I am normally one of those people who attempts to see the good in all things. I continually tell people that they need to calm down. “Get a grip.” I tell them. “Things are not as bad as they seem.” “You have to look at the good.” But today is not one of those days and the issue is not one of those issues. The alarm is sounding and I don’t plan on handing out earplugs.
It has been over a decade since Mark Noll penned the piercing words: “The scandal of the Evangelical mind is that there is not much of an Evangelical mind” (The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind). Sixteen years to be exact. It was a call for Evangelicalism to recover from the spiritual atrophy brought about by a neglect of the mind in favor of a shallow form of Christianity that offered no history, creed, or hope, only self-help remedies without any foundational basis.
Since this time, a lot has happened. But, broadly speaking, not too much progress toward a reformation of the mind. Biblical and theological literacy continues to shame us. We have seen the children of Evangelicalism turn bitter and pout about their heritage, demanding that all things must change, but not really knowing why or how. They began to implement a sour change that gave birth to a short lived movement without a sustainable or defendable creed, and no certain hope.
We have seen the iconic fall of the “seeker” mentality when Willow Creek admirably confessed that their method of discipleship was bankrupt. According to Bill Hybels, leader of Willow Creek and the seeker-sensitive movement:
“Some of the stuff that we have put millions of dollars into thinking it would really help our people grow and develop spiritually, when the data actually came back, it wasn’t helping people that much. Other things that we didn’t put that much money into and didn’t put much staff against is stuff our people are crying out for.”
He goes on:
“We made a mistake. What we should have done when people crossed the line of faith and become Christians, we should have started telling people and teaching people that they have to take responsibility to become ‘self feeders.’ We should have gotten people, taught people, how to read their bible between service, how to do the spiritual practices much more aggressively on their own.”
As wonderful as this admission sounded to many of us, sadly, it seems as if it has been ignored by most. It is as if nothing happened. “Move along. Nothing to see here.” Business as usual for most.
What are “people crying out for”? I don’t think it is too difficult to answer. Lewis Sperry Chafer, founder of Dallas Theological Seminary, used to end each class with this admonistion: “Men, give them something to believe.” That is what people are crying about for: Something to believe. Truth. Not only this, but an understanding of the truth that they have ownership in. It is a stimulation of their minds, so that their hearts can be satisfied. It is teaching. Real teaching. Biblical teaching. Theologically and historically sound teaching. Teaching that relieves the scandal of their own minds which, in most cases I am afraid to say, have never really had a chance to believe. Like really believe. Not simply because of emotional persuasion. Not simply because they have a deep down feeling. Not because their parents or pastor believe this or that. But because they have seen for themselves, and now they know.
J.I. Packer, in a recent issue of Modern Reformation, speaks about the “Evangelicalism’s Winter.”
“It has often been said that Christianity in North America is 3,000 miles wide and half an inch deep. Something similar is true, by all accounts, in Africa and Asia, and (I can testify to this) in Britain also. Worshipers in evangelical churches, from the very young to the very old, and particularly the youth and the twenty- and thirty-somethings, know far less about the Bible and the faith than one would hope and than they themselves need to know for holy living. This is because the teaching mode of Christian communication is out of fashion, and all the emphasis in sermons and small groups is laid on experience in its various aspects. The result is a pietist form of piety, ardent and emotional, in which realizing the reality of fellowship with the Father and the Son is central while living one’s life with Spirit-given wisdom and discernment is neglected both as a topic and as a task. In the Western world in particular, where Christianity is marginalized and secular culture dismisses it as an ideological has-been, where daily we rub shoulders with persons of other faiths and of no faith, and where within the older Protestant churches tolerating the intolerable is advocated as a requirement of justice, versions of Christianity that care more for experiences of life than for principles of truth will neither strengthen churches nor glorify God.”
He goes on:
“The well-being of Christianity worldwide for this twenty-first century directly depends, I am convinced, on the recovery of what has historically been called catechesis—that is, the ministry of systematically teaching people in and coming into our churches the sinew-truths that Christians live by, and the faithful, practical, consistent way for Christians to live by them. During the past three centuries, catechesis as defined has shrunk, even in evangelical churches, from an all-age project to instruction for children and in some cases has vanished altogether. As one who for half a century has been attempting an essentially catechetical ministry by voice and pen, I long for the day when in all our churches systematic catechesis will come back into its own.”
He then speaks about the old Anglican dictum: “There are three priorities in pastoral ministry: the first is, teach; the second is, teach; and the third is, teach.” (Source)
When did we forget this? When did we become scared to teach? When did we start caring so much about what the world thought of our message? When did we quit loving people and start loving the world’s acceptance?
