GlocalNet

I spent some time with some church planting heroes of mine--not the kind you can blast their name everywhere until we get to heaven. One guy trains guys all over the world and he had some incredible observations. Some of you know how I talk about starting with the society versus the church and focus on the disciple instead of the planter. That’s exactly what these guys do. He told me how our evangelism paradigm in the West has become a rescue mentality versus a redemption mentality. Well, as someone who is obsessed with the whole concept and practice of transformation, he was ringing my bell. Both realities are true. But, if you start from redemption instead of rescue, it impacts both your presentation and end game. This isn’t a western response but a global response that’s already happening on every continent and in many nations. It was exciting him paralleling some of the differences in the two and what happens when you start with redemption/reconciliation versus rescue.

The other planter is a non-anglo guy who’s about my age who lives in the East and is leading a church planting movement of nearly two million--just in the past 10 years. Not bad for not being a Texan! He now travels to other nations and teaches how to plant churches and is mentoring some movements globally. No one hardly knows his name, but God does. As I sat and listened to him, I was so moved. He has no books, he has no web-site or chat-room, video-room, conferences, articles, but man he has fruit! Who wouldn’t trade all their “stuff” for fruit?

There once were two cars. One came from the junkyard and one from a used car lot. The one from the junkyard was there with a lot of junk, nothing was new, nothing was primed, nothing was without rust, or holes, and nothing worked. So, it was really cheap. The one from the used car lot had been washed and waxed with her tires all armored! The motor ran, but not real good. The owner who got the car from the used car lot took what was there, cleaned it up, tuned it up, repainted it. The original motor was kept, because it was original, even though a newer one would be better mechanically. It really shined. Conferences were held and books were written on …

// Continue Reading //

I spent some time with some church planting heroes of mine--not the kind you can blast their name everywhere until we get to heaven. One guy trains guys all over the world and he had some incredible observations. Some of you know how I talk about starting with the society versus the church and focus on the disciple instead of the planter. That’s exactly what these guys do. He told me how our evangelism paradigm in the West has become a rescue mentality versus a redemption mentality. Well, as someone who is obsessed with the whole concept and practice of transformation, he was ringing my bell. Both realities are true. But, if you start from redemption instead of rescue, it impacts both your presentation and end game. This isn’t a western response but a global response that’s already happening on every continent and in many nations. It was exciting him paralleling some of the differences in the two and what happens when you start with redemption/reconciliation versus rescue.

The other planter is a non-anglo guy who’s about my age who lives in the East and is leading a church planting movement of nearly two million--just in the past 10 years. Not bad for not being a Texan! He now travels to other nations and teaches how to plant churches and is mentoring some movements globally. No one hardly knows his name, but God does. As I sat and listened to him, I was so moved. He has no books, he has no web-site or chat-room, video-room, conferences, articles, but man he has fruit! Who wouldn’t trade all their “stuff” for fruit?

There once were two cars. One came from the junkyard and one from a used car lot. The one from the junkyard was there with a lot of junk, nothing was new, nothing was primed, nothing was without rust, or holes, and nothing worked. So, it was really cheap. The one from the used car lot had been washed and waxed with her tires all armored! The motor ran, but not real good. The owner who got the car from the used car lot took what was there, cleaned it up, tuned it up, repainted it. The original motor was kept, because it was original, even though a newer one would be better mechanically. It really shined. Conferences were held and books were written on …

// Continue Reading //

Last week, I listened to some of the world’s greatest scientists discuss faith and science and got to meet with them in a couple of small group gatherings. I wish I could have been with those men for an entire week. I would have asked thousands of questions. The previous week, I made a statement in my sermon that has generated a lot of discussion. When man sinned he fell. It genetically altered him. Sin changed our genetics; whereas, man’s physical body was created to live eternally. It would now have a life span and die.

In the past few years, there have been magazine articles to the effect that some people may be “genetically” predisposed to certain sin(s). The “worldly” rationale is that God created us prefect, and, so, if I have the predisposition it must be OK. The “religious” rationale is God didn’t make you that way--science is wrong.

I think they’re both wrong.

Genetic “sinful” genes only prove “original” sin and that man is fallen. We truly are born sinners, and science backs it up! Science is helping your case pastor--use it! Children are born with birth defects every day. Is that a statement to the way we have to stay? Of course not. We medically fix those defects as much as possible.

Jesus came not just to redeem our souls, but our genetics as well. Could this be why a bodily physical resurrection is so important? Are we going to get a new body that is genetically altered or “new” and “improved?”

Ask me in a few hundred years--I’ll have a definitive answer for you!

