Light-work

Can Bad News Come From Grace?

God had something to say and wanted Jeremiah to get His message through. When God revealed the contents of this message, it gave the prophet reason to pause. God was asking him to deliver the kind of bad news that makes people want to kill the messenger: "Amend your ways or Jerusalem is going to be turned into rubble." His previous experience with national leadership told him not to expect a warm reception.

The beauty of being a pessimist is you're either right or your expectations are exceeded. In this case, after talking straight with Israel, Jeremiah was the former: Then the priests and the prophets spoke to the officials and to all the people, saying, “A death sentence for this man! For he has prophesied against this city as you have heard in your hearing” (Jer. 26:11).

Despite the accusations, Jeremiah did not flinch: Then Jeremiah spoke to all the officials and to all the people, saying, “The Lord sent me to prophesy against this house and against this city all the words that you have heard” (Jer. 26:12).

The skewed  reasoning of the religious bigwigs went like this: “We don’t agree with Jeremiah’s message, and that’s all we need to know. Jeremiah deserves death for the audacity of telling us we need to change.” It is remarkable that the priests and prophets did not debate the merits of Jeremiah’s case. They did not ask, “Could it be true that we must either change or be punished?” Had they done so, they might have seen that Jeremiah’s preaching was a benefit not a bane.

What if someone could have provided rock-solid intelligence about what was planned for 9/11 (and how to prevent it) before it happened? Who wouldn’t find receipt of such information an incredible benefit?  That is precisely what Jeremiah did. But, the power trip the priests and prophets were on blinded them to the value of what they were receiving. The general populace did get it right, saying, “No death sentence of this man! For he has spoken to us in the name of the Lord our God” (Jer. 26:16).   

An unfavorable message, if it comes from God, is evidence of grace not grumpiness. God does not have to warn us. He could easily give us a taste of “shock and awe” without warning.  But that is not how our Father operates. Even when we are walking in disobedience, His love moves Him to tell us what we NEED to hear even when it is not what we WANT to hear. So if you want to receive the full benefits of God’s grace, ask Him to help you hear and take to heart whatever He wants to tell you, even when He has some bad news.

An "Unusual" Ultimatum?

I read about a curious conversation from the life of King David. To appreciate what caught my ear, ponder the art of the ultimatum. Presidents and Kings need to be masters of the art when declaring a final demand, one whose rejection will end negotiations and be followed by a resort to force. There are lots of ways to mess up.

• The Petulant: Provoke a fight that's not worth fighting.
• The Pacifist: Fail to issue an ultimatum when vital interests are threatened.
• QuickDraw McGraw: Issue an ultimatum when there are viable alternatives still on the table.
• Johnny-Come-Lately: Issue an ultimatum after a "point of no return" has already been passed.
• Mr. Hollow Threat: Draw an appropriate line in the sand, but attach it to a threat you have no intention of using.
• The Cream-Puff: Make a reasonable demand, but attach it to a threat of insufficient force.

The above possibilities are enough (there are plenty more) to illustrate how easy it is to get it wrong and singularly daunting it is to get it right. David understood this art well. While Saul was still alive and seeking David's death, a group from the tribe of Benjamin came to his stronghold. Saul was from the tribe of Benjamin, so David had good reason to be suspicious of the intentions of these new recruits. He delivered a "choose-whom-you-will-serve" ultimatum: Then some of the sons of Benjamin and Judah came to the stronghold to David. David went out to meet them, and said to them, “If you come peacefully to me to help me, my heart shall be united with you; but if to betray me to my adversaries, since there is no wrong in my hands, may the God of our fathers look on it and decide” (1 Chron. 12:16-17).

What kind of ultimatum is this? The first half makes perfect sense: Help me and we will become a great team. But in the second half, David's "threat" would strike a "modern man of enlightenment" as the words of the cream-puff: Mess with me and you'll have to deal with God. In a day when life is defined with God factored out of the equation, a threat has no "teeth" when it invokes God.

To get an appreciation for the modern irony of David's ultimatum, imagine saying this to a robber who has you at gun point: "Walk away. If you don't, you will answer to God for whatever you have done to me." How many thieves would find this compelling? How many would flee in terror for their fear of God?

David's ultimatum is a window into a value system profoundly different from modernity. David knew how to wield a big stick, but the verdict of heaven's opinion was of far greater consequence. The worst possible outcome, from David's perspective, was for a man to be on God's bad side. The poverty of modern "threat making" stands in such stark contrast. Where there is no respect for God, men are left to issue ultimatums that depend entirely upon their own efforts. Such ultimatums only carry as much force as the stick one is able and willing to wield.

Do we believe that men will answer to God for their actions? Is this the worst that could happen to those who act on their intentions against us? Is this what leaks out when we utter a threat? If not, our value system may fit the times but not the heart of David, a "man after God's own heart."

When Moral High Ground is the Pits!

As I am listening to President Obama's "100 Days Press Conference," I am struck by his response to a water-boarding question. He believes this "enhanced interrogation technique" is torture and wants nothing to do with it. He expressed a commitment to "hold true to our ideals" even when doing so makes it harder to fight terrorism.

Will the President better protect our nation by seizing this moral high ground? Will he inspire those who hate us to admit the error of their ways? I can hear them now: "We've made a horrible mistake! Sure, we have not been above some righteous beheading now and then. But the great Satan has disdained interrogation techniques we consider comparatively tame. How he shames us with his obvious moral superiority! How wrong of us to think he is our enemy when he should be esteemed as our teacher."

My purpose in this moment is not to evaluate interrogation techniques or how shifting the line of demarcation between what we will and won't do will influence our national security. My attention was fixed on the glaring incongruity between what he considers "above his pay grade" and what he deems his moral obligation. The President wants to be able to sleep well at night in the knowledge that no one has been intentionally subjected to the fear of drowning on his watch. Yet, he is apparently capable of sleeping soundly while millions silently scream, their lives snuffed out by those who swear, "Primum non nocere."

The Declaration of Independence that captures our "ideals" names "life" as an unalienable right granted all men by their Creator. I am not closed to a debate about what constitutes torture. But spare me the tortured morality devoid of moral sensitivity to the greatest crime against humanity of our age. How disgusting to hear someone crowing about his scruples over scaring people when he so cavalierly dismisses the slaughter of the innocents. I think I'm going to puke.