The recovery of Evangelicalism lies in the most obvious of all places. It is a recovery which requires us to gather up our dignity and preach the certain hope of the Gospel with passion and persuasion. Timidity and the Gospel are not bed-fellows. The time for doctrinal embarrassment is over if we are to survive. The song of cultural satiation must not be sung anymore. Evangelicals have a message and it must be preached. Evangelicals have doctrine and it must be taught. Evangelicals have a message and it must be told.
J. Gresham Machen says “False ideas are the greatest obstacles to the reception of the Gospel.” When did we forget this? When did false ideas become just other valid options that we don’t happen to agree with? False ideas are our enemy just as much as Satan, demons, pain, depression, poverty, and death.
How do we counter false ideas? By preaching and teaching true doctrine. But the simple fact remains that we cannot preach what we don’t know. Thus our plight. Thus our mission.
“And we proclaim Him, admonishing every man and teaching every man with all wisdom, that we may present every man complete in Christ.” (Col 1:28)
Result: Complete in Christ
When did teaching become secondary to everything else? How shall we escape if we neglect teaching?
We still are on a mission to recover the mind. We still are on a mission to recover the mind. We still are on a mission to recover the mind. Pick back up your weapons.
61 replies to "The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind Sixteen Years Later"
LOVE IT! I feel a renewed sense of urgency in my study after having read this! Thanks for the “preaching” moment.
Most curious. Not sure Noll was right in the first place. Confer Dr. Allen C. Guelzo’s feast on American religious thinking via the Teaching Company, “The American Mind.”
On the other hand, just perusing a very thoughtful engagement of the issues by Rev. Dr. R. Scott Clark, “Recovering the Reformed Confession.” He’s Confessionally Reformed and an Oxford-trained history teaching at Westminster California. His prescription, obviously, is for the recovery of the grand Reformation Confessions, but it goes to your salutary point about biblical and doctrinal preaching.
Beginning to track some on this Evangelo-Emergo-phenomenon. Today’s evangelicals will be tomorrow’s liberals. Same trajectory noted by B.B. Warfield, repeatedly, at the close of the 19th and early 20th century. It’s upon us who have Confessional roots.
Revivalism and experientialism have wrought significant injuries as well.
Regards and thanks.
Phil
Michael, I could sense the passion with which you have penned the post. I am increasingly saddened that the pulpits (in India) give the impression that our minds do not matter, and that our experiences alone count in the Christian life. Mind-less Christianity seems to be the norm of the day, and that is scandalous indeed! Thanks, Michael for increasingly pushing us towards re-claiming our minds!
Great post, Michael.
“When did we forget this? When did we become scared to teach? When did we start caring so much about what the world thought of our message? When did we quit loving people and start loving the world’s acceptance?”
I think Noll in his “America’s God” has a great answer for this. He records the shift in definition of who is considered a Christian from exclusive to inclusive concepts that are based more on piety and community than they are on doctrine and confession. What happened to Edwards is a great example of this. When we draw the circle larger, we must abandon that which divides us. We are left with the superficial elements that bind us, and any teachings that divide us must fall by the wayside. Evangelicalism’s modern answer to pluralism then is more pluralism. Christianity’s answer, however, needs to be the whole counsel of God, discipling by teaching ALL that Christ commanded.
Good post!
Christianity is about “orthodoxy” (right teaching) so why are we not “orthodox”?
A lack of proper teaching produces a people blown about by every whim of wind and wave.
You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink.
All that can be done is to preach and teach the word of God. Those who thirst will come and drink.
I agree with Cadis [#6 on 05 Jan 2010] and the quote that the US spiritually is 3000 miles wide and an inch deep. Jesus said that we are to preach the Word to all the world, and believe God for the results.
Thank you, Michael. I agree 100%. The current emphasis on experience and relationship at the cost of teaching correct doctrine and how we are to live as Christians has done very harmful things to the church as a whole. I have seen way too much of it in the last years to not know what a huge problem it is.
Wow, this is eerie. I started reading through Evangelical Hermeneutics by Robert Thomas. He talks about the shift in hermeneutics, its definitions and subsequent decline of evangelicalism. I was really struck by this citation he makes by David Wells,
I was contemplating if it was possible to back to the sufficiency of Scripture and reexamining our runaway hermeneutics or have we gotten so raveled in the extraneous bells and whistles, that that becomes the driving determinant of truth and gauges how aligned we are with it.
I don’t know what planet you guys are living on. The segment which is as you describe in my opinion is much smaller than we make it out to be, and it is really not getting that much bigger. Not only are evangelicals doctrinal, but they are dogmatic on far too many things and their list of orthodox doctrines is far too large. Doctrine is important, of course, but give me superficiality & passion/action vs. orthodox doctrine and coldness any day. Let’s learn to mix the two, and then we will have a movement that makes a difference. This will lead neither to the latest fad nor the movement towards a highly institutionalized form of church considered “historic.” It will be something different; something new.