On more than one occasion, I’ve found myself in a group of meg-church pastors who make a statement like this. “We need to partner to start some significant churches--we don’t need to waste our time on these little churches of a hundred or two hundred--but to really start a thriving large church.” They don’t get it! I try to educate them, but, more often than not, to no avail. When they make a statement like that they miss two things. First, they don’t know their history. Where faith has exploded, it has never been because of the multiplication of mega-churches, but of smaller churches from 50 to 200. This happened in the early church, Europe, American history, and now it is happening in Asia. Nothing wrong with a mega-church if that’s what God has for a church. NorthWood is a mega-church, BUT to not know history is to make some major mistakes. Second, they don’t understand the nature of movements. Movements are personal and viral. Where movements have emerged, it hasn’t been because of the large, but because of the small. There is a difference between a fad and a movement. A fad is a short-lived growth spurt based on mass hype and enthusiasm. A movement is a long-term growing tsunami gathering every drop of water that will change the landscape of everyone and thing it touches.

So . . . I’m at a conference called Faith Forward at the Crystal Cathedral and I meet this young pastor David Phillips. His church isn’t a hundred and he walks up to me and begins talking and tells me what his church has already planted and how many they are planning to plant every year. HE’S THE SECOND GUY I’VE MET WHO IS AT A SMALLER CHURCH THAT HAS MADE CHURCH MULTIPLICATION A PRIMARY FOCUS! NorthWood started planting when we had 300, and, at the time, I thought we were too small. Mark Harris is a pastor in Tucson, Arizona. His church runs around 150 and has planted 18 other churches that when their total is combined represents around 4,000 people.

I want to see churches multiplied so badly, but for that to happen, it can’t be just the larger or mega-churches, but the smallest units multiplying. When we do that, we just may have movement.

Tuesday, I spoke at a conference called Faith Forward at the Crystal Cathedral in Orange County, California. Hands down, the most fascinating speaker was Francis Collins author of The Language of God. He headed up the Human Genome Project to map our genetic map. He took on--head on--Dawkins, Dennet, and Harris on why, as a scientist, he believes in God. You can put this guy in the history books with some of the greatest scientists who ever lived. More on that in a later blog. Later in the evening, a small group of us had supper with Dr. Schuller. Ken Medema, the famous pianist was with us. The conversation went over to Ken’s blindness and Dr. Collins asked if he knew the cause of his blindness. Ken explained it was a genetic issue since birth. Dr. Collins told him there is a significant breakthrough with his condition and experiments have been done and it might be possible to fix his condition! Ken was excited, right? Wrong. Pleased, ok--yet questioning.

I would think a man who’s been blind his entire life and has a chance to see would want to see. Ken told us he had “seen” a movie about a man who had been blind his entire life and for a brief period he could see, but he was relieved when the treatment failed and he could go back to life as he had known it.

Healing--he would have to learn an entirely new way of coping, surviving and living in the world. Maybe if he were in his 20s, but now in his 50s plus, would he really be ready for that?

Healing--he believes that he plays the piano as he does because his other senses have compensated for what he lost. Would it impact his passion, his ministry, and who he has become? Would it be worth risking his music not being what it is now?

Healing--he’s never seen anyone, anything, mountains, oceans, or people he loves. The first person he would expect to see would be Jesus, now it might be a doctor--would he really want to trade that?

Healing--maybe Ken’s already healed. Maybe what others would call a loss has become his gain, and perhaps ours as well.

Sunday was kind of this “surreal” and fast-paced time lapse all at once, in my mind, as I stood to preach in the 11:30 service. I looked out and saw all these young college kids that I knew since they were born, or very, very young. My son Ben has just graduated from NYU and is trying to use business to one day live and work globally with Ashley, his finance, who has just finished her teaching degree. Aaron Snow spent the weekend with homeless people. I told him, “do that once a week and you can write your own book on missional!” Seems today, people like to sit, write, dissect, gripe, but do very little. Rock and roll wild man Aaron. Kyle Neiman is a youth intern and booming in his life and ministry. Paige Kimmel is getting ready to teach, and hopefully one day do somelthing globally for God. Ben Hammond was an agnostic when I met him. Later he married Ashley Wilson--they leave next week to help Kevin Colon at his plant in Superior, Colorado. Jason Worlitz has been “grabbed” by God in a powerful way and is headed into the ministry and is in our internship program--who wudda thought!!!! Justin and Amanda Sadler are living the life and serving God and others. I remember when Justin accepted Christ. I asked him “Have you ever sinned, Justin?” His resposne was, “Well, I’m not a regular!” Many, many more that God is using. I’m proud of all you guys! Love God, love life, have fun, take huge risks, learn in your suffering, comfort others in their suffering, dream big, walk consistently, be they big or small steps, see God in everything and everything will work out.

