Category: Contemporary Christianity

Flexibility, Church Planting and Fundamentalism

~ Bob Hayton ~ 2 Comments

Steve Davis has an intriguing article on church planting over at Sharper Iron. I will quote the first part of his article then encourage you to go read the whole thing.

Left Behind: The Apparent Absence of Fundamentalists in Resurgent Church Planting
by Steve Davis

While Fundamentalists often noisily do battle over issues important mostly to their sub-culture, there is a battlefield where Fundamentalists are conspicuous by their absence. There has been a resurgence in church planting in North America and few Fundamentalist churches have answered the call. The names of leaders in this resurgence are well-known and include Mark Driscoll, Tim Keller, Bob Roberts, and Ed Stetzer, to name a few. Whatever Fundamentalists think of these men, let there be no doubt that they are engaged in the most noble of tasks””the Great Commission””on a scale rarely seen and in cities which, with some notable exceptions, have been long abandoned by solid, Bible-believing churches. These leaders are not without their foibles, and controversy often surrounds or follows some of them. That said, it must be asked if there are any church planting movements in Fundamentalism with the depth and breadth of what is taking place in conservative evangelical circles.

Recently I attended a conference on church planting where several thousand active or prospective church planters and their wives were in attendance. Admittedly the presenters and attendees were from diverse evangelical backgrounds, a blessing in many ways in witnessing the diversity and unity of the body of Christ. Many in attendance could not plant churches together, a fact they recognized, due to doctrinal differences that are at the heart of one’s understanding of the nature the local church. One speaker, a prominent Southern Baptist leader, expressed his friendship with and admiration for Tim Keller, yet confessed that they could not plant a church together. There would be an immediate conflict over needing a bowl or a bathtub to baptize the first convert. Yet in spite of obvious differences and the inability to partner in church planting there was a laudable spirit of cooperation to help others plant churches by providing training, mentoring, and access to resources.

Why not?

We cannot partner with anyone or everyone to plant churches. But planting churches is not an option. It is a matter of obedience. If fundamental churches are lagging in this area they need to ask themselves why. The neglect of church planting is flagrant and perhaps nothing will hasten the demise of Fundamentalism more quickly than the inability or unwillingness of Fundamentalists to be engaged in this work. Alas, church planting requires cooperation and networking, rare commodities among many Fundamentalists, among whom the spirit of independence and individualism persists, and few churches have the resources to go it alone. In addition, churches must recognize that the churches they plant may not be a mirror image of the sending and supporting churches, an unacceptable condition and consequence for many churches.

Some of the reasons for the lack of church planting movements in Fundamentalism were addressed in an earlier article and won’t be repeated here. In this article I would like to expand on those earlier thoughts and raise some questions.

I will offer this opinion up front. Most traditional churches cannot reproduce themselves….

[read the entire article]

Why Preachers Fall

~ Bob Hayton ~ 20 Comments

The higher you rise, the harder you fall. There seems to be nothing more universally revolting than the fall of a big name preacher.  The scandals of Jim & Tammy Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart and Ted Haggard all made the national news headlines.  But not every scandal gets such nationwide attention. Sadly, such falls by “men of God” are all too common.

Yesterday, I found out about one such fall that sits far too close to home for my liking.  Rodney Stewart, an evangelist who was a frequent preacher at the Bible College I attended, was recently caught in an online sex sting.  I own several cassette tapes of this man’s preaching, which always struck me as intense and radically serious. He was a great preacher who stuck close to the Biblical text in most of his messages.  Yet he was found out in his sin and now is sitting in prison awaiting his trial and sentencing.  The sad story is covered by a local news station in the Cleveland area here.

Why is it that men who are respected and hold a revered office (such as pastor, evangelist or preacher) would do such horrendous things?  Why would they be found soliciting sex online from a 15 year old? And why exactly are such failures so commonplace, as it seems?

I can’t speak for all sectors of Christianity, or for the Roman Catholic Church. I do know that sin is common to all men, that is sure.  But for conservative evangelical churches, particularly of the fundamentalist variety, there are several factors which I believe contribute to this problem.

1)  Too much emphasis on morals

This might sound crazy to some.  But an over-emphasis on morality actually encourages sin.  Moralism cannot save.  It cannot free someone of sinful urges within. Only the Gospel of grace can truly transform our hearts.

2)  An external focus

Many fundamentalist churches stress external conformity to rules and standards.  Christians need to look different, act different and dress differently than the world.  Christians need to read their Bibles, spend time evangelizing their friends and neighbors, and actively serve in their church.  All of this, people can trick themselves into thinking they can do.  And then keeping up the appearance of spirituality can in turn become a heavy burden.

