You never know where God will show up

I found this completely awe inspiring and wanted to share it in as many ways as I can. Another example of how God's Kingdom breaks through into our lives in the most unexpected places and ways.

Ecclesia vs Church Part 2: The historical roots of the Ecclesia

Read part 1: Ecclesia vs Church

This is my ongoing look at Emil Brunner's prophetic discussion of ecclesiology in his little classic entitled The Misunderstanding of the Church. In this blog, we will look at chapter 2 entitled The Historical Origin of the Ecclesia.

Brunner's principle thesis is that the Ecclesia of the New Testament is something other than and has little in common with the institution of the Church that has emerged out of it. To more fully appreciate that, we need to better understand the historical foundations of the Ecclesia. The first step is to look at its relationship to and distinction from God's people as revealed in the Old Testament. In the Old Testament, God chooses a people to act as the supporting character in His divine drama of redemption. They become known as Israel. In short, Israel is "the covenant-people of the covenant-God." This, too, can be said of the Ecclesia. Brunner writes:

It would seem, therefore, that according to the purpose of God the Ecclesia was to be identified with the elect people of the Old Covenant. And yet the fellowship founded by Jesus realized that it was something wholly new, namely, the fellowship of those who through Jesus Christ share in the New Covenant and the new aeon. . . through the present fulfillment of what had been previously merely promised, not simply a new [mode of dispensation] but an utterly new dimension of salvation has been vouchsafed, namely, life in the Holy Spirit, concerning which the Gospel of St. John roundly declares "for the Holy Spirit was not yet given". When Paul affirms: "if any man is in Christ he is a new creature" he is alluding to a new mode of existence not yet known to the believers of the old covenant.

This new existence, Brunner observes, leads to three observable facts in the New Testament Ecclesia.

1. The ceremonial and cultic laws of Judaism are no longer valid for the Ecclesia. This becomes particularly important in regard to the issue of circumcision as Christianity spreads among the Gentiles.
   
2. There is clear distinction between membership of a nation or race and membership of a community of believers. The newly baptized Gentiles are as fully citizens of the Kingdom of God as are those who were circumcised.
   
3. The Ecclesia no longer stands under the jurisdiction of or subordinate to a theocratic government. The Ecclesia renounces "the fusion of Christ's rule with the law of the state."
   

This last point is particularly interesting as we consider the current state of the Church within our culture. Especially, within the United States, Christianity is straining under the weight of the accumulated negative perception of society gathered over years of misguided efforts to establish a modern day theocracy. The Kingdom of God will never be equated with a secular government. The Ecclesia understood this and it informed how it related with the world around it.

I believe the emerging church movement is, in part, contributable to a renewed awareness of this life in the Holy Spirit and a reformation of the role of the Church as a delivery agent for the Kingdom of God in contradistinction to the laws-based pursuit of a Christian society. What do you think?

Related articles by Zemanta

• One (Growing) Perspective on Evangelicalism and Politics (gatheringinlight.com)

Timeless Wisdom has Timely Significance

Image via Wikipedia

I am a regular reader of JD Greear's blog. He had a link  to a letter in a recent post. The letter was written by John Newton, the author of the hymn Amazing Grace. In this letter to a church leader who is about to criticize another church leader, Newton offers some profound and grace-filled incites. Many denominations are in the throws of great conflict around the issues of orthodoxy, my own included. Additionally, I see much rancor between the many factions and movements within the Church. May we all heed Newton's words. The letter is entitled, "On Controversy" and can be read here.

Related post:  Godly unity in the midst of human division

Sustainable and Reproducible Discipleship

Recently, there has been a lot of talk around the blogosphere about multi-site ministry and its effectiveness or lack thereof. Neil Cole, author of Organic Church: Growing Faith Where Life Happens, among others, has a running series on the issue. I've already commented on one of Cole's posts over at his site. Today, I'm going to add my own thoughts to Cole's 4^th installment in his series, The Multi-Site Church Model.

Cole, as well as most others I'm reading, is not fond of the multi-site model. In his 4^th installment, Cole tackles the issues of whether a church is self-perpetuating and self-propagating. In short, is the church able to support its own ministry and is it able to reproduce groups that will plant, grow, and do the same. Cole, based on these criteria, links the success or failure of the church site to how independent the church is of external resources for its survival. The more dependent it is, the less likely it is to ever be self-perpetuating and self-propagating. Check out Cole's site for the full read as well as his other insights on multi-site churches.