Ferdinand de Lesseps and Infectious Optimism

Everything David McCullough has written is worth reading. One of my favorites is The Path Between the Seas, the fascinating account of the creation of the Panama Canal. His almost 700 page volume is divided into three "books," each devoted to a major phase of the project. The first book chronicles the failed attempt by the French to build the canal, a debacle spanning the years 1870 and 1894.

The dominant figure in book one is Ferdinand de Lesseps. Ferdinand was a diplomat and optimist who seemed the perfect man for the job. He had employed his formidable skills to great effect in the successful completion of the Suez Canal. The Panama Canal seemed the logical next step, albeit this challenge was of far greater scale.

I find this statement from Wikipedia ironic: "He attempted to repeat this success [Suez] with an effort to build a lock-less version of the Panama Canal during the 1880s, but the project was finally completed by the United States in 1914, once developments in medicine had been made which combatted the serious problems of malaria and yellow fever in the area." The statement makes it seem that the US merely picked up where Ferdinand left off, once somebody figured out how to fight malaria and yellow fever. Read the book to get it right - de Lesseps had moved some dirt, but his plan was flawed. The chief impediment to French success was de Lesseps own unassailable optimism. Although neither an engineer nor banker, Ferdinand was CONVINCED that only a sea level canal would do, even though his engineering staff knew this represented an impossible challenge.

Here is an extended quote from McCullough that captures the problem:

"The important point is that de Lesseps, once again, would get exactly what he wanted; he would follow his own lead and they would nod in agreement and go along with him as willingly as his stock-holders had, raising no serious objections about anything, which must be viewed as another testament to his powers of persuasion, rather than any lack of perception on their part. Unmistakably these were men of eminence and ability. ...Yet none was willing, or bold enough perhaps, to challenge de Lesseps' judgment or to take seriously the inevitable cost of a sea- level canal. Later it would be charged that de Lesseps never listened to his engineers. But in fact it was the other way around; it was they who were listening to him" (p. 137)

McCullough quotes the Illustrated London News which observed, "Perhaps no other man ever possessed to such a marvelous extent the power of communicating to other minds the faith and the fervor which animated his own" (p. 137). De Lesseps, in his own words, enjoyed "the privilege of being believed without having to prove what one affirms" (p. 239). McCullough notes, "His was the faith that the mountains could be moved by technology. He had the nonscientific, nontechnical man's faith that science and technology would 'find a way'" (p. 239).

What Ferdinand described as the investment opportunity of a lifetime was eventually demonstrated a fiasco. Those who believed this great optimist and invested in his project incurred staggering loses. They were taken in by a convincing communicator with a positive message and a unbridled confidence in what men can accomplish.

The incessant attempts to raise capital for a flawed project, the astounding amount of time, money, and manpower expended without return, the dogged enthusiasm for what bright minds can achieve, it all sounds eerily familiar to those dwelling in land of the bailout. When the dust settles on the current economic crisis, will we recognize the ghost of de Lesseps?

When men who knew better remained silent before unassailable optimism, when blind faith in the ability of man held sway, when men acted on the strength of another's belief despite their personal misgivings, disaster was waiting in the wings. Do not underestimate the power of men to be convinced of what defies their better judgment. Do not doubt the inevitability of disaster when they do.

Can Obama Learn A Lesson Fit For A King?

The Wall Street Journal is tracking Obama's First 100 Days. Their handy "track-o-matic" is a nice touch and highlights major developments for each day in the countdown. Alas, there is no associated story with a Presidential quote like this: “For my first official act in office, I will spend the next 15 days making a complete handwritten copy of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. My entire cabinet of advisers will serve as witnesses during the process. I will then begin each day in office with the reading and study of the books I have copied.” This may sound like a speech from the twilight zone, but there was a time and place where it made perfect sense.

God spoke through His servant Moses, declaring the highest and best use for a monarch's first days in office. Here is what God outlined for each newly installed king of Israel: “Now it shall come about when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself a copy of this law on a scroll in the presence of the Levitical priests. It shall be with him and he shall read it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God, by carefully observing all the words of this law and these statutes, that his heart may not be lifted up above his countrymen and that he may not turn aside from the commandment, to the right or the left, in order that he and his sons may continue long in his kingdom in the midst of Israel” (Deuteronomy 17:18-20).

The worst thing that could happen to a king was to become proud, to let the power and prerogatives of his position go to his head. Reading, studying, and meditating on a handwritten copy of God’s Word was a great antidote for this workplace hazard. Making this part of his daily regimen would remind the king to lead the people in a way that served God's interests. It would help him remember that he answers to God.

Does it seem like President Obama would welcome a coronation? Let him learn what God says about the proper priorities of kings. Let him reaffirm his accountability to the God of the Bible for his performance as President. A good place to start would be in reading and meditating on the Word. Let him discover therein how to boost his approval ratings in the eyes of the only One whose opinion matters. Alas, we are now two thirds of the way through the first one hundred days, and the President's actions present scant evidence for a sense of accountability to the God of the Bible.

What about you? Would you like to live like a king? Start a journal in which you write out the Bible verses God is using to teach you, keep that journal ready at hand, and use it as the basis of daily study and refection. Your ability to obey God, to resist pride, and to be a constructive influence on those around you will all go up.  Writing, reading, and applying God’s Word is a great way to live like a king, the kind of which the King of kings approves.

Thank God for Presidential Audacity

On October 3rd, 1863, President Lincoln issued a proclamation that included these words:

The year that is drawing towards its close has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added, which are of so extraordinary a nature, that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever watchful providence of Almighty God.

No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy. It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently and gratefully acknowledged as with one heart and one voice by the whole American People. I do therefore invite my fellow citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next, as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens.

A lot has changed in 145 years, including the choice by public leaders to use expressions like "dealing with us in anger for our sins," and "gracious gifts of the Most High God." The sentiments in this proclamation may be rarely expressed, but still ring true. Perhaps you would like to read Lincoln's proclamation before you enjoy your Thanksgiving dinner. Here's a link to the complete text.

By the way, there are some elements to President Lincoln's proclamation which have been overshadowed by "the big feast."

And I recommend to them that while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings, they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to His tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the interposition of the Almighty Hand to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it as soon as may be consistent with the Divine purposes to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquillity and Union.

