes fish think it’s OK to eat it. But when they bite into it they discover a hook that stabs their mouth, drags them from the world they know, and results in them getting fried up and served for a meal.

Doesn’t sound so exciting anymore, does it? Well vanity is pretty exciting to adolescents… they are like bugs to a bug zapper with it. They almost can’t help themselves. Here are the two most common ones I see in Light Force.

(more…)

I’m glad this made it onto YouTube, this is classic David Letterman.

A statement of the obvious. We knew you were a bad boy… no here is proof. (It was all in the tie, the tie gave away your "badness")