As the pastor of a church plant that began as a multi-site, I feel as though I can bring a rather unique perspective to this discussion. Rather than self-perpetuating and self-propagating, within Threshold Church, we talk about these issues in terms of being sustainable and reproducible. Our categories are similar to Cole's, but there are important differences. First, being sustainable and reproducible is an attribute of discipleship rather than the viability or health of the church. Of course, the two are closely connected, inseparable. But, by making it an issue of discipleship, we are bringing the battle to the least common denominator within the church, i.e. the disciple.

Consequently, sustainability, as opposed to self-perpetuation, is concerned with the health of the disciple rather than the health of the church. Again, the two are inextricably connected, but the starting point is important. The Church is the fellowship of Jesus Christ. It is the community of disciples. To be sure, I am not recommending a focus on the individual. Rather, it is a focus on the person in the midst of community and how, together, we foster a model of faith that is sustainable. That faith is sustained by living in connection with the Vine, by living in Christ.

A branch that abides in the Vine, quite naturally produces fruit. So, will the disciple be reproducible. Every disciple should be following someone a little further along the journey then they while leading some that are behind him, this while we all are following Jesus Christ. When such a culture is built within a church it will quite naturally become self-perpetuating and self-propagating.

I don't believe Cole would disagree with any of this. In fact, he may see these as two separate conversations- the health of the multi-site church movement vs. the health of discipleship within a church. However, having been involved in both, I see it related in this way. When I was operating within a multi-site model, I could see over time that our ministry was neither self-perpetuating nor self-propagating, to use Cole's terms. However, I truly feel as though it had less to do with dependence on resources as it did to a lack of missional identity unique to our community. Our community failed to take ownership of our mission as a church. With that came laissez-faire and a lack of responsibility for the mission of the Church. It was not so much that we were dependent on resources, but that we were dependent on the "main campus" for our vision and values. Yes, resources and programs were handed down to the site, but more importantly the site's identity was dictated to it by the main campus. This was not a heavy-handed thing in any way. Rather, it's the nature of multi-site, i.e. one church, multiple locations. It sounds good and biblical. In principle it is. However, the practice often leads to impotent children of an otherwise potent mother church.

The decision by a majority within that site, with the blessing of the mother church, to re-locate and plant itself as a church with its unique calling within the context of the larger Church, breathed life into the ministry. More than no longer relying on others for our resources (largely, in fact, we still do), we could no longer rely on the mother church to tell us who we are or what we are to do. We needed to take ownership and responsibility for our vision and values. The biggest result of that has been a commitment to building a sustainable and reproducible culture of discipleship. Such a commitment will lead to health among the parts as well as the whole, providing fertile ground for the growth and multiplication of the Church and the proclamation of the Kingdom of God.

Do you have any experiences of multi-site ministry? What do you think its merits are? What about its shortcomings? What do you think of Neil Cole's and my critique? Agree or disagree.

7 Tips for Joining the Emerging Church Movement

The title is, of course, tongue-in-cheek. Most emerging churches are zealous in their defense of the organic development of their ministries. The notion that there are seven easy steps to anything is a decidedly modern, non-emerging way of thinking about things. Additionally, emerging churches are exceptionally diverse in their praxis. However, in my own journey, I have identified some common marks within the movement. Some are generally accepted, others are my contribution to the conversation. So here they are, my 7 tips for joining the emerging church movement: 

1. Be missional

"Missional" has become nearly synonymous with "emerging." To be missional as a church means to understand that the culture is increasingly distancing itself from the Church. Therefore, churches must move from an attractional model that expects those outside to come in, to a dispersed model where churches go to the world. In this way, they embrace the root meaning of the word "mission" which is "to send," as they proclaim the good news of the Kingdom of God in the midst of the world through both words and actions. Thus, they reclaim the essential nature of the church as a movement, not an institution. 

2. Build an environment of low control/high accountability

While Robert may have been a Christian, his "rules" are not canon. Yet, most churches are organizationally top heavy with structures based on corporate business models, not biblical principles. The result is an organization that operates with a high control/low accountability mentality. Consider the typical church structure. It consists of committees (sometimes we rename them teams to make ourselves feel better) that typically do little ministry, yet they often exert significant control over what ministries get done. It is high control. This might be palatable if we could be confident that the people making these decisions were disciples committed to growing in their faith. But, too often the people that make up these committees are warm bodies. Their qualifications were that they had the time and they were willing. That's low accountability.

