The Ministry Report

Getting the 'Stuff' Out of the Way

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 18:44:00 +0000

Because of the many cringe-worthy statements being made from the platform at the Lakeland Outpouring, I'm determined to focus on the great things God is doing there among the leadership. Last night's meeting presented a prime opportunity to do this as John and Carol Arnott from the Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship sought to follow the Holy Spirit's movement amidst a crowd of eager, hungry people from across the world. The international flavor was, as always, a beautiful peek into the kingdom, yet what struck me most was a statement John made while praying for a lineup of individuals affected by spinal injuries.

After a woman came up hobbling onstage with a cane—a result of a major car accident four years prior that claimed her daughter's life—and left able to walk on her own, John said this:

"Maybe you didn't notice … but while I was talking to [some other people], Carol was busy ministering to this lady, going deeper and unraveling some of the stuff that maybe had been getting in the way of her heart receiving that healing. You and I are learning to do this. We're not nearly as good at it as Jesus was—at least I'm not. But I'm aspiring to that. I want to get to the place where everything is healed instantaneously. Don't you? Wouldn't that be great? In the meanwhile, sometimes we take a little more time getting the stuff and the baggage out of the way."

If there's anything we need more of at Lakeland, it's the humility and transparency John showed with this simple, somewhat off-the-cuff comment. John's been praying for people's healings for years, yet I love that he was honest enough to explain what was going on at that moment and offer insight into the atmosphere of healing. We desperately need more of this—particularly in Lakeland—to diffuse the "mystical," elitist sense that surrounds healing in certain charismatic circles. Healing has become a complex issue partly because of the culture we've created around it—the "why not me?" questions, the level-of-faith game, the prayer flair, etc. Yet throughout the night, John reminded people of how simple it really is. God does the work, we receive His gift. At one point, while speaking of God's fatherly heart, John cited Luke 12:32: "Do not fear, little flock, for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom."

If only we—yes, I'm talking to leaders—could believe this and keep things simple. Then maybe we'd get some of this "stuff" out of the way and let God to really move among His people.

Pastors Defending Marriage

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 18:23:00 +0000

I don't usually opt to blog on someone else's behalf, much less post someone else's e-mail/PSA as a blog ... but I'm making a well-deserved exception in this case. Read the letter below sent out a few days ago from a group of concerned pastors and you'll see why. Then, if you live in Florida, Arizona or California, go make a difference!

----------------------------------------------------------

July 10, 2008
To: Our Pastor and Christian Leader Friends in Florida and Arizona
From: Your Pastor and Christian Leader Friends in California
RE: Your Invitation to join 2,000 California pastors in a July 30 Conference Call to defend marriage on November 4 (Election Day)

Greetings,

We are a collection of California pastors writing to pastors. We apologize in advance for the length of this letter, but we feel the seriousness of the situation merits it. Our three states have something in common. On November 4, California, Arizona and Florida will be voting on the definition of marriage.

In California, we are reeling from a May 15 ruling of the CA Supreme Court which overturned our Family Code (Proposition 22, approved in 2000 by 61.4% of the voters) which declared that marriage consisted of the union of a man and a woman. As a result, gay “marriage” became legal here on June 16 at 5:01 PM.

Unlike Massachusetts, where gay “marriage” cannot be “exported” to other states, anyone can get married in California, due to the lack of a residency requirement, and then return to their home state, requiring their gay “marriage” to be recognized.

Here in California (as in Florida), we recently reached the needed number of signatures for a November 4 referendum when we will vote on the definition of marriage again, this time as a state constitutional amendment, so the CA Supreme Court cannot overturn the will of the people.

Candidly, we, as California Bible-believing pastors and churches, are vulnerable at this time. There is no state protection that permits us to decline performing gay “marriages” (contrary to what appears as one small paragraph on page 117 of the CA Supreme Court ruling). Somewhere and sometime in our state, a gay couple will walk into an evangelical church, or a conservative Catholic Church, and demand (under California State law) to be married.

We are responding to this by working to pass CA Proposition 8 which will add an amendment to the state constitution stating that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. To accomplish this, many pastors and Christian leaders have united.

Over 1,600 of us (an unofficial “California Pastors Rapid Response Team") joined together to protect marriage in a June 25 Statewide Pastors Conference Call. We gathered at 101 locations throughout the state. Now we are preparing for our next conference call.

A THREE STATE CONFERENCE CALL – INVITING ARIZONA AND FLORIDA TO JOIN US
Two thousand pastors and Christian leaders across California are coming together at 200+ locations (host churches) for a statewide Pastors Strategic Protect Marriage Conference Call (1 hour and 45 minutes) on Wednesday, July 30, at 10 AM in California and Florida, and 1 PM in Florida.

And here is our reason for writing. May we invite all pastors and Christian leaders from Florida and Arizona to join us for this gathering? Would it be beneficial for us to have “three state solidarity” on this issue from now until November 4, Election Day? If so, would you please forward this email invitation to every Florida and Arizona pastor and Christian leader you know.

NEEDED
Here in California, it is our goal to have, before November 4, 500 locations with 5,000 pastors and Christian leaders coming together in future conference calls in order to activate (along with others) 8 million men and women to vote for marriage, as God ordained it. With 7 million votes, we win it. With 8 million votes, we beam an indisputable message!

Now we invite you in Arizona and Florida to join with us in this great three state conference call.

