Ed Stetzer

Church Signs of the Week & Weekly Wrap- February 10, 2012

2012-02-10T13:00:00Z

Earlier this week from Ed Stetzer

The Baptist Bogeyman

Thursday is for Thinkers: Jen Hatmaker

Big Apple, Big Problem: 3 Reasons NYC School's Church Ban Is a Mistake

A Closer Look: The Message and Lifestyle of the Apostles

Beyond My Church: A Book Interview with Jason C. Dukes

Monday is for Missiology: Seeing Missional in 3D

Church Signs of the Week

For this week's church signs, I present a riddle and a rhyme.

Thanks to Anthony Stephens and Chris Davis for these. As always, send me your signs on twitter @EdStetzer.

Thursday is for Thinkers: Jen Hatmaker

2012-02-09T16:00:00Z

In case you missed the 2012 debut of Thursday is for Thinkers, last week we kicked things off with Sally Lloyd-Jones.

My guest this week is Jen Hatmaker. Jen and her husband, Brandon, live and serve in Austin, TX, where Brandon pastors Austin New Church. You may be familiar with Jen's new book as well-- 7: An Experimental Mutiny Against Excess.

Jen will be dropping by the blog today to answer questions and respond to comments, so be sure to leave a comment before you go.

I like the name of this series: Thursday is for Thinkers. See how creative Ed is? I named my blog, um, "Jen Hatmaker." Catchy. Really casts vision.

Anyway.

As it turns out, I have indeed been thinking some things. I'm thinking that I read constantly these days about the state of the western church and its imminent decline. We hear of church buildings foreclosing, congregations shrinking and dying, and others coasting in utter stagnation. It seems we can't draw the next generation or even keep the ones we've got.

I'm thinking how people outside the church walls are giving us the collective eye roll and tuning out the white noise of our Christian rhetoric. And why wouldn't they? We're putting coffee bars in our 30 million dollar sanctuaries while the world burns down outside our windows. Evidently this bothers people and seems inconsistent with the humble, radical Savior we say we love.

I'm thinking of this sticky observation, one we're not sure what to do with, and it is this: most of our churches are churning out untransformed people.

This doesn't resemble at all the early church, where folks met Jesus and their lives careened wildly off course. They were called lunatics, heretics. Like the pagan satirist Lucian (130-200 c.e.) mocked: "The earnestness with which the people of this religion help one another in their needs is incredible. They spare themselves nothing for this end. Their first lawgiver put it into their heads that they were all brethren."

Here's what I'm thinking, spiritual leaders: We cannot expect to develop transformed disciples of Christ, radical in word and deed, hopelessly devoted to the suffering and the poor and the lost and hungry, when our own lives do not reflect the gospel mandates Jesus was so obsessed with.

When Brandon and I sat down with Shane Claiborne four years ago, confused and buckling under tension, asking new questions and trying to figure out if Jesus was serious about all that stuff he said about poor people, Shane said to us:

"Care for them yourself first."

(We were hoping for a leadership model or some structural scaffolding, Shane.)

I'm thinking a spiritual leader on mission in his or her own life is the best possible catalyst for the movement of the Spirit within a faith community. Leaders, strip away the sermons and administration, the staff meetings and endless details of it all. Step outside the tidy boundaries where you spend your time serving saved people and blessing the blessed. What do your folks see? How do they view you radically emulating Jesus? What can they point to in your regular life as an ordinary believer and say, "That. That is legit."

We are leading the Body of Christ in a time and place where 'well done' trumps 'well said.' People are hungry for inspiration, for something big and important and meaningful to give their lives for, and I'm afraid our heady theological words and redundant Christian dialogue isn't doing the trick anymore. Show me a transformed pastor living a brave, revolutionary life, and I'll show you a transformed church under his leadership.

I'm thinking it's time to unpack what Paul meant when he said, "Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ" (1 Corinthians 11:1). In a culture where Christianese has lost all meaning and we've forfeited our right to be heard after decades of turning a blind eye to a suffering world, I'm afraid the only way back is to actually live out the gospel. Right in front of people. With our real hands and real time and real money and resources and gifts in our real homes and real neighborhoods, serving real people who are sad and lonely and sick and hungry. If Jesus was right, then the literal goodness of the Good News is compelling, so maybe we better figure out how to get the "good" back into our story.

Because people are watching.

I'm thinking this could actually change the world.

Jen Hatmaker is the author of nine books and Bible studies, including Interrupted and 7: An Experimental Mutiny Against Excess. She speaks all over the United States. She and her husband, Brandon, lead Austin New Church in Texas where they are raising their five kids - three the old-fashioned way and two recently adopted from Ethiopia. Follow her ministry and blog at www.jenhatmaker.com.

Morning Roundup - February 9, 2012

2012-02-09T12:00:00Z

Churches Go Less Formal to Make People Comfortable -- USA Today

Ron Williams is the pastor of Church at the GYM in Sanford, Fla. As the Baptist church's name implies, Williams' congregation meets in a gym. Williams says the goal is to remove the "stained-glass barriers" for people who might not be comfortable in traditional church settings. To make people feel more comfortable, Williams wears jeans. In the warm Florida climate, some members wear shorts. Other clothing types, from urban wear to biker gear, also are welcome.

Comfortable is a theme that's becoming common among churches taking advantage of new, non-traditional spaces. Across the country, churches are springing up in unexpected locations -- movie theaters, skating rinks, strip malls and old warehouses, among others -- in an effort to welcome people who may not feel comfortable in more traditional settings.

Planned Parenthood's Hostages -- Wall Street Journal

So how did Planned Parenthood and its loyal allies in politics and the media react to Komen's efforts to be neutral in the controversy over abortion? Faced with even the tiniest depletion in the massive river of funds Planned Parenthood receives yearly, the behemoth mobilized its enormous cultural, media, financial and political apparatus to attack the Komen Foundation in the press, on TV and through social media.

The organization's allies demonized the charity, attempting to depict the nation's most prominent anti-breast cancer organization as a bedfellow of religious extremists. A Facebook page was set up to "Defund the Komen Foundation." In short, Planned Parenthood took breast-cancer victims as hostages.

On Komen Controversy, Media Told Half the Story -- CNN

Some claims of media bias are overwrought. But here, the media wasn't even trying to hide its advocacy on behalf of Planned Parenthood. And in so doing, the media only told half the story.

The media bought Planned Parenthood's public relations campaign hook, line and sinker. Planned Parenthood argued that Komen's decision to stop funding was "political." This was the way most media outlets framed the entire story. But logic dictates that it's not more political to stop funding Planned Parenthood than it is to keep funding it.

We're talking about the country's largest abortion provider, an organization that performs 330,000 abortions a year. According to Gallup polls from recent years, about half the American population identifies as pro-life while half identify as pro-choice. If you don't have a sense for how controversial abortion is, you simply shouldn't be in journalism.

Missio Nexus Debuts as Largest Evangelical Mission Network in North America -- Christian Post

The merger of two dominant mission associations in North America culminated Monday with the public unveiling of Missio Nexus, which is now the largest evangelical mission network in North America.

Missio Nexus, formed through the marriage of CrossGlobal Link and The Mission Exchange, will represent 35,000 evangelical missionaries deployed in every country by more than 200 agencies and churches.

Top evangelical leaders across North America convened for a special service held Monday in Boston that celebrated both the debut of Missio Nexus and the 200th anniversary of North America's first ordained missionaries.