Emerging Churches try to build structures that serve the organism rather than the organization. That means that out of a commitment to mission, the church tries to build structures wholly committed to that goal. A greater emphasis is placed on releasing and mobilizing the church, God's people, to do ministry. Low control is exercised. However, because of an equally great emphasis on discipleship, those doing the ministry are kept accountable for their walk with God. The desired result is a restoration of the priesthood of all believers with a very flat structure of government. This is low control/high accountability 

3. Create ministries that are light weight/low maintenance

Because of the emerging church's desire to put ministry back into the hands of the people, it is important to emphasize the development of ministries that are light weight and low maintenance. Our culture, including our church culture, has typically engrained in our minds that bigger is better. More is better. So, in the church, we often talk about "the value of excellence" which is, frequently, the codename for bigger and more. However, in a priesthood of all believers, low control/high accountability environment, this model of ministry is often not sustainable, nor, in the end, desirable. These churches keep the values of simplicity and authenticity in the context of discipleship at the forefront of all their ministries. 

4. Throw out the programs

Emerging churches embrace the process rather than programs. Though programs may be used within the emerging church, they are always subjugated to the larger vision of what it means to be the Church. Many emerging churches are non-programmatic. Sometimes this is a conscious decision to avoid feeding into the provider-consumer mentality that permeates much of Christian programming. Instead, there is an emphasis placed on community, generosity, and spiritual discipline. 

5. Emphasize transformation

In the emerging church, discipleship is a matter of death and life. The disciple dies to the Old Adam and becomes a new creature by the grace of God and through faith in his Son Jesus Christ. There is an emphasis on the transformative power of the Holy Spirit within the life of the Christ follower. Moreover, that transformation is manifested within the entire Body of Christ. Thereby, the Church becomes an agent for transformation within the culture as it proclaims the good news of the Kingdom of God and brings that Kingdom to bear on the world. Thus, the emerging church is action oriented and believes it has a calling to be involved in matters of ecology, economy, and justice. 

6. Embrace interdependence

The loss of community is one of the greatest wounds in the post-modern world. Whereas, independence was a hallmark of the modern world, interdependence is the same for the post-modern. This is to be celebrated. But the interdependence of post-modernity is a relative interdependence that is shaped by needs and circumstances. In this way it is still a shadow of truly interdependent community. Without question, the very nature of community is being reshaped by social networking and globalization. But in the midst of this societal upheaval, the emerging church offers the experience of biblical community built on vulnerability, accountability, and love. Throughout the emerging church you see this in the development of house churches, clusters, sacramental communities and the rekindled interest in monastic rules and the lives of the saints. 

7. Focus on relational discipleship

Within the emerging church you see models of discipleship that are more akin to the ancient catechumenate than purpose-driven, modern models. Apprenticeship and mentoring are central within the context of couplets, triads and groups where relationships of encouragement and accountability are built. Within the safety of these relationships, individuals can ask questions and risk answers that advance honesty and vulnerability. This focus on relational discipleship is committed to a longer view on progress that diminishes the likelihood of rapid growth within the church. Even Pentecost was preceded by three years of discipleship under Jesus Christ. However, this approach has its eye on producing a church with sustainable and reproducible discipleship that leads to depth in our relationship with Christ and exponential growth for the Kingdom.

My 7 tips for joining the emerging church movement. These are some of the identifying marks of the movement that I have observed. So, what do you think? Do you disagree with any of these? What would you add to the list?

Ecclesia vs Church

Image via Wikipedia

No ministry I know that is labeled as postmodern or emerging seems to welcome the categorization. I believe that is due, in part, to the immense diversity that exists within these labels. Churches given the same moniker can be vastly different in terms of theology, structure, and practice. Nevertheless, there are some marks that are more commonly shared among these churches than others.

One of these defining marks that I have identified is a reformation of our understanding of the Church. Again, it takes many forms, but churches living firmly in the ethos of postmodern thought embrace a struggle to more authentically resemble the Ecclesia of the New Testament. For many, this results in a heightened missional passion and practice. There is often an emphasis on the Church's role in bringing the Kingdom of God to the world, rather than expecting the world to come to "church." For others, there is a great desire to recapture the place of the gathered body of believers as the central expression of what it means to be Church.