President Lincoln proposed that we celebrate Thanksgiving by humbly confessing our failures, both personal and national, by requesting God's care for those facing the recent loss of loved ones, and by imploring God to show favor to our nation. What an audacious proposal by an American President - but a perfectly sensible one to those who know God.

Join the Fight Against Praise Team Chaos

Musicians have guts. They pull something out of their hearts, showcase it under a spotlight, and then allow others to decide its  merits. It's a simple two way deal struck between the band and those catching their act, and it takes courage. For the praise team at your church, this dynamic is more complicated. There's a third party involved and what He thinks matters more than the band's satisfaction with their offering or the audience's approval.

At Collierville Bible Church, we recognize that there's a lot at stake when leading a congregation to praise God. Things can run amok in a hurry. To fight the chaos, we have prepared a pamphlet that is given to everyone with an interest in serving on the team. We ask them to voice their agreement with the handbook BEFORE joining. I have attached a copy of our Praise Team Handbook for your reference. If you don't have something like this, feel free to borrow some content from ours. Anything we can do to keep our praise on track is mission critical. Join the fight against praise team chaos.

Those Nicer Evangelicals

When we started Collierville Bible Church almost twenty years ago, one of our first challenges was finding an appropriate name for the new work. The church was sponsored by First Evangelical Church of Memphis and the assumption was that the new work would have the word "evangelical" in its name as a hallmark of this lineage. But we ran into a snag. We discovered that the meaning of the word "evangelical" was fuzzy. When we tested out "Collierville Evangelical Church," it left most people wondering, "So what are you?" They couldn't tell you what an "evangelical" is - but they did understand the word "Bible." We figured, "Honoring, learning, and applying the Bible is what we're about - why not make it our middle name?"

This name choice was not a departure from being evangelical, however. Here's an excerpt from the notes for the CBC New Members class:

Collierville Bible Church could be described as an evangelical, doctrinally conservative church.  CBC is an independent congregation – it is not part of a larger organization nor a representative of a particular denomination. When we say it’s “evangelical,” that word describes lots of different kinds of churches who share a common vision: They proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ and believe it is essential to do so. To say that CBC is doctrinally conservative means that we’re not interested in innovation, novelty, or creativity when it comes to interpreting the Bible. We strive to be faithful to the timeless truths taught in God’s word.

The words in bold capture our basic summary of what it means to be evangelical. It seems fairly straight-forward. But cultural and political trends have messed with my tidy definition. The meaning of "Evangelical" has become even fuzzier than it was twenty years ago. The term has come to be bandied about, often as a slam against those who are attempting to rally Christians toward political conservatism. Evangelicals are depicted as those who coerce or impose their beliefs on others. Here's what happened at a church in Michigan last weekend - just to give you some appreciation for the problem.

In an attempt to deflect some of the criticism, a group of evangelical heavyweights has drafted An Evangelical Manifesto. Here is a very handy summary that is also available at their website. I can commend both documents but I am not sure if their strategy will prove effective. Here is the logic behind it - these are my words, not theirs:

People are mad at evangelicals. But they are mad for reasons that are unfounded. If they just understood what we believe, they would see that much of their criticism is based on misrepresentations. If they would just read our manifesto and get to know us, we could all be friends.

I am glad for their efforts to jettison some baggage and clarify what we believe. And I will be delighted with whatever benefits this effort imparts to the debate in the public square. But even if we were called "those nice evangelicals," the clash between world-views will remain both real and fierce.

The Hungry Man Advantage

Campbell Soup hit the advertising jackpot in the late 60's with it's jingle, "How do you handle a hungry man? The Manhandlers." (If you are older than 50 and were raised in America, you know the melody that goes with the lyrics.) Embedded in the slogan is the assumption that a hungry man is a force to be reckoned with. One of the world's wisest economists and an ancient King of Israel understood the concept that lies behind this ad.

During Solomon's 40 year reign, he unleashed an unprecedented season of national prosperity. My suspicion that Solomon could help us out of our current economic crisis led me into a 60 day study of his opus, the book of Proverbs. In its pages, I have discovered a collection of bedrock principles for a nation that wants to put it's financial house in order. One of those principle's could be called the "Hungry Man Advantage." It's found in Prov. 16:26: A worker’s appetite works for him, for his hunger urges him on (Prov. 16:26). Hunger is a worker's ally. It drives him to engage in pursuits that promise the satisfaction of his need. But Solomon is not just talking about "what's for dinner;" When compensation and performance are connected, a lack of results serves a beneficial purpose. 

Solomon discerns a vital connection between need and motivation. When you satisfy needs irrespective of labor to meet those needs, you remove a man's reason to work. When compensation is disconnected from performance, you destroy initiative. This is what makes handouts dangerous. And this is what makes our resort to "bailouts" a reminder of medical ads on TV. You know the ones I'm talking about, where they market a drug to relieve some malady and then cite a list of "possible side effects." The side effects sound worse than the original condition!

Here's an illustration. Assume you are a college teacher and in the first day of class you announce that you will give everyone who remains enrolled in the class an "A," regardless of attendance and performance. Now ask yourself these three questions: How many will drop the class? How many will attend the class? How many will work at mastering the material? If you answered "none" to all three, you see what Solomon sees: Everyone (perhaps with one or two exceptions) will do the minimum: They will stay on the roll expecting to do nothing beyond this and to receive an "A" for their "effort."

There is a place for compassion when it is informed by wisdom and extended to those who encounter hardship not of their own making. But handouts and bailouts have dangerous "side-effects" when extended to those reaping what they have sown. Wise up! Allow the lack of compensation resulting from poor performance to be an asset. Allow it to lock in some vital lessons on "things I should do differently." Handouts and bailouts might answer an immediate need but will diminish the reason for men and women to be productive and make wise choices. We will never get out of the hole if our "solutions" teach men and women to do less while expecting more. Pay people to be stupid and stupidity will start popping up everywhere. Won't this be fun.

Lest We Forget the Prodigal's Brother

The Prodigal Son is the celebrity sinner, the poster child for stories of failure and forgiveness. For parents of wayward teens, his tale gives them reason to hope. For those who have wandered far from God, the prodigal's return is a prototype for making a fresh start with God. I am not trying to take anything away from his "great comeback" story, but the prodigal is a secondary player in the parable that is named after him.