Social Media Explained with Donuts -- Three Ships Media

Big Apple, Big Problem: 3 Reasons NYC School's Church Ban Is a Mistake

2012-02-08T15:50:00Z

A few weeks ago, I spoke to a church in New York City that is now vulnerable to eviction from the school building where they meet because they spoke of the wrong things - religious things. As such, their speech is soon likely to be banned from NYC public school buildings that sit empty and unused on the weekend.

According to city officials, worship in a public facility -- when the schools are not even in session -- is too much mixing of church and state so they've ordered dozens of churches evicted by February 12.

I agree with most Americans who believe this is wrong-headed.

In a recent study by LifeWay Research, two-thirds of Americans believe public schools should rent to churches and other community groups (click on the image to enlarge). For that matter, school districts across the country have shown their agreement by renting to thousands of congregations every weekend.

Until recently, religious groups have been legally permitted equal access to public buildings. But recently the U.S. Supreme Court let stand the ruling of a lower court, which approved the New York City Department of Education's ban, opening up NYC churches to lawful eviction. So, legally the city government can enforce a ban, but just because it's legal doesn't mean it's best for our communities and our country.

Churches benefit communities

Schools and churches make their communities better and the public knows it. According to a 2011 Barna Research study:

Three-quarters of U.S. adults believe the presence of a church is "very" (53%) or "somewhat" positive (25%) for their community. In contrast, only one out of every 20 Americans believes the influence of a church is negative.

It seems odd for a municipality to ban something from public buildings that their constituents strongly view as positive.

The New York Law Department, however, disagrees, stating:

We view this as a victory for the City's school children and their families. The Department was quite properly concerned about having any school in this diverse City identified with one particular religious belief or practice.

Most Americans see churches as partners in the community, but the NYC school system sees churches as a threat rather than a benefit. They are mistaken.

Discriminating on the basis of the speech content is against our values

The NYC municipal government contends religious speech should be banned from public school buildings to avoid confusing our children. (Remember churches use the schools when school is not in session.) Yet, the Long Island public school I attended as a child had plenty of religions present--and NYC today has nearly every faith represented. Allowing individuals to worship in empty public buildings does not confuse children about religion. To the contrary, it affirms our commitment to religious freedom.

Father Richard John Neuhaus wrote against stripping religion from our institutions. Neuhaus believed religion is a public endeavor, not an enterprise best kept underground. I'm not one who believes in the war on religion by the secular elites, but it is hard not to see a problem with what Yale University scholar Stephen L. Carter called 'the culture of disbelief' in his book by the same name. The book, introduced to many by President Clinton, reminds us that banning public religion threatens the individual liberties of millions of Americans.

Religion-neutral is better than religion-hostile

Any constitutional concerns about church use of public school buildings can be answered by a religion-neutral approach. A government that is religion-neutral we will not discriminate based on the content of speech--even unpopular religious speech. Thus, I stand with my Muslim friends who wish to rent on Friday, my Jewish friends on Saturday, and my Christian friends on Sunday--all paying money to use space that belongs to us all.

The rationale that leads to a ban like the one enacted by New York City follows the principle that in order to avoid poisoning young minds, we must strip religion out of our lives, and essentially relegate it like pornography to the back of the store. Yet metro NYC includes a robust mixture of the cultural and religious milieu. Renting empty public buildings, with the income going to under-resourced schools, benefits many and imposes nothing.

We need to decide if religion is a danger to our culture that should be banned from the public square, or something to be valued and protected. I desperately pray it is the latter.

For Further Reading from NYC Religion:

• OpEd: Tim Keller on "NYC School's Decision to Ban Churches"

• Massive march for fairness to NYC churches

• Hunger strike ends, fasting begins. Worship in public school controversy enters new stage on Sunday.

• Protest movement grows, Bronx Pastor willing to die to oppose city policy against churches meeting in public schools

• Temperature check: how the crowd outside see the Bloomberg administration

• Waves of pastors, professors, politicians, lay people arrested at Bloomberg's annual State of City gathering

• New York City, Church and Civility. OpEd by Mac Pier, NYC Leadership Center

• NYC public housing authority pulls Christmas Pearl Harbor on religious groups

A Closer Look: The Message and Lifestyle of the Apostles

2012-02-08T13:00:00Z

I've written on apostles on two occasions-- consider the meaning and the usage today. Today we take a closer look at the term apostle-- both what it means and who they were. In his short essay, Michael J. Wilkins provides a clear, biblical understanding and application of the term.

As I'm doing all year long, I am giving away a free HCSB study Bible to a commenter. To be entered to win this week's giveaway, share with us your thoughts on the term and the people we know as apostles.

The apostles of the New Testament lived through what is arguably the most significant era of human history. They experienced the personal entrance of God into history in the person of Jesus Messiah, and their lives were permanently changed. Their transformation catapulted them into the entire then-known world with the message of what they had experienced--the arrival of the kingdom of God and salvation in Jesus' name.

The term apostle has a significantly different meaning than the word disciple. "Disciple" is the term used to designate all those who have believed in Jesus and have followed Him as their Savior. The title "apostle" designates those who have been commissioned to be leaders of the church and Jesus' representatives with the gospel message. From out of the large group of His disciples, Jesus chose the Twelve to be sent out as His apostles (Lk 6:13-16).

Therefore, coming from the verb apostello, which means "to send someone away to achieve an objective," the noun "apostle" indicates a "sent one" or "messenger." It occurs in the NT in at least four ways.

Four usages of "Apostle" in the New Testament

First, the term is used especially to refer to the "twelve apostles" who were eyewitnesses of Jesus' earthly ministry. They were first sent out to Israel with the gospel message of the arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:1-7), and after Jesus' death and resurrection they were sent out with the gospel message to make disciples of all nations (Mt 28:18-20). They witnessed Jesus' resurrection appearances, which Luke tells us demonstrated the reality of Jesus' victory over death and the certainty of the kingdom of God in this age (Ac 1:2-3). They were among the first to receive the filling of the Spirit at Pentecost (Ac 2:1-4), and their preaching of the gospel established them as the foundation of the church (Eph 2:20). After Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus and killed himself, another eyewitness of Jesus' earthly ministry and resurrection, Matthias, was added to the Eleven (Ac 1:21-26).

Second, the term apostle also refers to those who saw the risen Lord and were commissioned by Him for ministry (cp. 1Co 9:1). This is the sense in which Paul identifies himself as an "apostle of Christ Jesus" (1Co 1:1; 2Co 1:1; Col 1:1). He was not one of the Twelve (e.g., 1Co 15:3-11; Gl 1:17-19), but Jesus granted him a unique apostleship to the Gentiles (Gl 2:8-9).

Third, the term apostle can have the more general sense of "missionary." This was the case for Barnabas (Ac 14:4,14), perhaps Timothy and Silvanus (cp. 1Th 1:1; 2:7), and Andronicus and Junia[s] (Rm 16:7). The last may have been a husband-wife team; they were commended by Paul for spreading the gospel along with the other apostles.

Fourth, the term apostle sometimes referred more broadly to "messengers of the churches" who were sent out to perform certain tasks (2Co 8:23). This includes among others, Epaphroditus, who was sent as a messenger to minister to Paul by the church at Philippi (Php 2:25-30).

These different types of apostles had different roles, but what they had in common was either their encounter with Jesus in His earthly ministry or in His risen and ascended ministry, or else their being directly commissioned by one who had met these qualifications. And their transformation in understanding Jesus' identity as God incarnate, offering salvation to the world, became the foundation of their message. The Twelve and Paul are dramatic examples.