Jesus Christ said if righteousness wont exceed pharisees u wont enter kingdom of heaven! how many hours do u think rabbis and jews study their Torah (and our Torah) ! thats where is our weakness!!
Bible studies in churches now days nothing more than chit chat!!
And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: 7 And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. (Deut 6)
Thanks for this reflection, Michael. I see it so much. People want Christ and are hungry for signs of His presence, but they imagine just about any kind of methodology to manufacture it, short of learning how to observe, interpret and apply the Word of God. That seems to be too much work. It is no wonder the cults and aberrant forms of church are out of control. I wish the Lord would dispatch 10 Puritans to our time-space continuum!!!
Bravo Michael, I can always count on you when it comes to posting the Truth. I have seen and heard so many Preachers, Ministers and lay persons state “We have to be very careful of what we say and where we say it.” If people are taught upfront what the Bible says, and what it means, then they wouldn’t have that mindset.
I quit worrying about what others say and just tell it like it is. “If I have to worry about who’s feelings are going to be hurt when I preach, I better quit preaching.” Is what I just told my Senior Pastor. I’m tired of others trying to tell us what we can and can’t preach or teach.
Great post.
Question: We talk about “teaching” and the need to “teach sound doctrine”. Paul seemed to know what sound doctrine was, but today ask ten church leaders from ten different denominations “what is sound doctrine” and you will in all probability get ten very different answers.
Many call for a return to teaching sound doctrine. I agree. Would someone please tell me what that means!
Thanks for listening.
Michael, can you tell me what resource was used for the quotes from Bill Hybels? A friend of mine was using Willow Creek programs in his church. I would love to pass this info on. I loved this blog…thanks for writing, and calling us to action.
Michael, it was from their annual report. I am not sure where to get that from, but htere are a lot of places that reference it out there: http://www.christianstandard.com/articledisplay.asp?id=969
This is a fascinating topic; emotionally arguing for comprehension of doctrine for the sake of holy obedience; awesome. This seems to be the substance of this post, and certainly is if the J. I. Packer quote and reference is considered central. Oh, the paradoxes of faith and obedience; how can we resurrect faithfulness in a faithless church culture.
I sat under Packer in a Systematic Theology class at Regent in the early 80’s, and I’m an admirer of his commitment to faithfulness in doctrine and life. I am, however, conflicted over the value of commitment to the grand creedal tradition which seems to me to have exchanged commitment to its own distorted conception of biblical doctrines while simultaneously abandoning obedience to the behavioral teaching of Jesus and the Apostles. I know, who am I to think I know better than the grand tradition what the truths of these two realms actually are; but this reflects the essential problem: how do we get back to the future of faithful piety? Reformed piety of the post Reformation era hardly seems to me to be the solution.
Suppose for the sake of argument that the church of the 4th Century didn’t abandon New Testament teaching on behavioral matters. OK, so in that case Jesus actually had intended to bring a political and military conquest to establish the Kingdom of God, force baptisms, relegate the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount to the ghetto of the religious orders, expect less than obedience of the masses of the spiritually unbaptized baptized, and enforce doctrinal conformity by the rule of the sword. Sarcasm aside, I realize I’ve exposed my Anabaptist radicalism; please don’t drown me in the rivers of your doctrinal systems to show how wrong I am. Oops, I can’t help myself: sarcasm front and center once again. I don’t expect any to raise the flag and salute, but really, are there not inherent flaws in emphasizing teaching without comprehending faithfulness first?
Now suppose that the 4th Century church did grasp the nature of faithful NT piety. In this case I’m inclined to think that just about any feeble form of “spiritual apathy” is acceptable within the church, especially if it favors emphasis of the mind (or at least verbal assent) over obedience. The church “gave them something to believe,” but didn’t require obedience to anything but its impoverished and minimized conception of faithfulness. I totally agree with Packer’s characterization of the church when he says that “realizing the reality of fellowship with the Father and the Son is central while living one’s life with Spirit-given wisdom and discernment is neglected both as a topic and as a task.” Still, how does one get there from here? Any approach to faithful catechesis is empty unless mainstream conceptions of it are abandoned in pursuit of absolute submission to the Jesus few have perceived or embraced. I agree with Packer that teaching is essential, but teachers that conform closest to the teaching of Jesus are few and far be
OK, the character limits weren’t revealed to me, so the rest of my post is here:
I agree with Packer that teaching is essential, but teachers that conform closest to the teaching of Jesus are few and far between, and are generally dismissed and discredited by those calling for a re-emphasis on teaching and catechesis, precisely because they believe they already understand the teaching of the New Testament systematically, dogmatically, and ethically.