Parables are intended to make a point, and clues as to the nature of that point will often be found in context, in this case Luke 15. The entire chapter consists of three linked parables, "The Lost Sheep," "The Lost Coin" and "The Prodigal Son," that all answer to the need identified in verses 1-3:

Now all the tax collectors and the sinners were coming near Him to listen to Him. Both the Pharisees and the scribes began to grumble, saying, “This man receives sinners and eats with them.” So He told them this parable, saying . . . (Luke 15:1-3).

Jesus' three stories are intended to turn the tables on His critics. The religious big-wigs are grousing because Jesus is ministering to riffraff. Instead of celebrating that losers are flocking to the One person who can help them, they're grumbling that Jesus doesn't dust them away like so much shoulder lint.

So Jesus recounts a trio of parables that swell in a crescendo of celebration. First he talks about the recovery of a lost sheep. Yes, this sheep was only 1% of the flock, but surely it's recovery would be reason for joy. Then he talks about finding lost wealth. Even though it was only 10% of someone's life savings, who wouldn't host a party to celebrate its recovery? Finally he talks of a lost son. If you celebrate when one sheep (out of a hundred) is found, or one coin (out of ten) is found, then what kind of celebration would attend the return of a lost son?

Right as Jesus' audience is catching the party vibe, a new character shows up, the prodigal's whining brother. He is the one in the harsh spotlight crashing the party, the party-pooper with an attitude, and the embarrassing spokesman for Jesus' complaining critics. I draw your attention to the prodigal's brother because he is the punch line in Luke 15. THE PRODIGAL'S BROTHER is the one Jesus wants us to examine and understand.

I confess that I see in myself much that reminds me of the prodigal's brother. I have not lived a life of rebellion or moral abandon. I came to Jesus at an early age, began living for Him in earnest as a teen, and have sought to stay true to Him to this day. (Don't misunderstand me. I am just as much a sinner as the most profligate prodigal - no difference. And my steady pursuit of Christ has not kept me from presenting a pitiful picture of what it means to be His follower on occasions without number.) Despite my failures, flaws, and growing pains along the way, however, I am a fair example of the classic "good kid."

So when I observe the prodigal's descent into the depths of loose living, I can't identify. But when I hear his brother protesting, “Look! For so many years I have been serving you and I have never neglected a command of yours” (Luke 15:29), I hear in his words the voice of my own dissenting heart. I have expressed words like his, words of disappointment in God for His seeming lack of appreciation.

There are prodigals and there are prodigal's brothers. The prodigal's obstacle is his sense of unworthiness to lay claim to the heart of his father. The obstacle of the prodigal's brother is his sense of entitlement, an insistence upon God's approval for his faithfulness. In its advanced stages, "Prodigal's Brother Disease" (PBD) can rob a man of his joy. He can become a spiritual scrooge who mutters "Bah, humbug" on occasions when even angels are pulling out all the stops.

The religious leaders called out by Jesus have a pronounced case of PBD. It has achieved a level of spiritual toxicity that is acute, perhaps from which there is no recovery. But for anyone who seeks to be faithful (at risk) and who is willing to learn (teachable) from their sad story, there is hope in timely self-screening (self-examination) and treatment (repentance).

Are you a prodigal? Come home to a Father whose grace is greater than your sin. Are you a prodigal's brother? Then serve without strings before it robs you of joy. Stay faithful to God without getting sucked into thinking that God owes you recognition. Your faithfulness matters. Never forget what Jesus says to the prodigal's brother, “And he said to him, ‘Son, you have always been with me, and all that is mine is yours’” (Luke 15:31). Staying true to God WILL BE WORTH IT. That is no less true for the fact that we party strong when a prodigal comes home.

Purpose Driven Pricetag

I have been reading The Purpose Driven Life by Rick Warren. "Living a purpose-driven life" is Warren short-hand for living your life for the glory of God. This is my third reading and I would still retain this on my short list of books everyone should read. Pastor Warren has a marvelous gift for capturing truth in simple, memorable language. Many sentences rise to the level of proverbs for their pithiness.

Although chock-full of terse wisdom, there are some pages missing. One of those places is in chapter three, particularly pages 30-35. This is the section where Rick explains the "five great benefits of living a purpose-driven life."

1. It gives meaning to your life.
2. It simplifies your life.
3. It focuses your life.
4. It motivates your life.
5. It prepares you for eternity.

Let's take a cue from Paul Harvey and hear "the rest of the story." I am not taking away from what Warren has said, simply highlighting what he hasn't said that I think you NEED TO KNOW. Warren's five are all positives. Where are the negatives? Living for God's glory can be costly. And I don't think we do anyone a service unless we compare the benefits with the costs.

Jesus plainly talked about the cost! He declared, “Whoever does not carry his own cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple. For which one of you, when he wants to build a tower, does not first sit down and calculate the cost to see if he has enough to complete it” (Luke 14:27-28). Jesus did not just highlight the advantages of being His disciple and then hide the implications. He stated the matter plainly and asked men to make an honest assessment of their willingness to embrace those costs. He wants men to decide that it is "worth it" to live for Him. So let's add to Warren's list of benefits a companion list of the disadvantages of purpose-driven living.

Here's my list of three significant costs to purpose driven living. (There are probably some more, these are three that immediately came to mind.)

1. It increases your inner struggle.
2. It provokes opposition from others.
3. It leads to exhaustion.
   

First, "living your life for the glory of God" (or alternatively, living for Jesus) can increase personal stress. Living for yourself is not that complicated. When self desires - do what self wants - easy-peasy. But when you add "pleasing God" to the equation, you have complicated your life. Now you must figure out what someone else wants (God), discern where your personal desires are at odds with what God wants, and then do what is required. You can thus find yourself caught in some sort of schizophrenic tug-of-war, opposing the things your inner man desires.

No wonder Paul calls living for Jesus a "faith-fight" (1 Tim. 1:18; 6:12, 2 Tim. 4:7) and a struggle against dark forces (Eph. 6:12). His words drip with both agony and ardor in Romans 7:14-25 where his soul gasps for a reprieve from the spiritual warfare being waged within. Living a purpose-driven life introduces a whole new level of challenge to the inner man. Let's not kid anyone about the reality and intensity of this inner struggle.

Second, living for Jesus also makes some relationships pure misery. Jesus made this fact and the reason for it clear when He declared, “If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you” (John 15:19). To live for Jesus is to declare the bankruptcy of living on the world's terms. And that does not sit well with some. Know this - there will be recrimination and reprisals directed at those who live for Jesus. “Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A slave is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you” (John 15:20).