Diversity and unity among the Apostles

The Twelve displayed a remarkable personal diversity. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John were partners in a successful fishing business on the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:9-11). Matthew was a hated tax collector (Mt 9:9-13), seen as a traitor because he worked for the Roman occupying government extracting as much tax as he could from his own people. Simon the Zealot was a revolutionary who was willing to die for the cause of liberating Israel from Rome. In normal circumstances these men might be ready to stick a knife in each other, but their individual encounters with Jesus transformed them into a cohesive unit dedicated to declaring Jesus to be the only way to eternal life (cp. Jn 6:67-69).

Peter's preaching at Pentecost is an example of his dramatic transformation from one who denied Jesus to one who fearlessly preached to the multitudes in Jerusalem. His message was clear: "Repent . . . and be baptized, each of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. . . . Be saved from this corrupt generation!" (Ac 2:38,40). For over 30 years Peter traversed the ancient world proclaiming the same message, until finally the Roman government executed him. But Rome couldn't silence the message, for the church continued to proclaim the gospel fearlessly in the face of persecution.

The apostle Paul was a former Pharisee (Php 3:4-6). The Pharisees were well-known critics of Jesus (Mt 12:14), and Paul himself actively persecuted the church as a Pharisee (Ac 22:3-4). But after his encounter with the risen Jesus on the road to Damascus, Paul was radically transformed from an enemy to one who gave the rest of his life as a servant of Jesus. Paul's own testimony of what produced the transformation
is found in his letter to Titus. He speaks of his former life of foolishness, malice, envy, and hatred (Ti 3:3), but then says:

"But when the goodness of God and His love for mankind appeared, He saved us--not by works of righteousness that we had done, but according to His mercy, through the washing of regeneration and renewal by the Holy Spirit. He poured out this Spirit on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that having been justified by His grace, we may become heirs with the hope of eternal life" (Ti 3:4-7).

The apostles seem an unlikely group to be used by Jesus to establish the church and proclaim His message of salvation and transformation. But what empowered them was not their own charisma or powerful preaching, nor an ambition to create a movement. Rather, it was the operation of the Spirit that caused their transformation into the image of Jesus, which then impelled them to proclaim Jesus' glorious message of salvation and hope of change to the entire world.

Michael J. Wilkins
Ph.D., Fuller Theological Seminary

Breaking the 200 Barrier Webcast (NOW COMPLETED)

2012-02-08T00:00:00Z

Download Growth Barriers Booklet

Growth Barriers Conference Webcast

Breaking the 200 Barrier

February 7, 2012 • 7:00 pm--9:00 pm

Speaker
Ed Stetzer, President of Lifeway Research

Topics
• Information for church leaders to assist in understanding the inherent barriers to growing the church to her God given size.
• Focus on assisting leaders to develop a strategic plan for their barrier.

Beyond My Church: A Book Interview with Jason C. Dukes

2012-02-07T16:00:00Z

I've known Jason Dukes for a few years now. A pastor in the Orlando area, Jason and his local congregation focus on being the church, doing life together, and giving themselves away. They emphasize "living sent" - being a letter from God communicating His love and hope in the message of their daily lives among all whom they encounter. As someone who frequently talks and writes on our "sentness," you can easily see the connection Jason and I share.

In Jason's new book Beyond My Church, he explores the essentials of church unity and explains how it can become part of the DNA of your local church expression.

Feel free to jump in with questions and comments. Jason will be coming by the blog today to dialogue.

Beyond My Church - lots of places you can go with that title. What's the premise of the book?

We all have fervently prayed for personal awakening and community revival before, but how fervently have we taken Jesus' prayer in the Garden for us, His church? He prayed that He had given the same mission to us that had been given to Him, and furthermore for the maturity of our oneness so that the world might believe in Him, the One who was sent. But do we ever prioritize unity as followers of Jesus together in a city, cultivating for the maturity of our oneness (unity) in practical ways? We must. Through our unity around mission, what are normally self-absorbed local churches will put on display the transforming, near love of God so that the people of our communities will see and know the presence and evidence of the sent One, Jesus.

Is this a book that only pastors and paid church leaders can appreciate, or can every follower of Jesus begin to think and live beyond their church, and if so, how?

It is absolutely a book for every follower of Jesus. Two reasons why. First, unfortunately, many pastors live either under the pressure to "grow their church," which is an extremely anti-biblical thought, or they live stifled by their own insecurities, which creates a sense of competition and distrust between local leaders. Often times, our distinctive understandings of secondary theological ideals hinder pastors' connection, as well. Thus, it is imperative that every follower of Jesus lead out in cultivating for unity around mission among followers of Jesus in a city, therefore encouraging their pastors to emphasize and prioritize for it.

This can be done in the very ways that they cultivate for "beyond me" living in their families, among their neighbors, in the marketplace, among leaders in the city where they live, and even in the ways that they think of the church in the city. There is actually one chapter per each of those topics in the book, offering suggestions for how "beyond MY church" thinking and living can be cultivated. We need a vision for "on earth as it is in heaven" in the communities where we live, not a vision for succeeding as individual local churches. And followers of Jesus who make up those local church families can be key catalysts in enabling and allowing their leaders to feel secure to think and live "beyond MY church."

You mention in the book that this thinking and living is a must for the local churches of a city in order for the "work of God" to happen in the city where they live. Why do you think that is such an imperative?

Very simply, because the Bible tells me so. In John 17:18-23, Jesus prayed specifically for the maturity of our oneness as His followers SO THAT the world might believe in the One who was sent. Well, in John 6:29, Jesus taught that the work of God is "that you believe in the One that He has sent." Jesus is praying, then, for the maturity of our oneness so that the work of God might happen. Maybe all of our prayers for personal awakening are being hindered by our lack of praying and prioritizing and cultivating for the maturity of our oneness. Maybe we could live as an answer to Jesus' prayer and then see the very thing for which we are praying! The work of God might then come alive in our cities in ways we never imagined. This is not easy to surrender to, however, for the consequences could very well threaten the very systems we currently have in American church culture. But those would be worth giving up if the work of God happened in our communities, wouldn't they?

Specific to pastors and church leaders, give three practical suggestions as to how they can think and live beyond their church in the next month?

• take devoted time in Sunday worship gathering to solely pray for another local church expression and their leaders and their ministries and their fruitfulness.

• allow that "put the interests of others above your own" stuff to also apply to local church expressions, and commit some time every week to working toward the encouragement and success of another local church leader and ministry.

• put aside petty differences and serve the community together in ongoing, relational ways with no one local church's name tagged on the project, but rather for the sake of "on earth as it is in heaven" in your community.

Monday is for Missiology: Seeing Missional in 3D

2012-02-06T16:00:00Z

The term missional is commonly used in conversations among Christians today. The earliest known usage of the word missional occurred in 1883 in The Heroes of African Discovery and Adventure, by C.E. Bourne, and its next usage materialized in 1907 in The Age of Justinian and Theodora by W.G. Holmes, though neither of these occurrences uses the word the way it is used today. As the term has grown in popularity, it brings with it some theological concerns, challenges, and opportunities.

The defining missiological debate in mission history has been the relationship between "church and mission," which has become a catalyst for three dimensions of missional: missionary, mission, and the missio Dei.

The Church as "Missionary"

In 1910, John Mott called the leaders of the evangelical world to the World Missionary Conference in Edinburgh, Scotland. The conference's ambition was to carry the gospel to the entire non-Christian world (compare Luke 9:1-6). The Edinburgh conferees formed a committee that gave birth to the International Missionary Council (IMC) in 1921. The IMC's humble beginnings were an international collaboration between Protestant missionary societies. After 1921, the IMC--and later the Worldwide Council of Churches (WCC)--became the ecumenical vehicle by which many groups moved toward greater cooperation (Hedlund, Roots of the Great Debate in Mission, 39).