Threshold Church shares this struggle with many of our brothers and sisters in Christ. It was this welcome agitation that attracted me to a small, old book by theologian Emil Brunner. The book was mentioned in the midst of another I was reading and piqued my interest. The name of the book is The Misunderstanding of the Church. Having read the book, I would like to propose that it is required reading for every church leader struggling to understand the Church in the midst of the Postmodern milieu. In an effort to pique your interest, I am going to share some brief musings on each chapter over the course of the next several weeks.

Chapter one of Brunner's book is entitled The Supernatural Christian Community and the Problem of the Church. There he sets out the problem that confronts us.

"The Ecclesia of the New Testament, the fellowship of Christian believers, is precisely not that which every 'church' is at least in part—and institution, a something. The Body of Christ is nothing other than a fellowship of persons. It is 'the fellowship of Jesus Christ' or 'fellowship of the Holy Ghost', where fellowship or koinonia signifies a common participation, a togetherness, a community life. The faithful are bound to each other through their common sharing in Christ and in the Holy Ghost, but that which they have in common is precisely no 'thing', no 'it', but a 'he', Christ and the Holy Spirit. It is just in this that resides the miraculous, the unique, the once-for-all nature of the Church: that as the Body of Christ it has nothing to do with an organization and has nothing of the character of the institutional about it. This is precisely what it has in mind when it describes itself as the Body of Christ."

For Brunner, this reality of the New Testament Ecclesia is what makes it impossible to equate it with the present expression of the Church. As Brunner will lay out in the chapters ahead, the Church has so far departed from the original expression of the Ecclesia as to be unidentifiable with it. Here at the outset, he begins to establish why. The Church, as history has delivered it to us, is inseparable from its institutional standpoint. This "institutional distortion" of the Ecclesia has led to two erroneous views of the Church. In the first, we see "the replacement of a communion of persons by the legal administrative institution." Within this understanding of the Church we see dogma and government completely obscuring the movement of the Ecclesia "which is a pure communion of persons without institutional character." The equally erroneous opposing response to this, made by the protestant reformers, is the concept of the ecclesia invisibilis, the Invisible Church. At its most basic level, the doctrine of the Invisible Church declares that the true Church is defined by the sum of true believers which remains hidden amidst the world and the institution called the Church. Therefore, the ecclesia invisibilis exists as a group of individuals relationally disconnected. The problem is that this, too, robs the Ecclesia of its fundamentally indentifying mark which is fellowship.

The nature of the Ecclesia, explains Brunner, is the combining of the vertical with the horizontal, divine with human communion in an utterly unparalleled life that is unintelligible apart from its supernatural and miraculous character as the "fellowship of Christ" and the "fellowship one with the other." Next time, The Historical Origin of the Ecclesia.

Related articles by Zemanta

• The fascinating debate continues... (insightscoop.typepad.com)
• Pentecost Sunday: The Church made manifest (insightscoop.typepad.com)

Godly unity in the midst of human division

Image via Wikipedia

The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America made a decision at its churchwide assembly that will likely leave this denomination greatly divided. When we decided to launch Threshold Church as a mission congregation of the ELCA, we resolved to remain within this church body regardless of what decision was made. I felt this struggle was an important one for us to remain in dialogue over, to do so in a manner of love and humility, and not to run and hide from this difficult issue. I am conflicted over the decision of the ELCA, yet my immediate concern is for our unity in Christ and our witness to the world. The Kingdom of God is not served by anger, hatred, and division. So, I pray for our unity in Christ, who is the great equalizer. When we are in Him, in covenant we the Holy One of God, we find that we are all broken, all sinners and, yet, all loved, all forgiven.

I met Nadia Bolz-Weber, pastor of the Church for All Sinners and Saints, in Denver. Though our ministries and our orthopraxi are very different, I hold a respect for Nadia as she and her church struggle to live out their identity in Christ. As we struggle for healing in the midst of our brokenness, I find the words of reconciliation shared by my sister in Christ from "across the aisle" to be the words of reconciliation that I, too, hope fills the ears of all.

http://sarcasticlutheran.typepad.com/sarcastic_lutheran/2009/08/a-sermon-following-the-elca-church-wide-assembly.html

Related articles by Zemanta

• Lutheran Church Lifts Ban On Non-Celibate Gay Clergy (inquisitr.com)

Churchwide Approval! But . . .