Third, purpose-driven living alters the experience of time's passage. This is, for me, one of the most profound costs. When we decide to live for Jesus, we enter into a race against time. We are instructed to make the most of opportunities (Col. 4:5); make the most of our time (Eph. 5:16); number our days (Ps. 90:12). The window of opportunity to win those do not know Jesus will close when we die, so our love for Jesus drives us in ministry to others. Ours is not a dilemma of choosing between something good and something bad. It is the exhaustion that attends choosing to do every possible good while there is still time. This is purpose driven exhaustion.

Don't hear me discouraging anyone from living for Jesus. Quite the contrary, I think that living for Jesus is the highest and best use of a man's life. I say this not because living for Him is all benefit and no cost. I say this because the costs, great as they are, are transcended by the value of knowing and serving Him. I am not alone in this opinion. The Apostle Paul was no stranger to the costs of living for Jesus. Even so he reckons this: I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us (Rom. 8:18). Do I hear an "Amen?"

Flabby Faith Has Got to Go

I told you yesterday that my big need is a cure for my little faith. How did I come to this conclusion? Here's a copy of some verses and notes that brought me to this point. Please print out a copy and read through these sixteen Bible passages. I have selected verses and highlighted key phrases that can help you (as they have me) to appreciate the importance of developing my faith muscles.

The current "economic crisis" is a GREAT reminder that flabby faith has got to go. The prosperity we enjoy can beguile us into a sense of security based on stuff. Enough of that stuff! God is the only one worthy of unconditional trust. And when a man has great faith in his faithful God, that's when Jesus takes notice. May God help us all to learn well from whatever financial turmoil lies ahead. May God help us all to make the transition from peewee faith to remarkable faith.

From Nottingham to Saddleback

Something caught pastor Rick Warren's eye on a trip to Nottingham. While touring the famed castle, he came upon a diorama of a "typical medieval village." (See an example at left.) An information plaque on the side described the centrality of the local church to such a community: It helped men to love God, but was also the driving force behind local health-care, education, and compassion to the poor.

This description well captures what the PEACE plan is all about, a restoration of the church to a role she has abdicated to government and para-church agencies. The centerpiece of the "2008 Purpose Driven Community Gathering" this week was the launch of the next phase of this PEACE plan. Saddleback Church and a few select congregations have been field testing the plan for the past five years - they are ready to ask others to help them take the effort to the next level.

Here's the executive briefing on PEACE. There are five "global giants" facing the world - spiritual emptiness, selfish leadership, extreme poverty, pandemic diseases, and illiteracy. Jesus has the answer to each of these five problems - reconciliation (with God and men), servant leadership, assistance for the poor, care for the sick, and training for the next generation. Here is where his proposal has rattled some. He dares to believe that "ordinary people, empowered by God's Spirit, doing what Jesus did, together, wherever they are" hold the key to outpacing these fast moving giants. Some para-church leaders, understandably, have flatly pronounced that relying on amateurs will never work. 

Rick Warren is proposing that the church, the people of God, are the untapped powerhouse. He is not advocating some form of Dominion Theology which suggests we can usher in the kingdom of God through transformation of society. He is not declaring that evangelism and disciple-making must be superseded by a "social gospel." He is simply saying that the church has for too long been AWOL from the front lines of battles that Jesus would have us fighting. I agree, count me in!

An Ordinary Pastor Among Extraordinary Leaders

Today marked the close of the "2008 Purpose Driven Community Gathering." You know how I love my "to do lists," so I am processing my notes to compile a handy summary of insights and action items. Good stuff!

My time here was both proftably depressing and encouraging at the same time. One of the more poignant conference features to provoke these polar responses is pictured above. The moderator on the left, Saddleback Pastor Tom Holladay, led five pastors in a discussion of their involvment in global missions. All five regaled us with jaw-dropping stories of how God worked through them and their congregations. It was exciting to see God's goodness in accomplishing things that could only be explained by His hand.

There were eight of these panels, each focused on a different topic, all populated with nothing but gifted, dramatically successful leaders. With a steady stream of almost 30 such extraordinary men on stage, it made being extraordinary seem the norm. And that's where my self-doubt tugged at me. Being an ordinary pastor in what, by comparison, would seem an unremarkable church could make a guy feel a tad sub-par. So I was grateful when one of the last panelists, Jim Lane, described the challenge of ministering to business leaders. He observed, "Businessmen define themselves by what they do, not by who they are. This is what we have to undo."

I think his observation is relevant to us all, pastors included. We want to be defined by great exploits when Jesus is looking for a great likeness to Himself. What a slap-in-the-face reminder to keep things in perspective. I must never lose focus on what matters - a simple and pure devotion to Jesus. Such a heart may propel me to embrace great risks for God. And praise God when He chooses to work through me  (and you) in ways that are obvious and impressive. But, more than great exploits, maintaining the white hot fire of passion for Jesus must be my aspiration. This is what defines me; not what I do but who I am!

Rick Warren's Orchard

This week I have been attending the "2008 Purpose Driven Community Gathering" at Saddleback Church. In case you recently arrived on the planet, that's the California megachurch where Rick Warren is the founding pastor. You know I subscribe to Proverbs 18:13, so I'll reserve my conference relections for AFTER it's over. For now, what about the Nazareth effect? (Can anything good come from Saddleback?)

The reactions to the "Purpose Driven" model have been all over the map. I'm not getting it - I probably don't agree with Warren about some things he says, thinks, or does. (Nothing comes to mind at the moment, but I am sure I could come up with something if I did some nit-picking.) There is an incredible amount of what he teaches that has been instructive and convicting. I appreciate his labor of capturing biblical truth in simple, memorable language. Listening to him has encouraged me to be faithful and purposeful in the ministry God has entrusted to me. If "you will know them by their fruits," his cherry orchard looks pretty good.

Doesn't the criticism mask a conceit: "Unless Rick Warren thinks, does, and says exactly what I think do, and say, he is unworthy to be your teacher." Isn't this just another way of saying, "Bring in the clones - I alone can teach you, except when you find an exact duplicate of me." Serious measures are called for by factionalism and heresy. I am not hearing that here at Saddleback. So, I am taking my cue from the Bereans, searching the Sciptures and gobbling up all the truth I can find. It's kind of like eating bing cherries off the tree - You savor the fruit and spit out the pits. Sweet!