God’s providential maintenance of the church(es) in spite of these (implied) failures is something of a problem for me personally: conceptually, intellectually, spiritually. If this is the best God can do, supporting and perpetuating these pseudo-faithful traditions and their catechisms, then wherein lies hope? Well, I do actually find encouragement in the mostly ignored persistence of the more biblical (uh, conservative?) efforts of the Mennonite churches, as well as in the more biblically based and sometimes applauded theologies of N. T. Wright, Chris Wright, Greg Boyd, Scot McKnight, etc.; and even more purely intellectually in others.
Please pray that my own emphasis on seeking God in Christ through my mind does not result in a symbolically sequestered intellectualism that fails to empower a faithful and practical piety that transcends both the inadequate focus on engagement of the mind and the powerless commitment to obedience without faith in Christ and the power of the Gospel, which in Christ alone enables personal redemption from sin and faithfulness to the full teaching of Christ in concept and consecration.
All the best to all in Christ our Lord, God, and Savior.
Richard Worden Wilson
To Derek,
I think that as long as the Protestant church continues to lithargically go with the grain of the relativistic culture we live in, sound Christian doctrine will hard to re-discover. So I lament with you. I think that part of the scandal of the Evangelical mind is that Protestant Evangelicals in particular do not PROTEST against anything anymore. Instead of the church door reading “Extra Ecclesium Nula Sallus”, it reads more like “Whatever.” The church needs to recover the evangelical mind, but like Noll says it has to permeate through the WHOLE world, especially including the churches and Christian universities. Part of the inability of Protestants to distinguish correct doctrine from incorrect doctrine is their conformity to the relativism that many Protestant thinkers are either ignoring or unwittingly advocating.
Bravo!!!!!!
Great article!
“It has often been said that Christianity in North America is 3,000 miles wide and half an inch deep. Something similar is true, by all accounts, in Africa…” Let me make a provocative observation – it’s true in Africa (at least I can speak about it since that is where I live) in part because North America is so convinced it is right about social, political, religious and just about every other issue that it exports its perspectives globally and they are lapped up unthinkingly as gospel (literally) truth. I for one believe that the inundation of the African continent by American evangelists/pastors/apostles/prophets/etc. who fly in and out first class, stay in fancy hotels, hold mega crusades where thousands are supposedly “saved,” as well as the plethora of abominable “Christian” TV programmes available via satellite, have done us no favours. Instead they have largely propagated a shallow view of what it means to follow Christ; a comfortable, unthinking, self-interested, “fire-insurance” type of faith which is really American middle-class values dressed up in religious language.
Michael,
Thanks for the post… I have read and admired Noll’s work in the Scandal of the Evangelical Mind… Bishop Noel Jones also has a work “Battle for the Mind”… as a young preacher of the Gospel I love sound preaching and teaching… and what’s being given across many of our airways and pulpits are everything but sound doctrine. It saddens me that many are being robbed of True Christianity…
May we who believe in sound doctrine continue in our fight…
C.S. Lewis warned, “If you do not listen to theology, that will not mean that you have no ideas about God. It will mean that you have a lot of wrong ones.”
I’ll keep this simple.” the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.” 1 Tim.1:5(NASB) Sound doctrine is a means to an end: conformity to the image of Christ. They cannot be seperated. You cannot have one without the other. Word and Spirit. Teaching and experience. Creed and character. Mind and emotion.
Oh, I grieve at both extremes. This is divorce that the Lord hates.
Noll’s book was a turning point in my own walk of faith, and one very much needed for the evangelical landscape. And even though I agree with every point you have made about the need for solid, doctrinal, confessional teaching and discipleship, Noll’s book was in fact a lament on the fact that evangelicals tend to concentrate on matters of religion and piety and tend to avoid engaging the world of ideas outside the church at all. The scandal, said Noll, was not a lack of doctrinal preaching and discipleship (though your points on this are accurate and timely); it was that there was not much of an evangelical mind in terms of evangelicals engaging the arts, the sciences and the humanities with intellectual vitality.
Again, all of your points are well made and well taken. The needs you outline are very real and urgent – but the points you are making are not the issue to which Mark Noll turned his pen. His concern was the general intellectual paucity of evangelicals.
Ironically, some (not all) of the Christian leaders who will resonate most strongly with your clarion call for better doctrinal instruction from the pulpit and in discipleship may be the ones most likely to manifest the very problem Noll wote of: concentrating on matters doctrinal at the expense of matters intellectual which may fall outside the field of Christian doctrine.
But perhaps your post will prompt some of them to read Noll’s book to bring about the positive result of engaging the larger world of ideas as well as the more specific area of Christian doctrine. Your post is a good one, even if it might unintentionally have created a mistaken impression about the main point Mark Noll had in mind.