First, here is the good news. I met with Ruben Duran today. He is the head of EOCM; long name, suffice it to say it is the branch of the national church that votes on mission churches. We discussed Threshold and he informed me of the current state of affairs. He spoke with Marc Miller, Director for Missions, and told Marc that the synod would need to come up with an additional $15,000 a year. Marc will be working on this as soon as he gets back from vacation. Additionally, the ELCA would pledge support of $35,000. But, and this is a big "but", they have no money. None. Consequently, they are prioritizing the new church starts and will give the money, based on priority, as the finances come in.

I'm meeting tomorrow one on one with Ruben to further discuss Threshold. I hope to gain some additional information and understanding of what this development means practically for Threshold. Furthermore, I intend, by the grace of God, to impress on him the import of this mission for Toledo, the Synod, and the ELCA. Please pray for me as I share this vision with Ruben. We are meeting over lunch and we are two hours behind Toledo.

There is still so much to do, but there is much to celebrate. God has opened many doors and smoothed many obstacles already for His mission through Threshold. There are many more roadblocks ahead, but our God is exceedingly powerful and amazingly faithful. Without Him we should not wish to do anything. With Him, we can do all things!

Churchwide vote to support Threshold Church

Most who read this blog are aware that Threshold Church is seeking churchwide approval as a Mission Church of the ELCA. We have already received approval from the NW Ohio Synod of the ELCA. I've received the necessary approval to be the mission developer for Threshold. The last hurdle is the ELCA Churchwide approval and the accompanying financial support.

That decision was to be made last week. However, the vote was postponed for all new starts (not just Threshold) until the week of July 19. The information I have indicates that the committee is impressed and intrigued by our "application" and the description of our structure and vision as a church. Though we place no label on ourselves, the substance and style of our ministry tends to place us into the category of an emerging church ministry. This label is the cause of some concern on the part of the committee. Most emerging church ministries struggle financially. Consequently, one concern of those considering support of our ministry is the long-term fiscal feasibility for sustaining the ministry.

This concern is reasonable, because their assessment of emerging church ministries is largely accurate. However, it is not my vision and I do not believe it is God's vision for our ministry to be the recipient of the committed support of those who love God's mission for any more than six years. In fact, I believe we can be self-supporting in five years. Indeed, more than self-supporting, I believe we can be about the task of planting a mission of our own within that time.

For this to happen, we all need to die to self and live for Christ. Our financial giving will have to far exceed that of the average church. But God has not called us to be average. He has called all of us to be "ambassadors for Christ", bringing the Kingdom of God to a world in need. For that to happen, we will need to lay down our lives for God's greater purposes. It will take sacrifice. It will take great faith. It will take courage. Financially, we will all need to take seriously God's standard of sacrificial giving- the tithe or 10% of our income.

The vision for Threshold does not include it being an unsustainable taker of resources for the Kingdom. We are called to be a giving church. I believe that in so many ways. As God blesses our ministry, we will give back to the Church as we are graced with the privilege of teaching other churches how to be missional. We will give back to the Church, by becoming a training ground and launching pad for missionaries who will take the Good News of the Kingdom of God throughout Toledo, Ohio, and beyond. We will give back to the Church by being faithful in our giving and exemplary in our commitment to supporting ministries beyond our own.

This will not be the typical pattern of emerging churches. But it will be our pattern. It will be our pattern or we will fall short of the calling that God has given us. As I considered planting Threshold, God NEVER told me it would be easy. He did assure me that it would be vastly rewarding. I must tell you that same thing. Much will be demanded from us in the days that lie ahead. You will be asked to stretch yourself and risk as perhaps never before in your life. But I can assure you, it will be rewarding. It will be an adventure. Being an ambassador for Christ will give you a sense of fulfillment and purpose for your life like nothing else can. I am willing to do all this. I ask you to join me. More importantly, I believe God is calling us all to do this important work for the Kingdom. May God bless you all!

Who’s the focus of our worship?

God continues to shape and mold our ministry. Most recently, we have made some important changes in our worship. I'm entirely uncertain how many people have even picked up on these changes to this point. However, that is fine. One might say, even expected. The issue that needed to be addressed was this. Through prayer and study, I really believed our worship was too focused on the self, rather than on God. Consider for a moment that statement. If worship is focused on the self, then is not the self the focus of our worship? Clearly, no church would suggest that we should be the focus of our own worship, yet that tendency manifests itself in thousands of churches every weekend. We are so concerned with being "relevant" that we adopt a marketing mentality to all that we do. Our messages are centered on the self- "How to have a successful marriage," "How to be financially free," "How to … this" "How to … that." The Gospel message in many churches seems to be plucked right from the self-help aisle of your local Barnes and Noble. Believe me, I understand that as I point this finger there are three more pointing back at me. I stand accused, as do many teachers of God's Word. But, it doesn't stop there, either!