One of the most important early meetings of the IMC was the 1938 conference in Tambaram (also called Madras), India. The meeting included a focus on the centrality of the local church and its engagement in mission. William Hogg said, "In a day when many regarded the historic church as an unnecessarily appendage to 'the Christian spirit,' Madras brought a new awareness of the church's importance" (Hogg, Ecumenical Foundations, 297-278).

The Tambaram conference called the church to be the bearer of the Gospel in every sphere of life (Moreau, ed., "Tambaram Conference"). After the meeting, it was no longer possible to talk of mission without directly linking to the church--the church is God's missionary to the world (Acts 17:24-29). Francis Dubose, who used the word missional to reflect this sense in his 1983 book, God Who Sends, said he intentionally used the word to focus on the church as "missionary."

Tambaram's linking of mission and the church did not go without opposition. Former Indian missionary and Methodist theologian, E. Stanley Jones, questioned this emphasis, fearing that the substitution of the church for the Kingdom of God might fleece the missionary movement of the "needed fires of imagination, enthusiasm, and self-criticism" (Phillip, Edinburgh to Salvador). However, the Tambaram conference was clear and reminds us that a missional focus reminds us that the church is God's missionary in the world.

The Church Has a Mission

The 1952 IMC conference in Willingen, Germany, was themed "The Missionary Obligation of the Church." The theological debate on the missionary responsibility of the church became a topic of controversy, and the conference failed to accept the report on this subject. Dutch theologian J.C. Hoekendijk, whose opposition influenced the future of the conciliar missions movement, particularly resisted this church-centric view of mission in a paper entitled "The Church in the Missionary Thinking." Hoekendijk protested the "ecclesiocentric" view of missions and blamed the IMC conference of Madras for mission's propensity towards "churchism."

Willingen rejected Heokendijk's position and also affirmed that the missionary obligation of the church was found in the nature of God: "There is no participation in Christ without participation in His mission to the world..." (Goodal, ed., Missions Under the Cross, 180-190). The church changed from being the sender to being the one sent (compare John 20:21). This calling shows the self-revealing activity of God, who is the author of both church and mission (Georg Vicedom, The Mission of God). David Bosch says, "This evolution meant a momentous shift in the understanding of the church and mission" (Bosch, Transforming Mission, 371).

Charles van Engen popularized the term missional in his 1991 book, God's Missionary People: Rethinking the Purpose of the Local Church. He uses missional to talk about the types of relationships that the church has with culture--ambassadors, foreigners, pilgrims, etc. In an e-mail correspondence, Van Engen shared, "My understanding of 'missional' derives from what I would call a 'classical understanding' of mission: that women and men, through personal faith and conversion by the work of the Holy Spirit, would become disciples of Jesus Christ and responsible members of Christ's church."

Thus, the Willingen meeting and later people like Charles van Engen reminded us that a missional focus exhorts us that the church is on a biblical mission.

The Church Joins in the Missio Dei

After Willingen, a group that included Hoekendijk issued a rival report that pulled "missionary thinking away from the 'church-centered' model" and spoke "more of God's work in the secular world," apart from the church (Newbigin, Unfinished Agenda: An Autobiography, 138). This view--that the church is to join God in what he is doing in the world--became the prevailing view soon after the Willingen conference. Thus, the missio Dei became the focus of mission and mission was seen as originating as an attribute of God (building on an emphasis from Karl Barth decades earlier). Furthermore, Lesslie Newbigin's consolidated committee report signified a clear embrace of the Trinitarian grounding of missionary action. In Newbigin's version, missio Dei is movement from God to the world, and the church serves as an instrument for that mission.

The missio Dei movement would take new directions in the decades following Willingen--and those directions led to problematic theological and missiological conclusions that cannot be adequately traced in this brief article. In short, Hoekendijk (and others that followed) sought to define the missio Dei as larger than the church. He challenged the member bodies in the WCC to abandon the traditional form of church and missions. He held that the congregations should abandon their buildings and institutions and become bands of roving ministers, believing that the time for evangelistic mission work had passed. Hoekendijk's adaptation of missio Dei ultimately became a churchless mission and had wide-ranging impact on future missiological conversations.

However, theologians and missiologists would seek to reclaim that emphasis and focus on the missio Deiv with an emphasis more similar to the conversations that followed Willingen.

In the 1990's, Darrell Guder, editor and contributor for the Missional Church (1998), traces his view of the missional church through Vatican II (which was influenced by the post-Willingen conversation): "The church on earth is by its very nature missionary since, according to the plan of the Father, it has its origin in the mission of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Decree on the Church's Missionary Activity, 813, as quoted in Darrell Guder, Walking Worthily: Missional Leadership After Christendom, 252). Guder's desire was to take the best of the missio Dei conversation, mostly before its later expressions, and to rally around the missio Dei idea.

Thus, the focus on the church joining in the missio Dei, bearing witness to what God was doing in the world, was reengaged with a new (and for the first time widely embraced) term: missional.

Thus, a missional focus reminds us that the church is joining God on his mission, the missio Dei.

An Unchurchly Mission = An Unmissionary Church

Through the conversations at Tambaram, Willingen, and immediately after Willingen, most missiologists would agree that the church is to live as God's missionary agent, to be focused on the biblical mission, and to join God in the missio Dei.

The conferences mentioned and the emphases they provided are helpful in defining these dimensions. However, there are also errors to be avoided, namely a mission that does not include the church Newbigin has said, "An unchurchly mission is as much a monstrosity as an unmissionary church" (Newbigin, The Household of God, 169). Every Missional thinkers who root ideas in the historical debate over "church and mission" must be careful not to end up where the IMC movement led which was a "churchless" mission. The church as missionary led to the church having a mission, which then led to the church joining the missio Dei. Unfortunately, the IMC took it one step further by insisting that the missio Dei was to be found outside of the church.

In today's church conversations, there is a resurgence of the idea of a missional church. In its untainted sense, missional finds the inseparability of "church and mission" from God himself. In Matthew 16, Jesus tells Peter that He will build His church through him, the gates of hell will not overcome it, and that He will give Peter the "keys of the Kingdom of heaven." The "keys" are the authority given to the church, including the opportunity to present individuals with the Gospel--the message of salvation (Acts 15:7-9; Barton, ed., Life Application New Testament Commentary, 76). Here is the strongest connection between "church and mission." The church's mission involves Kingdom expansion--but God uses the church as his Kingdom tool. The disciples--a proto church--are indeed sent (John 20:21) on a Kingdom mission.

The church remains the fellowship through which our Lord promotes and advances His purposes. Its mission is not secondary to its being; the church exists in being sent and in building itself up for the sake of its mission. It has best been said, "Missionary activity is not so much the work of the church as simply the Church at work" (Power, Mission Theology Today, 41-42).

May the church discover its missionary passion, mission focus, and missio Dei orientation.

Morning Roundup - February 6, 2012

2012-02-06T12:30:00Z

Last week, Komen for the Cure decided to no longer fund Planned Parenthood. The uproar was immediate and overwhelming from Planned Parenthood and the media.

Here is a recap:

Komen Says Planned Parenthood Plans Are Mischaracterized -- USA Today

The founder of Susan G. Komen for the Cure said Thursday that there had been a "gross mischaracterization" about the group's controversial decision to stop funding breast exams at Planned Parenthood.

Komen, the country's largest breast cancer charity, gave $680,000 to Planned Parenthood last year to provide health education and breast exams to poor and uninsured women. Komen, which helped popularize pink ribbons as a symbol of breast cancer awareness, will not renew most of those grants because of a new policy denying money to groups under investigation. Planned Parenthood is being investigated by Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., for possibly using taxpayer money for abortions.