I agree! The proof is no longer in the message we are recieving from the all ‘learned’ people.
Searching God’s word, I have yet to find where Jesus says that we should exclusively take our lessons from teachers- although this is helpful, the only teacher we need is Jesus and His words come from scripture.
Being a once baby christian, I used to hang on the words of my pastor- When circumstances changed, I was heartbroken, as if to say “What do I do now?” I began to read the bible on my own, and a whole new world opened up.
Man most often gets things wrong, and as many books as there are, I have learned that they are a guide, a tool, but cannot be replaced by God’s only book that He says we need.
While it is true that we are called to teach and preach- many of us go before we are ready, or set out in this world with ourselves covered in lies- unknowingly.
It really is sad how those with doctorates and degrees have capped Chrisitianity and have made it so we ‘can’t’ Can’t learn in the capacity that God wants and NEEDS, and can’t do God’s will because of man’s rules, and what they have replaced God’s words with- feeding it to us, making us dependant and causing all sorts of ‘spiritual’ addictions.
Thank you for your site- Very very insightful! GOOD JOB!
DrewK (#24), I couldn’t agree with you more. I think the concern is that goal is forsaking the foundation that leads to the goal; doctrine is forfeited for application. But that dichotomy need not exist. And let’s not forget Paul’s exhortation to Titus in Titus 1:7-9 – the sheep are to be led in sound teaching according the the trustworthy message with lifestyles modeled by the leaders. The two do indeed go hand in hand.
I would say if by the “mind” you simply mean the intellect, then all that will happen is the cycle will renew but not deviate. If all we mean by “truth” is a list of commands and facts, then you will be left with something as shallow as the experientialists are accused. When Jesus revealed that the greatest commandment is to love God and the second to love your neighbour, that is truth that cannot be intellectualized, it is something that must be lived. Those who truly worship worship in spirit AND in truth. We are to love God with all our heart, mind, body, and soul. The Word of God (Jesus) is not merely “informational” but transformational.
I am not anti-intellectual but a purely intellectual approach is bereft of life. I am not anti-experiential, but experiential should not equate to lacking in thought. As a friend once asked of me “how is reading a book not an experience?”
So I would say regardless of your theological focus, if the result is not living abundantly with each other then the results will be no better than what is bemoaned and SHOULD be questioned. While I am sympathetic to the notion of “self-feeders” in the sense of people taking responsibility for themselves and taking part in their own spiritual growth, this has the potential pitfall of sustaining the individualism that has so inundated Western culture and Modern evangelicalism.
Where did Jesus say he could be found?
Just some thoughts,
Joe
Robert Pirsig, in his book ZEN AND THE ART OF MOTORCYCLE MAINTENANCE, said at some point in the book (IIRC – I haven’t reread it since it was first published) something to the effect of: If you tear down the system, but the mindset that built that system remains untouched or unchanged, it will just build another similar system.
If the same mindset and system that originally or has historically built the now-scandalous “Evangelical Mind” is/are used to fix or rebuild or restore the “Evangelical Mind,” then eventually the “fixed” “Evangelical Mind” will, too, become scandalous.
Insanity, as some have said, is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Judging by the state of the Church in all its forms and fashions and flavors and faiths, one can be led to wonder if either the way the church is built or the way we approach building the church is the problem, as well as wonder if the problem is systemic and endemic.
(completing/revising the last sentence from the previous post)
Robert Pirsig, in his book ZEN AND THE ART OF MOTORCYCLE MAINTENANCE, said at some point in the book (IIRC – I haven’t reread it since it was first published) something to the effect of: If you tear down the system, but the mindset that built that system remains untouched or unchanged, it will just build another similar system.
If the same mindset and system that originally or has historically built the now-scandalous “Evangelical Mind” is/are used to fix or rebuild or restore the “Evangelical Mind,” then eventually the “fixed” “Evangelical Mind” will, too, become scandalous.
Insanity, as some have said, is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Judging by the state of the Church in all its forms and fashions and flavors and faiths, one can be led to wonder if either the way the church is built or the way we approach or plan or think about building the church is the problem, as well as wonder if the problem is systemic and endemic – i.e., part of the nature of the beast.
I think that the seeds of destruction for the Evangelical Church go back to its earliest days. In an attempt to be inclusive, evangelicals shrank their definition of what it is to be Christian down to what they considered the essentials of the faith. This narrow understanding of Christian faith could only hold the Evangelical Church together initially because many, if not most, of the people that associated themselves with Evangelicalism also held to a much broader understanding of what it meant to be Christian. As time marched on and the more prominent figures in Evangelicalism either died or faded from the spot light, others have come into the spot light that only hold to the most basic understanding of the faith. The inclusive nature of Evangelicalism continues to accommodate people to the point where the name itself has become meaningless. I do not believe there is any longer hope for Evangelicalism. It is time to find a new word! When Emergent’s and old school liberals now consider themselves Evangelical, as many do, it is time to find another word. For what its worth.