Often our entire Sunday morning experienced seemed to be structured with little more in mind than serving those who were there. Moreover, this was in a church that was not trying to be "seeker-targeted." We simply seemed to drift into this mode more often than not. If the message was about relationships (again, who is the focus here?), we would have an amusing sketch to accompany the theme (and entertain the people, perhaps?). If the theme for a series was the Kingdom of God, maybe we would have a knight periodically appear throughout the series and provide some "relevant," but comic relief (Yes, we really did this). More often than not, whatever creative element we implemented in worship had little if anything to do with God.

Please understand, as some of our creative arts people may very well read this, that we all blindly went down this alley and I was the blind leading the blind. However, something started to nag me about worship. If worship is, essentially, the praise of God, why did so little of our worship seemed to be focused on him? It really started when I began doing a very pet peeve of my own. I started to refer to the music AS the worship. We would have just finished a particular planned element when I would say, "Okay, let's worship now." So what were we doing before? How did music become the only expression of worship on Sunday mornings? The really scary thing to be about this was that it was accurate. Little else that we did felt like worship. In fact, it was not. God was not the focus.

So, we have begun the task of changing this. Yet, it is not a simple fix. I now firmly believe that unless we are intentional we will continue to slip back into the comfortable fix of making ourselves the focus. Why? It's original sin. It's what comes naturally to us. We make ourselves the center of all our endeavors. In the words of the theologian Paul Tillich, we make ourselves our "ultimate concern", which means that I make "me" more important than God. I make "me" my own god. I make "me" the focus of my worship.

Now we are conscious of this constant pull away from God and back to ourselves as we plan worship. We are starting to say to one another, "Hold on. Are we making ourselves the focus, again?" Rather than designing services around a theme, we are designing worship to lift up an attribute or characteristic of God. We are intent on putting God at the center… and we need to be.

The Church in America needs to change. If it does not, the state of Christianity in the U. S. is in danger of duplicating the state of the Church in the U. K. within ten years. In England, only 3% of people attend a church. The Church exists well outside the boundaries of the culture and society. Its position of influence on the world around it is minimal at best.

Increasingly, the Church here in the U. S. is becoming irrelevant, unable to engage a culture that is leaving it behind as an antiquated, anachronistic institution representative of a passing time and generation. Frankly, the church has earned this distinction. Largely, the church has failed to recognize that it is no longer the focal point of cultural and societal activity. The world has moved away from it while it remained fixated on itself and its own preservation. Our communities became increasingly inclusive and the world progressively more "flat." Meanwhile, the church circled its wagons and closed its borders in an effort to protect a mindset that has little to do with the proclamation of the Gospel and everything to do with its parochialism. Just as the institutional church rejected Galileo and his scientific reality that the earth was not at the center of the universe, much of the institutional church is now blindly rejecting the socio-political reality that the church is not at the center of people's lives.

Still others in the Church have taken notice of this cultural shift. However, in an attempt to reach the culture they have walked the line of compromising the Gospel to the point where Christ and culture are indistinguishable. Well meaning people have adopted methods of "evangelism" that do little more than feed into the consumerism that is already rampant and increasingly understood as responsible for the breakdown of community. It has led to churches that are filled with people who are "happy" as long as the church meets their needs. When the church no longer serves that function, the "attender" simply breaks ranks and looks for the next God fix provided by some other church or loses all need and interest in the church altogether and walks away completely.

This may all sound harsh, but the numbers back it up. Researchers from Barna to Gallup agree that, despite the mega-church movement of the last twenty years, the state of Christianity in the U. S. is and has been one of decline. This is occurring while our culture is still among the most religious in the world.

This is sobering, but within it is the potential for a great awakening of the Church and a rediscovery of its purpose as the envoy of the Kingdom of God. It is time for the Church to stop seeing itself as institution and again see itself as a movement. This is the approach of the Church in the pre-Christian environment found within the book of Acts and it is the right approach for the post-Christian environment of the U. S. in 2009. Much like the U. S., the Greek and Roman cultures of the Middle East and Mediterranean corridor were highly religious, yet ambiguous. The Church was in no position to expect anyone to come to them. They had to engage the culture, yet not in order for Christ to become one with the culture, but in order that Christ might transform culture and the Church would act as that transformational agent in the world.