The controversy hasn't hurt Komen financially, Brinker said: Contributions "are up 100% in the past two days." Planned Parenthood also got a boost from the controversy, raising $650,000 in the 24 hours after the news broke, with an additional $250,000 pledge from New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Then, Komen changed its mind, to the disappointment of many:

UPDATE from The Christian Post:

[Friday's] surprise announcement by the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation to reverse its decision to fund Planned Parenthood has pro-life groups and advocates shaking their heads. The reversal will mostly likely alienate supporters on both sides, causing even more trouble for the breast cancer group.

The nation's leading advocate for breast cancer awareness previously gave abortion provider Planned Parenthood millions of dollars in grants, including at least $700,000 in 2011 alone.

"Well, I think one of the benefits that has come from this saga is now the broad majority of Americans realize the Komen connection to the world's foremost abortion provider," Brian Harris, the director of Tennessee Right to Life, told The Christian Post. "Millions of pro-life Americans - who have momentum now - will know to avoid any involvement with Komen until they become consistently committed to protecting all human life."

The group's announcement on Tuesday that they would no longer continue funding Planned Parenthood brought abortion supporters - most notably a group of Democrat U.S. Senators, out of the woodwork - thus creating some intense political drama that most likely contributed to the reversal.

What is creating even more drama is Friday's reversal of their previous decision.

Thom Rainer put out this statement:

Statement on the Komen Decision from Dr. Thom Rainer, LifeWay president and CEO:

I am deeply disappointed with Friday's announcement from Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation if it means a reversal of Komen's decision to stop funding Planned Parenthood. I renew my strong encouragement of Komen's leadership to end that relationship permanently, and restate LifeWay's commitment to not be involved, even indirectly, with Planned Parenthood.

Eight GetReligion Comments After Eight Years -- GetReligion.org

Eight years ago, the Rt. Rev. Douglas LeBlanc clicked a button with his mouse and GetReligion went live. I wrote the first post on Feb. 1, 2004, but the site actually kicked into gear the next day.

So, this is GetReligion's eighth birthday. What should we do in order to celebrate, in the midst of another crazy working week? Here are eight observations about what I have learned in eight years of work here.

1. GetReligion is not a blog about religion news.
2. Lots of people hate religion and lots of religious people hate journalism.
3. What we are dealing with is a Blind Spot with two sides. In other words, the two halves of the First Amendment do not get along very well.
4. The bottom line: The state of American journalism will be improved by people who love journalism, not by those who hate it.
5. No one knows what the word "evangelical" means, including evangelical leaders.
6. When in doubt, reporters should accurately quote people -- rather than continuing to slap vague and often inaccurate labels on their foreheads.
7. When specific flocks of religious believers keep saying, year after year, that journalists are printing inaccurate information about what they believe, journalists should (a) take that seriously and then (b) tell these believers to come down to the local newsroom with stacks of on-the-record reference materials that explain the basics.
8. At some point in the future, there's going to be a story that involves Episcopalians, same-sex marriage, Mormons, post-Vatican II liturgical rites and vampires and the server that hosts this blog is going to blow up.

Write it Down -- Brad Lomenick

Young leaders consistently ask me: "what's one practical piece of advice for becoming/being a leader who gets things done?" A leader that is trustworthy and reliable. The kind of leader when you ask them to get something done, you have complete confidence that it will happen.

My answer is always the same: Write It Down. Always. What do I mean?

1. Never show up to a meeting without a pen and a notebook.
2. Carry a pen and notebook with you wherever you go.
3. Create a system for organizing your ideas and thoughts.
4. One of the most important, if not THE most important person in the room during a brainstorming or creative session is the notetaker.

By doing these things, it frees you up to have energy to be creative, think outside the box, dream, and ultimately have a list that works and a way to keep a running account of what items are on your list to get done.

Super Bowl Commercials

The Skechers ad below ran last night during the Super Bowl. It's reported that "Mr. Quiggly" was a late replacement for another Skechers ad that was to feature Kim Kardashian. I think they made a good choice.

What was your favorite commercial from the big game?

Church Sign of the Week & Weekly Wrap

2012-02-03T13:00:00Z

Earlier this week at EdStetzer.com

Thursday is for Thinkers: Sally Lloyd-Jones

A Closer Look: Incarnation and Christology

Evangelical Convictions: A Conversation with Greg Strand about the Evangelical Free Church's Doctrinal Statement Revision

Monday is for Missiology: Three Important Church Trends and the Elephant in the Church

Saturday is for Seminars: The D6 Conference in Frisco, TX

Church Signs of the Week

Since this weekend marks the end of the NFL season, it's only appropriate that we celebrate with more Tebow. Thanks to Drew Clayton and Josh Weaver for these.

As always, send me your signs on twitter @EdStetzer.

Thursday is for Thinkers: Sally Lloyd-Jones

2012-02-02T16:00:00Z

Today marks the 2012 debut of my Thursday is for Thinkers series, and I am pleased to welcome Sally Lloyd-Jones to the blog. Over the next few months I will sharing guest posts from Kelly Minter, Jen Hatmaker, Eugene Cho, and a host others.

Many of you know Sally as the author of the Jesus Storybook Bible. We have the book and use it in our home. The unique quality found in many of Sally's books is the Christo-centric nature in which she directs the story. So today, I asked her to talk about that and how she shapes the stories she writes. Sally will be interacting today on the blog, so feel free to ask questions you may have in the comments below.

People have approached me, holding up one of my children's books, flicking through it backwards--awful for a writer because it implies the order of the words don't matter--and cheerfully announcing, "I'm going to do one. I mean. REALLY. How hard can it be?"

How many of us would dream of going up to a surgeon and saying, "I'm going to do an Angioplasty. I mean. REALLY. How hard can it be?"

That people feel free to say this about children's books tells you a lot--not so much about what they think of children's book writers. That's not important. It tells you what they think of children.

I think it's because they don't have a high enough view of children.

Our proper attitude before children should be humility. We need to be writing up to children--never down.

It also tells you something else: that they have too low a view of Story.

What is the lesson in that story? What is the message? I'm often asked that. But a story is not a sermon.

As writers we know we better not preach on the page. Our job is to tell a story. Not teach a lesson. If we have an agenda, a message in code we want to get across, a moral we want to teach in our writing--it might be an excellent lecture. But it won't be a good story.

It's too low a view of what a story is, of what a story can do. A story can do more than teach you.

A story can transform you.

One Sunday, I was reading the story of Daniel and the Scary Sleepover to some 6 year olds. One little girl in particular was sitting so close to me she was almost in my lap. Her face was bright and eager as she listened to the story, utterly captivated. She could hardly keep on the ground and kept kneeling up to get closer to the story.

At the end of the story there were no other teachers around and I panicked and went into automatic pilot and heard myself--to my horror--asking, "And so what can we learn from Daniel about how God wants us to live?"

And as I said those words it was as if I had literally laid a huge load on that little girl. Like I broke some spell. She crumpled right in front of me, physically slumping and bowing her head. I will never forget it.

It is a picture of what happens to a child when we turn a story into a sermon.

When we drill a Bible story down into a moral lesson, we make it all about us. But the Bible isn't mainly about us, and what we are supposed to be doing--it's about God, and what he has done through Jesus!

When we tie up the story in a nice neat little package, and answer all the questions, we leave no room for mystery. Or discovery. We leave no room for the child. No room for God.

Our focus needs to be not on giving all the right answers. But on raising the right questions.

There may be things just above the children's heads. They may not know every word. They may not understand everything. But let the story do its work, let the language weave its spell.