Michael:
I agree; however, I think you’ve left out a key ingredient: the methodology of teaching. The paradigm of this sound teaching emanating from the pulpit is part of the 3,000 mile wide, 1 inch deep problem. In many parts of the U.S. we don’t actually lack from sound teaching. Instead we not only do not “do” discipleship, we don’t even know what it means. Most would agree that discipleship is a class (lecture/sermon paradigm) that occurs on Sunday afternoons or some weeknight. Just look at the comments, how many times is the pulpit referenced? 30 minutes a week preaching correctly creates a change? Really?
Negative. Look how Jesus taught, how Barnabas related to Paul, Paul to Silas and Timothy, and on and on. Sitting and listening to sound doctrine and doing nothing together is a root cause for this decline your reference.
Great post Michael. My concern is there is always a balance in life and faith. Anytime we get extreme about something, we have walk outside the arena of what I would say beneficial. I will toot the horn all day on personal accountability, self-feeding, reasoning, education, and scripture tells us it is by the renewing of our minds.
My concerns come when I see so many “bible” churches (I use the term descriptively, not definatively) who place the significance and importance of the bible over Jesus. They hold the bible boldly in their right hand, proclaiming the truths, studying diligently, but Jesus is no where to be found. Particularly in my part of the USA and the city I live in…….there is no doubt we have the bible in our churches, but when are we going to let Jesus back in? My experience with many of the “deep” study churches is they are some of the most quarrelsome folks I know. Splitting churches because of non-essential doctrine, quarreling over systematic theology…….really? Is that how others will know we are His disciples? By our knowledge, our wisdom, our understanding of doctrine? No, it is by the love we have for one another.
Let me step back and say, in no way do I ever want to discredit or lessen the significance and value of scripture, doctrine, or history. But I fear so many people act like/believe scripture saves us. It is Jesus that saves us, not scripture.
I have a word picture I heard that was life changing for me……after 7 years of diligent study of scripture, history and theology I heard this word picture from a pastor in California.
“Say one day you came up to me concern about my physical health…..overweight, not exercising, etc. You gave me a book by our govenor Arnold called ‘Pump you Up’. 6 months later you saw me and my physical habits, appearrance etc had not changed. You say ‘Bob, didn’t you like the book I gave you?’. I respond, ABSOLUTELY! In fact, I loved it so much I started a small group around it, and from that we started a class where we underlined, highlighted and made symbols all over the text to get a better understanding. Then I started a college course on it, we got ‘really deep’ and even learned all the Austrian root meanings of the text. It is fabulous! The person responds, ‘Thats great, but you are still fat’
He ended the word picture with “you know there are people out there that may know the bible 10 times more than you do, but do they Love 10 times more than you do”
After hearing this I realized that after 7 years of diligent study, “going deep”, gaining knowlege that all I really ended up with was ‘gaining knowlege’. I didn’t love any more than before, I didn’t have more compassion, more mercy, more patience, etc.
All I am saying is, we have to be careful how we encourage others in Christ. We get out of balance on “Deepness” we will have a bunch of gnostics. We get out of balance on “Shallowness” we have a bunch of chaff.
I think there is a balance.
Thank you Lisa, #27. And kudos to Joseph (# 28). Well said in proper balance. I also think EricW’s comment is insightful and prudent. We need a paradigm shift. One huge reason for understanding the philosphies of the world, historic and current, is so we don’t unwittingly build our systematics with an alien(unbiblical) blueprint. And I can’t help but mention John Piper as one who exemplifies the balance I alluded to in my original comment. I find in him a wonderful tension between intellectual rigor and passionate experientialism (God is a LIVING God and we must obey.)
This is the type of writing that resonates with the renewed mind and dispels the frustration produced by superficial contemporary communication. Noll’s book is as relevant as it was in the mid-90s. Another good book that one may wish to read in conjunction with this is James White’s Pulpit Crimes. I personally think the latter is must read for any potential pastor-teacher.
Mike,
Great point on “do” discipleship. I think we are in agreement that discipleship is not “just” sitting and listening, yet that is the definition many assume. Discipleship is “doing life together”, “walking along side”. It is a word that requires work, action and is ongoing. Not simply absorbing a lecture. Man, I could really get worked up on this kind of stuff, I really have to keep my spirit in check. Certainly the above defining of discipleship is a parasphrase of my own.