3)  Little emphasis on grace

Grace, or God’s favor for undeserving sinners, is not emphasized.  God’s holiness and his high standards are.  Grace comes into play in salvation, but living the Christian life is all about effort, character, and duty. So when people struggle, there is no saving grace that can help them.  They must dust themselves off and try harder.  Often a do-it-yourself-mentality is the practical effect of an over-emphasis on externals and conformity.

4)  Failure to appreciate the Gospel

Similar to what was said above, the Gospel is seen as the 101 class for becoming a Christian.  The meat and the nitty-gritty of Christian living leaves the Gospel behind.  The Gospel is good news for the lost unbeliever, and its an assumed thing for believers.  This misunderstanding cuts off the Christian from his only sure hope.  The Gospel teaches that God accepts us not on the basis of how well we behave, but as a matter of pure grace and on account of Jesus’ death on the cross in our place.

5)  Legalism and burnout

All of this leads to a practical legalism.  Christians live as if God is not happy with them.  To please God and to truly grow in faith, one must add mountains of work to the faith that saves.  If we measure up to our own (or our group’s) expectations, if we perform, if we put out, only then are we satisfied with ourselves, and only then is God pleased with us.  When we fail in a myriad of ways, we have to struggle on alone.  This leads to burnout.  All work, no recognition of God’s love and approval, and no grace.  It’s hard struggling on in such a condition.

6)  No mutual accountability

The ethos of a legalistic church does not lend itself to mutual accountability.  Pastors rarely mention that they too struggle with sin.  If one confesses a sin, he is dealt with as a sinner. Grace isn’t proffered.  There is no benefit to opening up to others about your struggles.  You’ll be rejected, written off and then treated so differently.  For those struggling with sexual addiction, mutual accountability is balm to the soul.  Understanding that others share the same struggles and hearing others be open about their struggles to overcome the sin are key to victory.

7)  Lone Ranger Christianity

This final aspect is an American trait that has affected the church.  People think that the Christian life is something that is purely personal, and can be accomplished on their own.  The Bible stresses the role of the church and the need for brothers and sisters in the faith to encourage each other.  Often, in a high-stress environment, where a judgmental spirit is present, the communal aspects of church life are downplayed.  We get together to eat and socialize but never to discuss the impact of the Gospel on our personal lives.  This is only intensified in the life of a pastor or evangelist.  They are even more prone to the lone ranger phenomenon.  The pastor has to keep himself aloof from his congregation, it is thought.  The very thought of a pastor wanting help for struggling with his personal sins and thought life, is unheard of in many such legalistic environments.

I suppose other factors come into play, but these are certainly influential in many fundamentalist church environments.  But it isn’t only legalistic churches that can harbor such ideas about the Christian life. People can tend toward legalism in any context.

It’s so easy to cast stones at the fallen pastor.  I would hope that we could pray for him and his family, and be on guard lest the sin in our own hearts come to overcome us as well.  I certainly don’t excuse him for his crimes. however.  I just wish the system he was in would have been more grace-oriented.  But for the grace of God, I too could be consumed by my sin.

I would love to hear your thoughts on all of this, too.  Feel free to chime in and let me know what you think.

Central Baptist Theological Seminary Statement on Fundamentalism & Evangelicalism

~ Bob Hayton ~ 3 Comments

Central Baptist Theological Seminary of Minneapolis, MN recently posted a statement which helps define where they think fundamentalism is or should be going. It makes some careful delineation of terms and goes out of its way to repudiate some of the more extreme versions of fundamentalism.

I appreciate the desire this statement has for working with conservative evangelicals, as much as fundamentalist ideas and principles can allow. I’m going to excerpt a few key statements in this and recommend you go read it for yourself.

Ethos Statement on Fundamentalism & Evangelicalism

To be an evangelical is to be centered upon the gospel. To be a Fundamentalist is, first, to believe that fundamental doctrines are definitive for Christian fellowship, second, to refuse Christian fellowship with all who deny fundamental doctrines (e.g., doctrines that are essential to the gospel), and third, to reject the leadership of Christians who form bonds of cooperation and fellowship with those who deny essential doctrines. We are both evangelicals and Fundamentalists according to these definitions. We all believe that, as ecclesial movements, both evangelicalism and Fundamentalism have drifted badly from their core commitments. In the case of evangelicalism, the drift began when self-identified neo-evangelicals began to extend Christian fellowship to those who clearly rejected fundamental doctrines. This extension of fellowship represented a dethroning of the gospel as the boundary of Christian fellowship. It was a grievous error, and it has led to the rapid erosion of evangelical theology within the evangelical movement. At the present moment, some versions of professing evangelicalism actually harbor denials of the gospel such as Open Theism or the New Perspective on Paul. We deny that the advocates of such positions can rightly be called evangelical.