And then let children do what they love doing best--standing on tiptoes.

A Chinese proverb says: "A bird doesn't sing because it has an answer, it sings because it has a song."

Sally has a new picture book out all about love. Its called Just Because You're Mine. How does a daddy love his little squirrel? Is it because he so fast? Or strong? Or brave? Or good? He's all of those things but the answer is a heartwarming testament to the bond between a parent and a child and the nature of unconditional love. You can connect with Sally online here.

Morning Roundup - February 2, 2012

2012-02-02T13:00:00Z

How Do You Preach a 'One Time' Sermon? -- Ed Stetzer at The Gospel Coalition

Whether someone is preaching in view of a call, filling in for a vacationing pastor, or performing a wedding, every pastor will have to deliver a "one time" sermon at some point. Deciding what to preach or how to preach can be a challenge, especially if the pastor is young and doesn't have a handy sermon stashed away in his back pocket for these occasions. However, it's harder when you are the guest preacher with a single topic. I think you can go about it in two legitimate ways.

1. Preach a text on a topic.
2. Preach a topic with texts.

The Pro's and Con's of Planting a Church In a Movie Theater -- Brandon Cox

We didn't intend to launch in a theater. I fact, we spent a great deal of time looking at retail spaces, but eventually landed at the Malco because of space, price, and availability. There's a part of me that fell in love with the idea before we moved in, and has remained attached to it since.

The advantages: The rent is great, decorating is done, we don't have to stack chairs, the cultural barrier between the church and the community around the church that is automatically gone, the acoustics are great, there's a screen, kids think that going to kids' worship in a theater is awesome, we have community visibility, and the theater personnel are wonderful at both the local and corporate levels.

The disadvantages: We only have access on Sunday mornings until noon, altar calls are tough to figure out, the loading and unloading & setting up and tearing down, lighting is an issue, sometimes the movie posters in the lobby scare the children, sometimes there is the remnant odor of popcorn...which could fit in either category, actually.

How to Make Your Company More Social -- Mashable

A business becomes more inherently social by going beyond the corporate Twitter account and Facebook Page. A social business engages the entire company, from CEO to executive assistant. Take advantage of the opportunity to foster your company's internal community and teach valuable social media skills as the space rapidly grows and evolves. But how do you get everyone on board?

1. Give Interactive Tutorials
2. Focus on Fun Ways to Use Twitter
3. Find Influencers Within the Company
4. Launch a Fun Contest or Internal Campaign
5. Engage
6. Get creative!

Four Practical Reasons for Small Groups -- Rick Warren

We may attract attenders through preaching, but disciples are made in small groups. Small groups provide the kind of accountability and support we need to mature as believers, so I want to give you four reasons why they are important to your congregation. As you lead your congregation toward a deeper relationship with Jesus, you'll want to explain to your members why small groups are so important to their spiritual growth and why they are more than just a Bible study.

1. Small groups are relational.
2. Small groups are flexible.
3. Small groups are expandable.
4. Small groups are economical.

Happy Groundhog Day

A Closer Look: Incarnation and Christology

2012-02-01T16:00:00Z

Much has been said over the past week about the nature of the Trinity and the three persons which make up the God-head. This week's essay, featured in the HSCB Study Bible, is penned by Stephen J. Wellum. In his essay, Dr. Wellum takes a closer look at the human and divine natures--commonly known as the hypostatic union--of Christ, the second person in the God-head.

As I'm doing all year long, I am giving away a free HCSB study Bible to a commenter. To be entered to win this week's giveaway, share with us your thoughts on Christ and his incarnation.

The word "incarnation" derives from a Latin word developed from in + caro [flesh], which literally means "in the flesh." In Christian theology the term refers to the supernatural act of God, effected by the Holy Spirit, whereby the eternal Son of God, the Second Person of the Triune Godhead, took into union with Himself a complete human nature apart from sin. As a result of that action, the Son of God became the God-man forever, the Word made flesh (Jn 1:1,14; Rm 1:3-4; 8:3; Gl 4:4; Php 2:6-11; 1Tm 3:16; Heb 2:5-18; 1Jn 4:2).

The means whereby the incarnation came about is the virgin conception, commonly known as the virgin birth--the miraculous action of the Holy Spirit in the womb of Mary--so that what was conceived was fully God and fully man in one person forever (Mt 1:18-25; Lk 1:26-38). He did this in order to become the Redeemer of the church, our Prophet, Priest, and King, and thus to save His people from their sins (Mt 1:21). By becoming one with us, the Lord of Glory not only shares our sorrows and burdens, He is also able to secure our redemption by bearing our sin on the cross as our substitute and being raised for our justification (see Rm 4:25; Heb 2:17-18; 4:14-16; 1Pt 3:18).

The Humanity and Deity of Jesus in Scripture

Biblical evidence for the full deity and humanity of Christ is abundant. In regard to His humanity, Jesus is presented as a Jewish man who was born, underwent the normal process of growth and development (Lk 2:52), experienced a full range of human experiences (e.g. Mt 8:10,24; 9:36; Lk 22:44; Jn 19:28), including growth in knowledge (Mk 13:32), and the experience of death (Jn 19:30). Apart from His sinlessness, which Scripture unequivocally affirms (Jn 8:46; 2Co 5:21; Heb 4:15; 1Pt 1:19), He is one with us in every way.

Scripture also affirms that the man Christ Jesus is also the eternal Son of God and thus God equal with the Father and Spirit. From the opening pages of the NT, Jesus is identified as the Lord: the One who establishes the divine rule and inaugurates the new covenant era in fulfillment of OT expectation-- something only God can do (e.g. Is 9:6-7; 11:1-10; Jr 31:31-34; Ezk 34). That is why Jesus' miracles are not merely human acts empowered by the Spirit of God; rather they are demonstrations of His own divine authority over nature (e.g. Mt 8:23-27; 14:22-23), Satan and his hosts (Mt 12:27-28), and all things (Eph1:9-10,19-23).

Because He is God the Son, Jesus has the authority to forgive sin (Mk 2:3-12), call Himself the fulfillment of Scripture (Mt 5:17-19; 11:13), view His relationship with the Father as one of equality and reciprocity (Mt 11:25-27; Jn 5:16-30; 10:14-30), and do the very works of God in creation, providence, and redemption (Jn 1:1-18; Php 2:6-11; Col 1:15-20; Heb 1:1-3).

Theological Expression of Jesus' Natures

Later church reflection, especially at the Council of Chalcedon (a.d. 451), affirmed that we cannot do justice to Scripture without confessing that Jesus of Nazareth was fully God and fully man. God the Son, who gave personal identity to the human nature He had assumed and did so without putting aside or compromising His divine nature, must be confessed as one person who now exists in two natures. Additionally, Chalcedon affirmed that we must not think that the incarnation involved a change in the properties of each nature so that some kind of blending resulted which was neither divine nor human, as the Eutychians wrongly affirmed. Rather, we must affirm that the properties of each nature (human and divine) were preserved so that Jesus is all that God is in all of His perfections and all that we humans are except in terms of sin.

This affirmation entails at least two important points. First, the man Jesus from the moment of conception was personal by virtue of the union of the human nature in the person of the divine Son. At no point were there two persons or two centers of self-consciousness, as the Nestorians wrongly affirmed. That is why in our Lord Jesus Christ we come face-to-face with God. We meet Him, not subsumed under human flesh, not merely associated with it, but in undiminished moral splendor. The deity and humanity coincide, not because the human has grown into the divine, but because the divine Son has taken to Himself a human nature for our salvation. He is the divine Son who subsists in two natures, who has lived His life for us as our representative head, died our death as our substitute, and been raised for our eternal salvation. This is why the Lord Jesus is utterly unique and without parallel and thus the only Lord and Savior.