I have to limit how much I read blogs or listen to the radio as I find myself coming to an attitude of frustration and then leading to “well, we do church right”. I figure any time a pastor, teacher, or church comes to a point where they believe the do church “right”, then that is a terrible place to be.
Sorry, just confessing a little here to keep myself “balanced” 🙂
Great discussion everyone.
Jon
I would take it to another level. Not only should we catechize we also should equip our children and our church members to read and think critically. Our children and church members need to learn how to ask essential questions. They also need to learn how to become life long learners. They need to enjoy the learning process. For example, in our home we are attempting to dig deeply into the Heidelberg catechism utilizing Thelemann’s An Aid To The Heidelberg Catechism 1959. We have learned not only the Heidelberg and scripture verses we also learned new vocabulary words which are no longer in vogue. During family worship we discuss modern applications to this great work. I believe that the pedeological need is not only found in the evangelical camp its also found in the “Reformed” camp.
I applaud Michael for writing this as well as many, many of the responses. A whole hearted AMEN to many of you!
Like many business meetings I’ve attended we have identified the problems and to a certain degree came up with solutions but the problem always lies in implementing a plan which solves the problems we have identified.
How would I, a lay person, advance an agenda for my church which would do what many of you agree is lacking in the current church? How do we move from meaningless life groups to discipleship teaching (walking them thru to maturity)? How do we get off the “me centered” to the God centered?
Are there solutions out there?
Thanks Matt (#19) for sharing in my lament (#14).
J.R. #38. “How do we get off the “me centered” to the God centered?”
That my fellow believer is what we all should be struggling through. It’s sanctification in the most basic and maybe best definition. If there were a 5 step program for that……..it would be a best seller. It’s the answer to everything and we just continue throughout history to complicate it.
The meaningless life groups to discipleship is a core issue with churches today, as Mr. Pattons original article brings up and is a large component of what the issue at hand is.
What I must always keep in check is the difference between personal preferences and biblical instruction. For instance, what does the bible say the “correct” teaching method is? Exogenical, topical, etc….. While I certainly have my preference, I can not find in scripture specifics to this issue. And believe me….churches have split over this, pastors berate those that teach differently. Shall we bring up music? Whewww! Talk about us complicating things and passing off personal preferences as doctrinal mandates. I love to ask the question….”When did the last hymn writer die?” I listened on the radio to a very well known scholar/pastor/teacher tell me how to find the “right” church with the “right” pastor. Know what is funny……he went on to describe his church and himself! How they do things. The whole message was issues of preference, not doctrine.
All this at the core is “me centered”. If I go to a church and say I couldn’t worship to that style music or teaching, then I must check my own heart. Since when is worship dependent on style? That’s “me centered” and not God centered.
While Hybels certainly is controversial among many I would hope all agree with his open statement in Purpose Driven Life. “It’s not about you”.
Great job J.R. of bringing all this down to the core issue.
Short-time lurker and reader, first time commenting here (have commented at Google Reader and others)…
First off, this piece is indeed excellent. It is a piece of passionate, and self-reflective writing. In a sense, its one of those pieces that could remain in one’s personal journal, but ends up being a better nutrient to the soil of life when shared with others. Thank you for your openness here.
Secondly, the spark this can cause is neat. For me, it meant an aligning and reaffirming of a simple credo I and a few close friends use (“go, teach, disciple”), while getting off my butt to take up that work simply and directly to those who need it. Again, thanks for the kick.
Lastly, it takes more work to distill life into simple actions and parts. Methods and practices are great, but only when they stay simple. If we just got out and do “it” the methods and practices will take care of themselves. Maybe the new trend to follow should be to simply ignore the trends and just “go, teach, disciple.” Keep it simple, keep it Christ focused.
Michael,
A stirring post as any of yours. I am happy that in my home church in Delhi, we have teaching ministry focussed on the young adults. Thank you. I am sending this blog to my pastors as an encouragement.
AMEN Michael. Quick story: I am looking for a church closer to my new home, but in the mean time we drive 50 miles every Sunday to hear truth. I interviewed a pastor from I churcj that I wanted to visit. This guy has been a senior pastor for 5-6 years, has a Master’s in Theology and when I asked him about why he is a believer he said because he chose, free will, blah blah blah typical synergism . . . when I describe monergism to him and the fact that apart from being born again and given new spiritual life you cannot EVER on your own choose Christ. He asked me if I thought that God chose some for salvation, but not all, I said absolutely that is the case. He said he has never heard of such a belief, I asked him if he has heard of calvinism he said no, asked him if he had read anything by JOhn Piper and he said “who is John Piper” I was afraid to ask if he heard of Martin Luther. So there you go, the problem with our churches is this pastor! Please pray that I can continue witnessing to this guy, he was interested and was honest enough to say “I have never thought of that, let me look in to that . . .” I could go on about some of the other things he said, but no need . . .pray for his church too!