What any dumb bunny can do!

In a previous post, I proposed solving a Hillary-Obama-McCain dilemna by distinguishing between voting for and endorsing a candidate. God uses all men, even those of whom He disapproves, to accomplish His purposes - "God can draw a straight line with a crooked pencil." The fact that God can do this and still be holy demonstrates that it is possible for us to vote for a candidate about whom we have reservations and to do so with integrity.

Because God uses all men to accomplish His purposes, someone could easily assume that character and "doing the right thing" are of little value. But doing right matters, not because of "usability" but “supportability.” The man who loves God will find that the alignment of heart between he and God unlocks God’s willingness to bless his efforts: “For the eyes of the Lord move to and fro throughout the earth that He may strongly support those whose heart is completely His” (2 Chron. 16:9).

All men are used of God. But not all men’s plans are blessed. God is looking for those whose character shouts “Here is someone with a heart for God.” When God sees such a one, He has no problem saying, “I want to make what this guy (or gal) is attempting part of what I accomplish. We are on the same page. Why wouldn't I?”

So what is the more worthy goal? Any dumb bunny can be "used of God." But being "blessed by God" is reserved for a select few - those whose hearts belong to Him. Make the things of God the longing of your heart and watch how God's "strong support" kicks in. Don't waste today worrying about being used by God. Find a way, today, to give God more of your heart and know that THAT is precisely the defining characteristic God is looking for. A heart that is God's is what makes a man special.

Bricks, Spirit, and Truth

Cynthia Ware's Question: For whom should a church building be designed? My response: I wonder if we are asking the best question. Is there a deeper issue?

One of the heated debates in Palestine at the time of Jesus concerned the “proper location” for worship. Mount Gerizim and Mount Zion were the two contenders. The worship in both locations was flawed. Mount Gerizim represented a form of worship that did not honor the truth, ie, the Samaritans worshiped what they did not know. In Jerusalem, it was only marginally better. By all accounts, they had a killer facility. And they had the truth, the Old Testament. But their response, particularly from leadership, was laced with hypocrisy. They did not worship from the inside out, but went through the routine while “their hearts are far from Me.”

This is what makes Jesus' remarks to the “woman at the well” so poignant: Jesus said to her, “Woman, believe Me, an hour is coming when neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. ...But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers. God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth”(John 4:21-24).

I am not disparaging the importance of architectural and physical factors. Anything that gets in the way of true worship has got to go. But, Jesus is saying that “now worship” transcends the limitations of facilities and locations. Let’s be careful not to become pre-occupied with architecture.

Some years back, I attended a worship service in Abidjan, Ivory Coast. I have never experienced a worship service that was more moving, more vibrant, more ALIVE. Nothing about the facility was remarkable. By western standards, it was appallingly inadequate. But God was working, and the building didn’t matter. Let’s make our buildings work, but let’s be unceasing in our appeals for God to work - through the truth, in our hearts!

Sheep Power or Sheepish Behavior

We need shepherds who shep. But we also need sheep who know the difference between being good sheep and bad sheep. If you have downloaded the notes on Shepherdology, you will notice on page 20 a compilation of what the New Testament outlines for good sheep. Here are the key passages:

• But we request of you, brethren, that you appreciate those who diligently labor among you, and have charge over you in the Lord and give you instruction, and that you esteem them very highly in love because of their work. Live in peace with one another (1 Thess. 5:12-13).
• The elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching (1 Tim. 5:17).
• Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their faith (Heb. 13:7).
• Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they keep watch over your souls as those who will give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with grief, for this would be unprofitable for you (Heb. 13:17).

There may come an occasion when a shepherd crosses the line. That's when 1 Tim. 5:20-22 comes into play - a shepherd in sin should be publicly rebuked and privately restored. But the passages above outline the DEFAULT response of sheep. So unless a shepherd is involved in sin, here is what God expects of sheep toward their shepherds:

1. Appreciate them - Find ways (both in words and deeds) to register your gratefulness for specific ways in which their shepherding has promoted your good.
2. Esteem them very highly in love / consider them worthy of honor - View their ministry as a great asset. Take every opportunity to receive the benefit of their instruction and guidance.
3. Imitate their faith - Discover what makes their faith tick. Study their example. Export principles for living from their life to yours.
4. Obey them - On those occasions when they feel compelled to issue a directive, take it seriously. They wouldn't do this, if they didn't feel it necessary.
5. Submit to them - And don't just comply with a directive while maintaining a grumbling spirit. Take what they say to heart and follow through with a happy spirit.
6. Let them lead you with joy and not with grief - It is possible for sheep to make a shepherd's life pure misery. But sheep can also make a shepherd's life PURE JOY! How? By responding to God with passion and consistency. When I see people in my flock going all out for God, it puts the bounce in my bungee. That's when ministry is FUN!

Did you catch the last sentence in Heb. 13:17?  When sheep adopt this default position toward their shepherds, they actually promote their own good. There are far too many tales out there of sheep who bite. When they do, they make shepherding a pain and thereby diminish their own prospects for progress in the faith. Do yourself a favor. Find ways to use the six antidotes above; Use your sheep powers to transform the service of your spiritual leaders into something that gives them great joy. You'll be amazed at the difference it makes in your own walk with God!

Is there a shepherd in the house?

WHAT YOU SAID: "Would you be willing to serve the congregation as a shepherd?" WHAT THEY HEARD: "How would you like to attend lots of meetings and belabor mundane decisions?" The disconnect betrays the fact that understanding and appreciating what it means to be the shepherd of a local fellowship is waning.

Doing church "American style" has devalued the role of the shepherd in favor of innovative visionaries, dynamic leaders, and charismatic speakers. I bucked this trend by leading a shepherdology retreat this weekend and here is a complete set of my notes on New Testament Shepherdology. It unpacks the ten primary NT passages where the nature, responsibilities, methods, and qualifications of local church shepherds are discussed in depth. You can't read through this biblical material without drawing a conclusion: When local church shepherds are not present or are failing to fulfill their biblical responsibilities, the spiritual welfare of the flock is jeopardized. When these assignments are faithfully carried out, church health and productivity are promoted.