Second, since in the incarnation the eternal Son took to Himself a human nature, He can now live a fully human life. Yet He was not totally confined to that human nature as if for a period of time the divine nature was divested of its attributes or function. That is why Scripture affirms that even as the incarnate One, the divine Son continued to uphold and sustain the universe (Col 1:15-17; Heb 1:1-3) even while He lived out His life on earth as a man dependent upon the Father and empowered by the Spirit (Jn 5:19-27; Ac 10:38).

Our affirmation of the biblical Jesus is beyond our full comprehension, but it is only in such a Jesus that we have One who can meet our every need. Apart from Him as God the Son incarnate, we do not have a Redeemer who can stand on our behalf as a man, let alone satisfy God's own righteous demand upon us due to our sin. After all, it is only God who can save us. By becoming one with us, our Lord not only becomes our sympathetic Savior, He also accomplishes a work that saves us fully, completely, and finally.

Morning Roundup - February 1, 2012

2012-02-01T12:00:00Z

Komen Drops Planned Parenthood Support -- Christianity Today

Facing criticism and boycotts from pro-life groups, breast cancer charity Susan G. Komen for the Cure has dropped its partnership and financial support of Planned Parenthood and its affiliates, the Associated Press reported today.

Komen spokeswoman Leslie Aun told the Associated Press that the recent controversy with LifeWay was not the reason for the break with Planned Parenthood. Instead, she said, newly organizational rules against grants to groups under governmental investigation came into play when U.S. Representative Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) launched an inquiry.

Planned Parenthood, which conducts breast exams but not mammograms, received more than $600,000 from Komen last year. (One pro-life group put the number at $629,159. Planned Parenthood told the Associated Press that the grants were about $680,000.) Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards said the organization is "alarmed and saddened that the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation appears to have succumbed to political pressure."

Richards also indicated that "existing agreements or plans" between Komen and Planned Parenthood will continue, but that Komen Foundation officials have notified Planned Parenthood programs that they are ineligible for new grants.

Read the full article here

J.D. Greear on a Gospel-Centered Church -- Timmy Brister

1. In a gospel-centered church, preaching the message of the gospel is the priority.
Greear: "The gospel is an announcement that Jesus is Lord and that He has won the battle for your salvation. We are to respond in repentance and faith (Mark 1:15). The gospel is not good advice about how to live; it is good news about what God has done. Jesus told His disciples to be 'His witnesses,' which meant they were to tell everyone, faithfully, the story of what He had done for the world. Their lives would certainly demonstrate the changes His power brought in their lives, but they were to constantly point to what He had done that made those changes possible (222)."

2. In a gospel-centered church, the emphasis of the message is more on what Christ has done than what we are to do.
Greear: "... the only thing that brings true spiritual growth is abiding in-dwelling in, thinking about, standing in awe of-what Christ has done for us" (223).

3. In a gospel-centered church, the members demonstrate the beauty of the gospel in community.
Greear: "... by doing what healthy local churches do (praying, sharing, constantly preaching the word, etc.), [the early church] were evangelizing the community. The presence of a healthy local church in a community is the greatest catalyst for the evangelization of that community. In a healthy church the local community should see the glory of God on display" (229).

Read the full article here

When a Small Church Staff Is Better -- Craig Groeschel

Based on my experience, when LifeChurch (or a specific campus or team) is slightly overstaffed, forward progress generally slows. When we are slightly understaffed, we usually take more ground.

Here are my theories on why smaller is often better when it comes to staff:

When you have more staff members, the roles are often clearly defined and can lead to "that's not my job" mindsets. Smaller staff teams are forced to work together and innovate creating unity and a spirit of collaboration.
Bigger staffs take more time and energy to manage. Smaller staffs move quickly.
When more money goes to pay staff, less money goes to expand the ministry.
When more people are paid, it's easier to stop building volunteer leaders, which eventually weakens the foundation of the church.
A larger team might unconsciously not work as hard as they would otherwise

Read the full article here

A Good Summation of All Blog Arguing -- Zach Nielsen

Evangelical Convictions: A Conversation with Greg Strand about the Evangelical Free Church's Doctrinal Statement Revision

2012-01-31T16:00:00Z

In 2008 the Evangelical Free Church of America adopted a newly revised Statement of Faith. You should give that a read. It's a solid confessional statement that works at connecting each statement to the gospel.

Greg Strand, the EFCA's Director of Biblical Theology and Credentialing, worked on Evangelical Convictions: A Theological Exposition of the Statement of Faith, a book that gives clarity to the theological convictions contained in that Statement, spelling out what is affirmed and what is denied (and what is not addressed). His exposition of the Statement is clear, while avoiding a lot of technical theological terms making the book accessible to as wide an audience as possible.

I spent a few days with the EFree leadership at what is called their Mid-Winter Ministerial. I was impressed with their process and thought it worth sharing with you. I was surprised to see that pre-millennialism ended up an essential (see that information below). My denomination is MUCH more specific on most doctrinal issues, but does not require a pre-millennial view (though historical pre-millenialists, like me, are certainly welcome!).

Greg, can you explain what led to the writing of this book?

From 2003-2008, the EFCA was engaged in a revision of their Statement of Faith. The culmination of that revision was reached in June 2008, when the denominational Conference adopted a new Statement of Faith. In order best to understand it and to provide teaching resources for it, it was necessary to provide a companion, a "theological exposition" or commentary to the Statement of Faith. In this way we could expound its truth, clarify what it says and means, and also state what it does not mean.

By the way, the lengthy discussion and final decision was extremely healthy for the EFCA. There was great interest along the way. It revealed a biblical and spiritual vitality in our movement. Interestingly, in an article for CT last year, you made reference to this denominational discussion and decision and also concluded it was healthy: "Orthodoxy is more likely to remain established in denominations with clear faith statements. Confessional anchors have prevented drift in such denominations as the Assemblies of God, the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, and the Evangelical Free Church."

How is the book structured?

It follows the 10 Articles of the Statement of Faith. After an introductory chapter explaining what it means to be Evangelical in two senses, the broader Evangelical stream of which we are a part, and the more narrow Evangelical Free Church of America, there is a chapter on each of the Articles: God, The Bible, The Human Condition, Jesus Christ, The Work of Christ, The Holy Spirit, The Church, Christian Living, Christ's Return, Response and Eternal Destiny. If one wants to read through the actual Statement of Faith, they can do that at the EFCA website: http://www.efca.org/about-efca/statement-faith

As I read the new Statement of Faith I was impressed at how each article connects to the gospel. It's even reflected in the subtitles of the book chapters.

That is right; there is a clear and explicit connection to the gospel that unites each Article into the whole Statement of Faith. So the chapters and subtitles look like this:

God: God's gospel originates in and expresses the wondrous perfections of the eternal, triune God.
The Bible: God's gospel is authoritatively revealed in the Scriptures.
The Human Condition: God's gospel alone addresses our deepest need.
Jesus Christ: God's gospel is made known supremely in the Person of Jesus Christ.
The Work of Christ: God's gospel is accomplished through the work of Christ.
The Holy Spirit: God's gospel is applied by the power of the Holy Spirit.
The Church: God's gospel is now embodied in the new community called the church.
Christian Living: God's gospel compels us to Christ-like living and witness to the world.
Christ's Return: God's gospel will be brought to fulfillment by the Lord Himself at the end of this age.
Response and Eternal Destiny: God's gospel requires a response that has eternal consequences.