On the other hand, we also believe that some Fundamentalists have attempted to add requirements to the canons of Christian fellowship. Sometimes these requirements have involved institutional or personal loyalties, resulting in abusive patterns of leadership. Other times they have involved organizational agendas. They have sometimes involved the elevation of relatively minor doctrines to a position of major importance. In some instances, they have involved the creation of doctrines nowhere taught in Scripture, such as the doctrine that salvation could not be secured until Jesus presented His material blood in the heavenly tabernacle. During recent years, the most notorious manifestation of this aberrant version of Fundamentalism is embodied in a movement that insists that only the King James version of the Bible (or, in some cases, its underlying Greek or Hebrew texts) ought be recognized as the perfectly preserved Word of God.

We regard both of these extremes as equally dangerous. The evangelicalism of the far Left removes the gospel as the boundary of Christian fellowship. The Fundamentalism of the far Right adds to the gospel as the boundary of Christian fellowship. Neither extreme is acceptable to us, but because we encounter the far Right more frequently, and because it claims the name of Fundamentalism, we regard it as a more immediate and insidious threat….

We wish to be used to restate, refine, and strengthen biblical Fundamentalism. The process of restatement includes not only defining what a thing is, but also saying what it is not. We find that we must point to many versions of professing Fundamentalism and say, “That is not biblical Christianity.” We do not believe that the process of refinement and definition can occur without such denials. The only way to strengthen Fundamentalism is to speak out against some self-identified Fundamentalists.

We also see a need to speak out against the abandonment of the gospel by the evangelical Left, the reducing of the gospel’s importance by the heirs of the New Evangelicalism, and the huckstering of the gospel by pragmatists, whether evangelicals or Fundamentalists. On the other hand, while we may express disagreement with aspects of conservative evangelicalism (just as we may express disagreement with one another), we wish to affirm and to strengthen the activity of conservative evangelicals in restoring the gospel to its rightful place.

The marks of a strong Fundamentalism will include the following:

1. A recommitment to the primacy and proclamation of the gospel.
2. An understanding that the fundamentals of the gospel are the boundary of Christian fellowship.
3. A focus on the importance of preaching as biblical exposition.
4. An emphasis upon progressive sanctification understood as incremental spiritual growth.
5. An elevation of the importance of ordinate Christian affections, expressed partly by sober worship that is concerned with the exaltation and magnification of God.
6. An understanding of Christian leadership primarily as teaching and serving.
7. A commitment to teaching and transmitting the whole system of faith and practice.
8. An exaltation of the centrality of the local congregation in God’s work.

These are features of an authentic Fundamentalism that we all feel is worth saving. These features describe the kind of Fundamentalism that we wish to build. Their absence in either Fundamentalism or other branches of evangelicalism constitutes a debasing of Christianity that we intend to oppose. (emphasis mine)

Be sure to read the whole thing. (The link takes you to the statement as published by Sharper Iron, where additional discussion follows.)

Personally, as I read the entire statement, it still comes across as, well, quite Fundamentalist. At least this is consistent! I still don’t see how their 5th point regarding a strong Fundamentalism is not also adding “requirements to the canons of Christian fellowship”, however.

John Piper on Glorifying God in Your Movie-Watching

~ Bob Hayton

Desiring God just posted John Piper’s thoughts on watching movies, from an Ask Pastor John live event from some time back. From my vantage point I see his thoughts as a helpful corrective to contemporary Christianity. When Christianity Today can publish a glowing review of the “Sex and the City” movie, something is obviously wrong. May we all take care in our entertainment choices and guard our hearts.

Here is the video clip of Pastor John answering the question. Below you’ll find the edited transcript of his answer.

Is it possible to glorify God through the enjoyment of music, movies, literature, etc. produced by secular artists?

Yes. I assume the computer you are holding there was probably not built by Christians, and I hope that you are glorifying God as you tap away at it. And of course out from there, there are a 1000 things that we use all day long, and God says, ‘whatever you do, whether you eat or drink, do all to the glory of God.’ And he knows that you are eating this meat that may have been sacrificed to idols, so that means it was probably butchered by an unbeliever, or handled by an unbeliever, shipped by an unbeliever, it may have been cooked by an unbelieving cook. And here you are savoring the product of all those unbelievers’ work because you are in that moment giving thanks to God for it, recognizing that the earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof and taking the strength and the joy that comes from it to render back to him.

Now with the arts and with media it is more morally complex than with food. But it is the same principle. The complexity of it is, in those moments what do you do with the moral elements of it that are so contrary to your faith?