I am 55 years old, I was born again at the age of 4 at a YFC outreach our whole family went. I have heard it said that children cannot understand about Jesus so young, I did… I left my church at age 12 seeking for a church that taught the Bible, because though i didn’t like rules, the problem with me was not rebellion, but the need to know why.. So i went with friends, seeking to find truth, there was one family who was also seeking for a church,i went with them, @ age 14 i was still seeking for the right church. one week i found what i was looking for. verse by verse book by book the bible was being taught. Sunday am, sunday pm, wednesday night; I wrote every word he said as best i could and then went home to see if what he was saying was right. the family i went with continued searching. I stayed. Who says we cant find bible teaching churches? I have a question for all of you current thinkers? When did we take Jesus Christ and His Holy Spirit out of this equasion? It is not up to me to have the right program, or keep a watchful eye on who is growing or who is not and make those who arent grow to my expectations. That is the work of God. He sees the heart; we all have seasons of growth, we should not be surprised at our current apathetic situation, what is happening is biblical, God said in the last days the hearts of most would grow cold. Interestingly in Rev. 1 it says behold i come quickly and every eye will see me and mourn… isn’t that interesting. We all fall short, no matter how much or little we do; but the real question is are we growing because we love Christ and the body of Christ, and our enemies. to love requires the wisdom of the word. and that should be every christians goal. We are to make disciples, in all the world, not as we stay. as we go. Jesus is enough, but we must meet regularly, share with others, love the Lord our God with all our heart soul and might, love one another and Gods word, , and get to know who He is as He says He is. If we are in Him and listening, there is nothing to hinder his work in us. We need our Pastors, our teachers, and we need to be using our gifts, and we need to be praying in secret and together and serving along side one another. This is not a new formula, there is nothing new under the sun, so why are we seeking for new? Thy word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path. Thy word have i hid in my heart that I might not sin against Thee…. Trust and obey, for theres no other way to be happy in Jesus then to trust and Obey.Let God be God. He and He alone will finish in us what he starts. I was in a different bible study when Willow Creek began, I knew those who went, Ginny Merideth, Susie Ankerberg, it is a good work, and it grew! we will only know in Heaven its fruit. we all love Jesus and may walk different roads, but in the end it will be all for His glory. My life falls short, but He still loves me, is doing his work in me no matter what the season. How about You?
I’m a little more hard nosed than you Michael … I would be tempted to say “The evangelical mind – an oxymoron” . Understand that I am a hard core evangelical pastor but the lack of basic biblical literacy and shallowness of theological thought even amongst my brother pastors is frightening.
I agree with Cadis & Joseph. Preach the Word the best one can and let the Holy Spirit take it from there. Speaking from my own experience, I feel we might have too much “Churchianity” instead of Christianty. When I was saved, through the Navigatiors, in the military, it was simple and basic; Prayer, the Word, Fellowship, Witness. We were seeing new converts all the time.(To to fair it was not a organized church system per se. I was single and young). As time went on, I got involved in various churches in my life, and did the deacon thing and served on committees, etc. I have found many have ministries and programs for almost everything and anything, and in short no people to run them, and they use up resources. And many of these ministries are of little value in bringing people to Christ. Maybe it is time to get back to basics.
Awesome! I agree with all you have said. For the past couple of months I have felt the urgency to return to the basics.
In my experience growing up in the evangelical church, there has always been anti-intellectualism that has saturated life. When intellectuals (through books, television, pop culture) attacked Christianity and even God, the reaction was not to refute the arguments, but to retreat to the Bible and “common sense,” and I think there lies the tension we face. There is a notion that a “common sense” faith is a Biblical based faith, and too much study will only complicate things and lead you astray.
We have never been taught how to think about ideas with our foundation being the Grace we received through Jesus Christ. We are just told (directly and indirectly) to leave that stuff alone. For someone who has questions, they either have to shut-up or leave, and they do.
Not to poo poo on “common sense” Christianity because there is truth in it. They hold on strong to Jesus. I just wish they knew that this foundation was strong enough to support the weight of intellectual world as well.
Jon #40,
Just to clarify something, it was Rick Warren who wrote The Purpose-Driven Life and its opening line, “It’s not about you.”
Hybels has also written a lot, such as “Holy Discontent” and “Courageous Leadership”
Jess P,
I cringe when I think of how many brilliant minds have been lost to the world because the people in the church “had no need” for intellectuals. If someone’s gift from God is a keen intellect, but the church tells them that their intellect isn’t needed and just gets in the way of serving God, then they assume that God must not really be that big and powerful if a human mind can get in His way.