This attempts to follow both a biblical theology framework, the connection with the gospel, along with a focus on systematic theology, the doctrinal headings.

There are no listed authors. Why is that?

That was very intentional. This is a different work than most Systematic Theology textbooks, for example Millard Erickson's Christian Theology or Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology, in that both of them end up espousing the author's position. EC is an attempt to spell out the denomination's theological positions, which is a good representation of evangelical theology. Though it was written by a couple of individuals, it was vetted by numerous others in the EFCA so that it truly became representative of the EFCA. Rather than people in the EFCA saying, for example, "President Hamel said this in Evangelical Convictions," it is much better in a denomination setting for people to say, "It says in Evangelical Convictions."

What is the goal of this book?

This is an attempt by a denomination, the EFCA, to focus on essentials, spell out some of the parameters, and exemplify charity in those areas of the significance of silence, viz. those areas of doctrine/theology which we will debate in the EFCA, but over which we will not divide. For those who abstractly talk about how to live life together under the gospel, and then end up either Reformed or Arminian/Wesleyan or divided on the ordinances, this is a concrete attempt to focus on essentials and live charitably together with the non-essentials.

One of the things I've heard from a number of people in the EFCA is that you "major on the majors, and minor on the minors." Do you feel the new Statement of Faith reflects unity around the essentials of the faith?

Yes. That explains why we put our congregational polity in the preamble, because even though it is our form of polity, it is not considered an essential of the gospel. Additionally, it is why we broadened our statement on eschatology beyond premillennialism for three drafts.

As stated by President Hamel, "the retention of pre-millennial eschatology was vigorously debated, but it was finally retained as a denominational distinctive and conviction rather than a gospel essential. This eschatology issue will need to be reviewed at some point in the future, but clearly the necessary two thirds majority for passage could not be reached by leaving it out."

When we reinserted premillennialism, which was an EFCA distinctive, we could no longer with integrity refer to the SOF as "essentials." This means the EFCA motto has to be tweaked a bit. Instead of saying that we, the EFCA, "major on the majors and minor on the minors," such that we are unified in the essentials of the gospel of Jesus Christ and grant liberty in the non-essentials, we say that we "mostly major on the majors and mostly minor on the minors." In essence, though the EFCA retains its premillennial position, it is clearly a distinctive, not an essential of the faith. This is clearly spelled out in the book.

There is a lot of debate today around the historicity of Adam and Eve. Do you address this, or other contemporary theological issues in the book?

Yes, we did. This is a critical area of discussion among Evangelicals today, the age of the universe and the historicity of Adam and Eve. Let me give you an example from the book (both the statement and the accompanying footnotes) that shows how we have addressed these two important issues respectively.

The EFCA states clearly and explicitly in our Statement of Faith, Article 1 that God is "Creator of all things." We have spelled out some parameters in the EFCA on the matter of creation in Evangelical Convictions: A Theological Exposition of the Statement of Faith of the Evangelical Free Church of America; 34:

To be sure, Genesis 1 expresses truth about God as Creator and his creation, but because of the uncertainty regarding the meaning and literary form of this text and the lack of Evangelical consensus on this issue, our Statement does not require a particular position on the mechanics of creation. However, to be within the doctrinal parameters of the EFCA, any understanding of the process of creation must affirm:

That God is the Creator of all things out of nothing (ex nihilo)
that He pronounced his creation "very good,"
that God created with order and purpose,
that God is the sovereign ruler over all creation which, by his personal and particular providence, he sustains, (9)
that God created the first human beings--the historical Adam and Eve--uniquely in his image,
and that through their sin all humanity along with this created order is now fallen (as articled in our Article 3). (10)

9 We deny the notion that God is simply the Creator of the universe but is no longer active in it, as is espoused by deism.

10 This Statement does not speak to the precise process of creation or to the age of the universe. To be acceptable within the EFCA any views on these specifics must completely affirm this Statement of Faith and align within these essential parameters.

Regarding the creation of Adam and Eve as recorded in Genesis and the significance of their uniqueness as historical figures and that they are the first created beings in the image of God (and that this truth is being questioned today by some and denied by others), it is important to note the following theological truth from Evangelical Convictions: A Theological Exposition of the Statement of Faith of the Evangelical Free Church of America, Article 3, B. The Significance of Adam and Eve, 76-77:

There are legitimate differences of opinion about how one understands the nature of the language used in the early chapters of Genesis to describe the actions of God in the world. However, our Statement affirms that Adam and Eve were historical figures(16) in the following sense: 1) From these two all other human beings are descended (Acts 17:26).(17) 2) These two were the first creatures created in God's image such that they were accountable to God as responsible moral agents. And 3) these two rebelled against God, affecting all their progeny.(18)

What is essential to the biblical story-line is that the problem with the world is not ontological-that is, it is not a result of the material nature of creation itself nor is sin an essential part of our humanity.(19) The problem is moral. The first human beings from the very beginning, in a distinct act of rebellion, chose to turn away from God, and this act not only affected all humanity (cf. Rom. 5:12-21), but creation itself (cf. Rom. 8:18-25). This leads us from considering the dignity of humanity to acknowledging our depravity.

16 The historical reality of Adam and Eve has been the traditional position of the church (so Tertullian, Athanasius, Augustine, Calvin) and is supported elsewhere in Scripture. Particularly, Paul compares the "one man" Adam with both Moses and Jesus (cf. Rom. 5:12, 15-19; 1 Cor. 15:20-22). In addition, Luke traces the genealogy of Jesus back to Adam (Luke 3:23-37; cf. also 1 Chron. 1).

17 We take no position on the manner in which the human soul is passed on, either by natural heredity ("traducianism") or by a unique work of God in each life ("creationism").
18 Consequently, no human beings existed prior to these two, and, consequently, no human beings were sinless and without the need of a Savior.
19 This also gives us hope that human beings can be redeemed from sin.

This is not just a book detailing what the EFCA believes, but it also aims at the heart and life of believers. Can you talk about that a bit?

My prayer for the book is that it would effectively push three important elements: Orthodoxy, orthopraxy and doxology. We wanted to be faithful to "the faith once for all entrusted to the saints" (Jude 3). In light of the necessity in Statement of Faith revisions to address contemporary ways in which the faith is being undermined, we believed it was also important to include some statements on orthopraxy.

For example, as Evangelicals it is one thing to affirm the inerrancy and authority of the Bible. It is another thing to live under that authority in life and ministry. The end of Article 2 on The Bible addresses this: "Therefore, it is to be believed in all that it teaches, obeyed in all that it requires, and trusted in all that it promises." (We were influenced by the wonderful statement made in the document the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy.)

And finally our prayer was that this ought to lead to doxology, or praise and worship of our great God. The Statement of Faith begins "God has graciously purposed from eternity to redeem a people for Himself and to make all things new for His own glory" and ends doxologically "to the praise of His glorious grace. Amen."

Though this is limited to the EFCA, how would you see this being used more broadly?

Ken Kantzer, former Academic Dean of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, our EFCA school, and who is now with the Lord, used to say that TEDS was the Free Church's gift to broader evangelicalism. In many ways, this could be said of the denomination as a whole, our desire is to serve the gospel of Jesus Christ beyond the EFCA. Our goal and prayer is that maybe this book can serve as an example/model to other denominations or associations of how to attempt to focus on essentials, spell out some of the parameters, and exemplify charity in those areas of the significance of silence. If it were used in this way beyond the EFCA, we would be grateful to the Lord.

If readers are interested, here is a link to an interview with Bill Hamel, the President of the EFCA.

Greg will be at the blog interacting today. Feel free to dialogue about the content here or ask Greg questions.