I’ll just point out one principle because we can talk about this forever. What concerns me is the distinction between entertainment and cultural analysis. To watch something, to study the culture, learn from the culture, be more able to interact with unbelievers for the sake of the glory of Christ is one thing. To just sit and bask in nudity, or bask in fifty f-words, or bask in a world view that is shot through with arrogance to the core, and enjoy it? Hmm. That seems to point to something going on in the heart. And frankly, I have tasted it big time. I think today we are going to have to work at not being shaped by the world because the world has made its world view so scintillatingly attractive.

Movie after movie after movie has come out and most young reformed people are, I would say, indiscriminate. “Let’s go to a movie tonight.” OK, and then we just choose the best. None of the movies in that theater at that night are any good, probably. But you are just going to do it, because that is what you do. You go to the movies on Friday night, or whatever. And then of course you think, we’ve got to Christianize this thing somehow.

I just think we need to test our hearts big time. Big time. Why are we able to enjoy hell bound, God ignoring, Christ dishonoring, false world views because we can give it a little twist at the end that it taught us this or that about the world? So, I think the main thing I’m saying there is, test your heart as to whether entertainment is defaulting to the world, or to something more wholesome. We live in an age where we tend to default to the world for entertainment. [Quoted from Desiring God’s post, emphasis added]

[HT: Sharper Iron’s Filings]

“Global Awakening: How 20th-Century Revivals Triggered a Christian Revolution” by Mark Shaw

~ Bob Hayton ~ 1 Comment

In many ways, America is a world unto itself. Until some tragedy strikes beyond our borders, we are content to fret about our internal problems and concerns. But more and more the world out yonder is coming in to us. Globalization is forever changing our way of life. And the wide world is ever shrinking.

Almost every social arena is affected by this trend, and the Church is no exception. American Christianity has long prided itself as the beacon of world-wide missions. Yet we still are tempted to think the Church outside our shores stands in need of our American ingenuity. Mark Shaw in Global Awakening: How 20th-Century Revivals Triggered a Christian Revolution reveals how ignorant such a perspective truly is. Missionaries are now flocking to our own shores, and the story of the 20th Century is the world-wide surge of the Evangelical Church.

Some of us may have missed the newsflash. Mark Shaw explains:

When one looks beyond Atlantic shores the most significant change in the world in the last several generations is the broader revival of religion sweeping the southern hemisphere…. To miss the rise and significance of the new World Christianity would be like a concerned Christian in sixteenth-century northern Europe missing Luther and the Reformation. Something that affects the renewal of Christianity worldwide is afoot and no one should miss the party. (pg. 10-11)

From many quarters I had heard of this global renewal of Christianity. Mark Shaw’s book offered the chance for me to sample its various manifestations. Shaw uses eight case studies to illustrate his views of the nature and rise of global revivals. He argues that there are natural and supernatural factors at play. And he utilizes missiological and sociological studies to analyze these movements. Global Christianity, he finds, is less an exported Americanism than an indigenous inculturation of Christianity.

For the average Joe like you and I, his study still offers an accessible look into the variety and vivacity of worldwide Christianity. And to a large degree many of the movements he surveys from Korea and China, to India, Africa and on to South America, are the fruit of earlier mission endeavors.

The author shares what we all can learn from these historical revivals “as we look toward the future of the church” :

The current global awakening needs to shake us from our cultural isolation and obsessions as North American Christians…. What the current global awakening teaches me, however, is that the real emerging church is a wildly global and culturally pluralistic one which moves us toward the vision of 1 Corinthians 12, a body of Christ with many parts each recognizing their global interdependence. The message of global revivals is that God is internationalizing his people and we stand at an Ephesians moment (to use Andrew Walls’s expression) in which the cultural, geographic and political barriers are breaking down in light of the gospel. The current global revivals are not ends in themselves. Their ultimate significance will be seen in multicultural missional churches that seek to change their world in the power of the Spirit and in partnership with the mission of God. (from an Author Q & A provided by IVP)

This book isn’t for everyone. It’s a bit technical and doesn’t develop the stories as much as an average reader might like. Furthermore, Shaw is not as critical of new Pentecostal movements as some might like him to be. Nevertheless it offers a helpful survey of the growth of Worldwide Christianity and serves to enforce the notion that the proper term for such global developments is “revival” . Shaw helps us see that God uses both natural factors and human movements as catalysts in His work of growing His Church.

Ultimately, Global Awakening spurs us American Christians to see beyond ourselves and look for the hand of God in other places around the world. To serve this end I recommend the book for a wide audience.

Pick up a copy of this book at Amazon.com or direct from InterVarsity Press.

Disclaimer: This book was provided by IVP Academic for review. The reviewer was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.