At Collierville Bible Church, the responsibility of shepherding the flock is vested in men called "elders," a group that includes paid and lay pastors. But regardless of the form of church polity at your church and what you call your shepherds, you still need them. It is interesting that nowhere in the Bible does it require "lots of meetings and belabored decisions" from its shepherds. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with meetings. But the real work of such men is accomplished outside the board room and in positive engagement with people. If a conference table is used infrequently because shepherds are actively engaged with their flock promoting their spiritual welfare, that is a healthy neglect. Viva, less board meetings! Viva, shepherds who shep!

Knowing People Who Count

In a previous post, I talked about the American Idol Effect (the AI Effect) by which contestants disconnect fame from greatness. They long to be well known, even if it means they are not well thought of. (At the start of a new season of American Idol, we wonder if people will finally get this. Nope. I loved Ryan's line - "the auditions never seem to disappoint.") But, I also think there is something profound going on.

The need to be known is a basic human need. It is precisely this need which is addressed here: But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how is it that you turn back again to the weak and worthless elemental things, to which you desire to be enslaved all over again? (Gal. 4:9). If anyone supposes that he knows anything, he has not yet known as he ought to know; but if anyone loves God, he is known by Him (1 Cor. 8:2-33). The search for fame is a poor substitute for finding true significance, the significance of being known by the One who matters, our heavenly Father. If you love God, you are NOT a nobody! Don't let anyone, including presidents and celebrities, tell you otherwise.

Do You Agree with Your Pastor?

Here is a video clip from Fox News in which Obama sought to move national attention away from the constant loop of sermon footage of his pastor. Click on this link for the related story from Fox. Can you ever remember a time when more people were watching and talking about a local pastor and the content of his sermons? Wouldn't you know the sermons everybody is talking about are being talked about for all the wrong reasons. What might life in America be like if sermons that well represented Jesus were creating this kind of buzz? Wishful thinking!

Obama is taking the following approach: "He's my friend. I don't agree with him but I support him as my friend." It is healthy for a friendship to thrive despite disagreements. I imagine that this will actually play well with the demographic he is courting, a demographic that believes relationships trump truth. Of course, I can't help but remember the statement from Proverbs, "Faithful are the wounds of a friend, but deceitful are the kisses of an enemy" (Prov. 27:6). A friend is willing to wound you when you step over the line. He loves you too much to just say what you want to hear. He loves you enough to say the hard things. I wonder if Obama has given out any "faithful wounds" to his friend, Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr.?

I am the pastor of a community church, so it is easy for me to personalize these events. Every Sunday, I strive to communicate clearly and fairly what the Bible teaches. Despite my attempts to get it right, I am sure there are sermons in which my words fall short of doing justice to God's Word. But let's say we are not talking about nuance, depth, and effectiveness. Suppose I really blew it by consciously, persistently, and passionately stating something that was squarely at odds with what the Bible clearly teaches. Let's also assume that friends and fellow leaders appealed to me to return to the truth and were repeatedly rebuffed by me. Would people decide to continue attending the church and simply "agree-to-disagree?" I doubt it. If I blew it like this, wouldn't my flock promptly and surely vote with their feet. Wouldn't they be right to do so? Wouldn't a failure to do so raise questions about their own spiritual health?

Obnoxious Christians - Pt. 2 of 2

Some state, "There is only one way to be saved, through a personal relationship with Jesus as one's Savior and Lord." Others declare, "There are many ways to be saved." Who's right?

Remember the politician who beamed, "Some of my friends are for it, and some of my friends are against it - I'm for my friends." Is it possible to take a cue from him and embrace both statements? Yes, except for the stubborn phrase, "only one." If you exchange "only one" in the first statement with something less exclusive, then both statements can become friends. It would yield this composite: "There are many ways to be saved. One way is to be saved through a personal relationship with Jesus as one's Savior." Break out the candles and start singing Kumbaya! Stated this way, the Jesus people can do their thing while everyone else discovers what works for them.

Once we insert the phrase "only one," however, these two statements become hopelessly irreconcilable. Both of them claim to be the truth, but only one can have the title. If Jesus is the "only way," then there CANNOT be many ways. So, is insertion of the "only one" clause necessary? Jesus declares, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but through Me" (John 14:6). This passage seems to clearly demonstrate that the inclusion of the "only one" clause is Jesus' idea. There are some who say that this key passage is being misapplied. We have been around this block before, so let me just direct you to one of our exclusive "pretty good downloads," an analaysis of John 14:6. Sift through the evidence, and you can be sure of this: Christians believe that Jesus is the only way to salvation because Jesus taught it.

Remember the principle I asked you to tuck away last week? We have a moral obligation to communicate with others what we know about the good and the bad of choices that are theirs to make. If Jesus is the only way, then men who turn to any other way are in grave peril. And, the imperative to "love your neighbor as yourself" requires us to make their peril known. Why not take our approach to publishing truth about temporal issues and adapt it for use in matters of eternal importance. Remember the process we described last week? Here's an adaptation to the Gospel: A sense of moral obligation should drive us to share this information with a circle of friends, acquaintances, and contacts; anyone who could benefit from this knowledge. How could we face them in the future if we withheld what we know? We need not cajole or pressure anyone to respond; we should give them the information and sources to examine the issues for themselves; we ought to encourage them to take our appeal seriously; we must answer their questions with patience and grace.

There are two trends afoot that I think are at cross purposes to this approach. On the one hand, I will admit with shame and sadness that there are those who claim to be Christians but whose speech and behavior detracts rather than adds to our credibility among those who need to hear our message. We deserve some of the invective we are receiving from our culture. We do Jesus no service when we give people reasons to dismiss our message.

But we should not kid ourselves. People are going to find reasons to dismiss our message, simply because the "only one" clause puts us in a position where someone is right and someone else is wrong. So here is my second concern: Some believers are responding to the criticism by losing their voice. They are tempted to downplay the "only one" clause, or even concede this point to the culture of "many ways" in order to get off the hot seat. There is no way to reconcile our "only one" view with the modern mind of "many ways." We cannot pretend that there would be no conflict if we "just understood one another."

So, on the one hand, let's give our culture every reason to listen to our message. Our truth-claims exclude competing claims - Let's not use any confidence in our position as an excuse to be arrogant and dismissive. But, let's ALSO not fool ourselves into thinking it is possible to be popular with the "many ways" crowd without compromising our essential message. Stay the course between the twin perils of arrogance and silence: Don't be obnoxious, but speak up!