The strength of this ministry was found in its weakness. Left to its own devices the Church was destined to fail. Its message was a stumbling block to the Jews and foolishness to the Gentiles. For the Jews, the message of Jesus Christ crucifixion was an embarrassment. The word translated as "stumbling block" is scandalon. Yes, it is where we get the word "scandal" from and its meaning was closely associated with the idea of "disgrace." Still, the Jewish faith shared an understanding of the Scriptures (i.e. Old Testament) and of Sin. They neither had to be convinced of God's Law or their need for salvation. However, to the Gentile this was all just foolishness. They neither shared an understanding of Scripture or of Sin. As the messenger to the Gentiles, Paul could not rely on a shared understanding of God or the need for redemption. If he or the Church at that time, began their message with the amorphous question, "If you died tonight, do you know where you would go" they would have received a host of answers that had nothing to do with God or Sin or Heaven or Hell, nor would have their audience possessed any foundation on which to understand such concepts. Their world was highly religious, but not even remotely Christian.

I believe the same is increasingly true today. When I began in ministry just twenty years ago, meeting someone who was first generation unchurched (i.e. they had never gone to church, but their parents had) was unusual, but certainly not unheard of. Today, not only is it common to meet people who are first generation unchurched, but it is not highly unusual to meet someone who is second generation unchurched (i.e. neither they nor their parents have ever gone to church). Consequently, the Church can not operate with an expectation that it shares a religious foundation with the world around it. At the threat of complete ineffectiveness, the Church is being forced to rethink how it communicates the Gospel.

When the culture shares a biblical world view, the distance that one must travel from recognition of our Sin to acknowledging our need for a Savior is a short distance indeed. When the culture does not share that biblical world view, the starting point and the destination are not even on the same maps. In this context, the most effective witness comes through the combination of hearing the Good News of the Kingdom of God and seeing that Kingdom manifest itself in the world. Herein lies the source of the early churches success. They understood that the witness of their words was not enough. Christ told them to wait for the gift of the Holy Spirit before venturing out as his witnesses (Acts 1:4ff). The work of the Holy Spirit was absolutely necessary in their ability to engage and transform the culture around them. It would not simply be by words but the inbreaking of the Kingdom of God into the world through their witness. We see it again and again in the example of their lives and the power of their actions. God performed many signs and wonders through the people of His Church (Acts 2:43, Acts 4:30, Acts 5:12, Acts 6:8, Acts 14:3). They absolutely expected God to show up and confirm the message he had given them to share with the world. The Apostle Paul reiterated this in his first letter to the Corinthians when he said, "I came to you in weakness and fear, and with much trembling. ⁴My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit's power, ⁵so that your faith might not rest on men's wisdom, but on God's power." In his letter to the Romans, he again says, "I will not venture to speak of anything except what Christ has accomplished through me in leading the Gentiles to obey God by what I have said and done— ¹⁹by the power of signs and miracles, through the power of the Spirit."

The pursuit of increased church attendance was never the mission of the church. Increasing our "numbers" should have never been the measure of evangelism. Yes, it is the byproduct, with the caveat that the numbers increased are those who put their faith in Christ, not those who attend our church. Even then, evangelism has always been, biblically speaking, the "going", the "taking", "the proclaiming" of the Gospel to the world! The Church must be a movement. As it was in the first century pre-Christian culture, so it shall be in our 21^st century post-Christian culture. People will come to Christ only when the Kingdom comes to them. Moreover, as they did in the 1^st century, so we go now- with the faith that God will confirm His message. The message of Christ crucified may seem foolishness to an unbelieving world that lacks any biblical context for hearing that message. But the manifestation of the Kingdom into their lives through God's envoy- the Church- will confirm the message. When ordinary, everyday men and women do extraordinary things in the name of Christ our weakness points to God's power. Today, as then, we will not rely on wise and persuasive words. We will not turn to the devices of man. We will not put our confidence in the most eloquent preacher or the slickest projection or the most professional band. We will put our faith in the demonstration of the Spirit's power. The Church will confess all it's prideful sin in its own ability to manufacture what God alone can produce- faith! And we will go. As God has called us, we will go, and proclaim the good news of the Kingdom of God.
For further discussions on the issues of missiology and ecclesiology check out the following posts:

•  Ecclesia vs Church 
• 7 tips for joining the emerging church movement
  

What’s been going on?