I’ve heard the term “simple church” bantered around in different context meaning different things the past few years. I like it. All the discussion on church is about how to keep the church alive and effective today and insure a place for it tomorrow. How much of that is up to us and how much of that is up to God?

Is the answer of the church and the future of the church found in the church, or outside the church? What if the answer was not the bride but the bridegroom--Christ? Can we truly “deal” with the bride without knowing, understanding, or even getting in trouble with the bridegroom--if it’s His bride? In Texas we have a saying, “Don’t mess with Texas.” And, it’s true. Ever been to the Alamo? I have an ancestor whose bones were burned in a pit with some 189 others. I think today Jesus might say, “Don’t mess with my bride until you’ve first dealt with me!”

The challenge to the relevance of the church we are dealing with is generally not our theology, history, or even Biblical understanding of Jesus as much as it is our cultural and personal way of relating to Him. How do we bring others into a dynamic relationship with Him.

What if, instead of making the church simple, we made our understanding and walk with Jesus simple? What would that look like? I’m traveling and will try to respond, but I’m just curious.

There seems to be two responses to the church today in the West in terms of challenging it to be more than what it is. One is a church planting movement--let’s start new churches to do what the established church can’t do and reach more people because, no doubt about it, new churches reach more lost people than anyone. Then there are modern reformers, or should I say post-modern reformers, that are experimenting with what a new emerging church out of the old church looks like. Been thinking about this a whole lot lately. Is there really such a thing as a church planting movement or is it a Jesus movement? Can emergent replace existing where the church already exist (emergent in China and Asia is very different from emergent in the West).

So here’s the big question. How do we see change happen? What if, and I’m thinking out loud here, it wasn’t to do with “church” at all. We start with church forms, be they central or decentralized, church models, be they house or building, but, is there a movement in history that did that and was successful? I can’t think of any. They may be there. I just don’t know them.

Meno Simons, Count Zinzindorf, and Tolstoy all started movements, but they came as a result of a passion for Jesus. The church in Asia is exploding because of their passion for Christ--church is an outgrowth. Church is present, church is real, but it doesn’t start with church, it starts with Jesus and church evolves. Evolve is the right word because movements each have a unique expression of church. No Chinese pastor woke up one day and said, “I’m going to start a church planting movement!” They did wake up, in love with Jesus and change their community and ultimately other communities as the Gospel spread and people congregationalized.

We start with the church, and all her functions, regardless of model or philosophy, and try to engineer things to produce what we are after. Here’s the question, does the church make disciples, or disciples make the church?

For disciples to make the church, you have to believe the Gospel is powerful enough to change. You have to believe the Word of God is alive and can bring the character of Jesus within us. You have to believe the Spirit …

// Continue Reading //

When we returned from taking Jill back to Baylor last week and walked into our utility room, we found these messages on a slick board.

It’s really a blast reading Bosch’s Transforming Mission in one hand and N.T. Wright’s Jesus And the Victory of God in the other. I don’t think I’ve ever thought as much in terms of tying Christology and missiology as I have recently. This is what’s driving the whole “worldview” question in my mind. I think that’s going to be a big one for me. I do not believe I would have ever been that interested, or even seen the value of reading them simultaneously, had I not been captured by the Kingdom and then falling in love with the King and finally engaging the world. All three of those things had to be going on at the same time. I doubt I’d understand, truly understand, this had I not first got my hands dirty in planting other churches and engaging domains of society globally.

The greatest learning I’ve done is not when I’ve discovered a single thing-- but when a few things have been arranged in a specific sort of way unexpectedly--that gave unexpected results and insights. Kinda like DNA. That’s discovery! I like Sweet’s “ancient-future” insight. Bosch is very adamant we are on a new threshold--that was the early 90’s. Man, I wish he were still alive. I’d love to get his take on so many things.

He distinguishes between scientific and missiological paradigms—he gives four things:

First, new theological paradigms don’t necessarily cancel the old ones—example of the revelation of God through Israel and Christ.

Second, no new theological paradigm insists on absolute right but admits it is incomplete and affected by cultural bias.

Third, scientific paradigms cannot be made without people joining them who are insiders—theological paradigms can make sense to outsiders.

Fourth, scientists operate in one paradigm or another, ordinarily life people straddle two theological paradigms at once (maybe more).

In short, scientific paradigms tend to be totalitarian demanding absolute loyalty from their adherents. Theological paradigms, at least Christian ones, can afford to be much softer around the edges.

This is powerful, powerful, powerful!!!! Heavy reflection here is needed. We’ve done the same when we focus on our models of ministry and methods of engagement. I’m convinced there will be no viral movement of the Gospel in the US until we destroy boundaries of methodology.

Next Page »