Obnoxious Christians, Pt. 1 of 2

There is plenty of disdain out there for the "bigoted Christian." TG at the Drudge Forum finds herself shocked that "Christian bigots, sometimes referred to as Christian Fundamentalists, will flat out tell you that if you do not believe as they do, that you are going to suffer damnation in an eternal and torturous hell." She sees a "thought template" here that is indistinguishable from that of "Muslim Radical Theology" that is "killing hundreds of thousands all over the world."

Her perspective deserves some analysis for the fact that she is not alone. A rising tide of invective threatens anyone who dares to believe that salvation is found in Jesus alone. I am confident that if you are sharing the Gospel with any frequency, you have reaped such a "how dare you" response. So let's use her comments as the basis for some analysis of the trend.

First, let's examine the definition of "bigotry" that TG us using. According to the Random House Webster's College Dictionary, "bigotry" is "extreme intolerance of a . . .  belief that differs from one's own." Note that there are two components to this definition. There is "extreme intolerance." And there is a "belief that differs from one's one." Based on this definition, there are two tests that must be passed before the term "bigot" is appropriately assigned. First, there is the belief test. Person A (the possible bigot) has beliefs that differ from those of Person B (the possible target of the bigotry). Second, Person A demonstrates intolerance that rises to the level of being "extreme" toward person B. Even though person A may have a fundamental disagreement with person B, by itself, this does not constitute bigotry in the absence of "extreme intolerance." Both components, different beliefs AND extreme intolerance, must be present before the term "bigot" is appropriate.

In TG's world, she defines bigotry using a modified definition; when Christians "flat out tell you" what they believe, they earn the label. Here is a mystery to solve - How have they met both conditions necessary to earn the label? Clearly, the Random House first condition for bigotry has been met. There is a difference of opinion between TG and the "Christian bigot." But where's the "extreme intolerance?" Here's my best shot at an answer. When the Christian bigot "flat out tells you" his view, he has, in TG's mind, gone to extremes and met condition #2. For person A to merely COMMUNICATE his view to person B is "extreme intolerance."

I wonder if this sword cuts both ways? Isn't TG, whose opinion differs from the alleged Christian bigot, "flat out" communicating her opinion, too? What makes the Christian's self-expression bigotry and not hers?

Despised for all the right reasons!

I am shocked! The world doesn't like me. Yes, results from a Barna poll tell us that "only 3% of 16 to 29 year-old non-Christians express favorable views of evangelicals." I am an evangelical, someone who proclaims the Gospel of Jesus Christ and believes it is essential to do so. So I guess 97% of non-Christian young people can't bring themselves to tell some poll-taker I'm OK.

I will be the first to admit we evangelicals have lots of room for improvement. David Kinneman has proposed in his new book, UnChristian, that we address failures like hypocrisy, treatment of outsiders as conversion targets, hatred of homosexuals, seclusion from the real world, over-politicization, and condemnation. Tony Woodlief, from World Magazine, wrote an editorial, Going Negative, that is favorable toward the book and that suggests we should be even tougher on ourselves than UnChristian recommends.

Let's put some Light-work balance into the equation. Jesus was VERY CLEAR when teaching His disciples that being hated goes with the package: “And you will be hated by all because of My name” (Luke 21:17). At the Last Supper, He explained the basis for this hatred:  “If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you” (John 15:19). If we are living for high approval ratings from non-Christians, we might as well pack it up. Not gonna happen! Jesus says that the more clearly our allegiance to Him shows, the lower our approval ratings will sink.

However, this doesn't mean that we write off every critic.  Peter explains, For it is better, if God should will it so, that you suffer for doing what is right rather than for doing what is wrong (1 Pet. 3:17). There are times when we are criticized and suffer recrimination for doing what is wrong. In those times, repent, confess it, and put things to rights. But there will be times when God allows us to receive criticism and reprisal for doing exactly what He desires. Those are the times when we are despised for all the right reasons. 

So when our approval ratings are low, some healthy self-examination is in order. If we can discern ways to "improve our serve," let's do it. But if that examination confirms we are doing exactly what Jesus wants, then it is time to reaffirm for whose pleasure we live. It's time to take a cue from the church in Acts and throw a party: So they went on their way from the presence of the Council, rejoicing that they had been considered worthy to suffer shame for His name (Acts 5:41).

Is one more seeker-sensitive church needed?

Someone suggested in a recent conversation: "Maybe we need to become more of a seeker driven church?" I don't think so! This approach to ministry was pioneered by Rick Warren (Rick would call his approach "seeker sensitive") and Bill Hybels (who would use the term, "seeker driven"). The franchise has been emulated by thousands of churches in America and around the world.

These men have received a lot of criticism from the established church, but let me be clear that my aversion to their approach is not about these concerns. I am grateful for thousands who have come to Christ through the ministries of Saddleback, Willow, and other churches like them. Collierville Bible Church has had the privilege to grow saints who first embraced their Savior through these ministries.

My hesitation to emulate their model is more about a sense of God's calling for our church. I doubt that our modest fellowship could muster the kind of budget and program upon which this approach to ministry depends. But even if we could, do we really need one more church that is trying to do the same thing all the other seeker sensitive churches are doing? Do we really need another church that, because of resource constraints, is doing a so-so job of emulating the franchise when there are lots of other churches that are doing it well?

I don't think this is God's calling for our church. He is directing us to a "makers of disciple-makers" model that is not gauged by its success at "attracting a crowd," but by its ability to mobilize a core of disciple-makers. This is a model that is neither constrained by budgets nor limited in opportunities. Its fundamental challenge, according to Jesus, is a shortage of skilled and motivated labor.

As I consider the many churches in the seeker driven franchise, I view them as prolific birth and delivery centers. I am grateful for all the new births. Unfortunately, way too many saints are spending way too much time in the nursery as receivers. They are provided with a steady flow of goods and services. They "grow" into consumers. We see row upon row of those clear plastic baby tubs on hospital carts - they stretch as far as the eye can see. Who will get these babes out of their bassinets?

What we need is one more church that will help these babes become mature and productive givers. We need a church that will challenge the Christian consumerism that has become the norm. We need one more church that will affirm the destiny and calling of every babe to be made complete in Christ, to become a producer, to bear much fruit, and to reproduce. It is the longing of my heart for us to become one such church. We exist to mobilize hands for the harvest.