You may have noticed an acute absence of new material in my blog. Well, now I can fill everyone in on what's been going on. Back in January, a decision was reached to a process that began in November of 2008. "10:35", a satellite ministry of St. Paul's Lutheran Church in Maumee, would begin the process of establishing itself as a mission church. That set into motion a chain of events that continues up to this moment and will continue for at least the next year.

The immediate issues were the announcement of this change to both the congregations of St. Paul's and "10:35". Additionally, the ministry needed to find a new location. It needed to clear that location with the local church government, called a synod, as well as, garner their support for the establishment of the mission. It also needed to meet with the area churches, prepare a document to share its philosophy of ministry, and begin casting the vision.

The announcement has been made. The Synod is on board. The area churches are supportive. The Philosophy of Ministry has been written. The vision is being cast. And, oh yes, the new location has been found and, in fact, this past week was our first Sunday there. Moreover, we are no longer "10:35". We are now Threshold Church. So, as you can see, I've been a little busy.

The result of all of this is a lot of excitement with a healthy mix of utter obedience to and dependence on God.

As I mentioned, this past week was our first week at our new location. We are now meeting in the Omni Nightclub on Bancroft Avenue, one block off of the University of Toledo campus. We are really excited about reaching out to this community with the good news of Jesus Christ. We expect God to do great things and for His Kingdom to intersect with the lives of many, many people. The first Sunday was absolutely wonderful. We are taking this opportunity to put much greater emphasis on our vision and to study together what it means to be the Church. You can listen to that message via our website: www.1035online.org . Yeah, that's one of the things we need to do that we haven't gotten around to. The website name will change, but for now that's still the location.

What is really important is that we do not waste this opportunity that God has given us. A time of such change is a time for introspection with the goal of clarification. We need to answer the question of who we are. Why has God called us together? For what purpose has God placed us here? These are, indeed, questions that every church should ask itself. God has given God has placed on the heart of Threshold Church a strong desire to rediscover the Biblical Church and its purpose. We certainly do not claim to have the only way or even the right way. We are simply trying to pursue that in a faithful way. Should not every church do the same?

That's all for now. I do hope to get back to blogging and I will in the weeks to come as I share with you the journey that God has me and Threshold on.

Peace,

Tom

Lessons from Leviticus

Being in the midst of reading the Bible in 90 days, Roger and I were discussing the Levitical code- i.e. the laws found within the book of Leviticus. We were marveling at how pervasive these laws are. They encompassed nearly every facet of life, from diet to bodily fluids. It struck the both of us as to how much this must have played into the formation of the Jews as a community. They truly were a people set apart by God.

It was impossible for them to forget their covenant relationship with God, because God had given them laws that kept that covenant always before them. Nearly every moment of every day was lived with the awareness of God's presence in their lives. Every part of their life was given or dedicated to God through the Law.

Any sane person would sigh in relief and offer a prayer of thanks that God has released us from much of this Levitical code. Living by such a code would radically alter our western culture lives. For an interesting and sometimes comic look at following these laws in a modern world, check out A. J. Jacobs' book, The Year of Living Biblically.

Jacobs', though not a religious person himself, decided to take on the task of living the laws of the Bible as literally as possible. One of the funnier segments is his attempt to stone a sinner. By the end of the book, one thing is certain. This attempt entirely altered his life.

All of this leads me to the following thought. While we are certainly thankful for not having to follow many of these laws, are we perhaps missing out on the depth of understanding of how all pervasive our relationship with God is to our lives. As Christians, we talk about surrendering our whole lives to God, but few of us will ever do that to the level required by God of His people Israel. When St. Paul talked about giving our lives as a "living sacrifice" to God, as a Pharisaic educated Jew he genuinely understood and appreciated the magnitude of what he was saying. Our commitment to Christ should EXCEED that of the Law.

Imagine the witness of a community of believers so sold out to God. Imagine the power of such lives to transform the world they live in into the likeness of the Kingdom of God. What would your life be like if you had such a deep and all encompassing covenant relationship with the Father through His Son Jesus Christ? Would we then fully experience the promise of that covenant, the filling of the Holy Spirit? Would it be said of us like Noah and Abraham and Isaac that we "walked with God"? Would we more readily HEAR the voice of God? Yes, yes, and yes! Oh, how I want that for my life! Oh, how I learn the truth of those words as I increase my surrender to the will of God! May we all learn what it means to offer ourselves really and truly as a "living sacrifice."