HOSTING A SITE
If you, as a pastor, are willing to host a gathering of Florida or Arizona pastors and Christian leaders at your church, or you know of a pastor who will host, please contact Chris Clark at marriagequestion4@skylinechurch.org if from Arizona or marriagequestion5@skylinechurch.org if from Florida, or call 619-415-5453 ASAP if you are willing to host.

SIMULTANEOUS TRANSLATION
We plan to offer the conference call in simultaneous Spanish translation.

BRING STAFF AND LEADERS
You may want to host a site in your church so that it makes it easier to bring your pastoral staff and key leaders. If you do not host a site, be assured that assistant pastors and key select lay leaders of ministries are welcome – at any site.

WHAT IS NEEDED TO HOST A SITE
In our June 25 statewide pastors call, we offered only audio capability (with some 200 power point slides for the 90 minute event). For our July 30 three-state call, we hope to present two technological options for site hosts:
(1) Webinar (a seminar broadcast via the internet) or
(2) Conference call (such as we did for our June 25 gathering).
We are currently testing our capability to broadcast this and future conference calls to sites that have a broadband (Cable, DSL, or T1) internet connection for the webinar. Future emails will communicate the details for the site hosts.

If we are able to go live with the webinar format in July, sites must be able to project the internet-based presentation (audio and video) from a computer. If you do not have broadband, and prefer to utilize the conference call format, you only need to have speaker-phone capability that can be adequately amplified, along with the ability to magnify or project a PowerPoint presentation. For those who have broadband: Webinar participants will not need anyone on-site to run the PowerPoint presentation – the presentation and the audio will be streamed to your site via GoToWebinar.com. For those who do not have broadband: The traditional conference call will be an audio transmission, with a PowerPoint presentation available for conference call sites to show while the audio plays, making the event more "informationally friendly." (A person at that site must listen to a separate conference call giving PowerPoint instruction and cues.)

Be assured that the information shared will be extremely beneficial for the future of the cause of Christ. Saying it another way, it is worth canceling all other appointments in order to be present at one of these locations.

FORWARD AND ALERT US TO NEW EMAIL ADDRESSES
Additionally, please forward this email to as many Florida and Arizona pastors and Christian leaders as you can - or email us from Florida at marriagequestion3@skylinechurch.org and from Arizona at marriagequestion2@skylinechurch.org with the names of pastors and Christian leaders so that we can keep them informed of future developments.

COURAGEOUS PASTORS
If you are activated on this issue, may we take a small detour and affirm you? Thank you for being bold brothers and sisters in this struggle! Thank you for standing for the truth of Scripture, when it is not popular to do so. The present culture may be unkind to you. History, however, will be most kind to you.

Being a biblically-based pastor today costs. The Gospel always has. It takes courage to pastor biblically today. We stand together with you!

OUR LEGAL REALITIES HERE IN CALIFORNIA
On page 117 of the 121 page May 15 California Supreme Court ruling, it supposedly exempts pastors from being forced to perform gay “weddings,” stating the following: “Finally, affording same-sex couples the opportunity to obtain the designation of marriage will not impinge upon the religious freedom of any religious organization, official, or any other person; no religion will be required to change its religious policies or practices with regard to same-sex couples, and no religious officiant will be required to solemnize a marriage in contravention of his or her religious beliefs. (CA Const., art. I, § 4.);”

It may appear that pastors have "dodged this bullet." Candidly, we have not. The paragraph above, which sounds so consoling to Bible-believing pastors, needs to be fully understood. In legal terms, since the court case was not whether or not pastors should have to perform homosexual weddings, this paragraph is not legally relevant. If the case had been about the issue of whether or not pastors had to perform same sex marriages against their will, then that paragraph would have carried legal "weight." But the court case was only about whether same sex marriages were allowable in California. Thus that seemingly comforting paragraph is of little to no value.

Succinctly stated, we are - according to the best legal minds we have talked to - vulnerable. Attorneys defending us would make their case on a federal basis, but not, as we understand, on current state law. What will we face in California, Florida and Arizona if we fail to defend marriage?

For an answer, let us look at what has happened to our Christian brothers in Canada and Sweden and their losses of religious freedoms. Some have been charged for speaking out on the practice of homosexuality. Others have been tried. Some have been jailed. The Bible is now viewed as hate speech. Pastors are viewed as hatemongers.

Coming closer home, what has happened to the Methodist camp meeting in Ocean Grove, New Jersey when two lesbians demanded to have their civil union ceremony on church property? The lesbians could have chosen any part of New Jersey’s long shoreline, but they wanted to be married on one location owned by a church related group. The State of New Jersey, siding with the couple, took the tax exemption away from a portion of their property. Now the church campground is involved in a draining lawsuit. What is ahead for us – if we fail to preserve the definition of marriage?

Succinctly stated, (and unlike other issues), this is a survival issue, the survival of religious freedoms, the capacity to freely preach the gospel.

It is important to note that it is totally legal for churches and pastors to speak out clearly on this issue. Ordination did not deprive you of your religious liberties. Churches can (and should) speak out on moral issues.

Equally important is the fact that marriage is not ultimately a civil issue. It is biblical. It is a moral issue. Marriage, as you know, predated civil governance.

FLUIDITY
How are we to understand the changing legal climate? Christian attorneys will update us in the Wednesday, July 30 conference call. Several attorneys will be on hand to bring information on unfolding legal realities, including the recent legal attempts by the radical secularists to disqualify the upcoming ballot on marriage here in California.

UNFOLDING STRATEGY
In addition, we will cover the strategy for preparing for (and winning) the California, Arizona and Florida Constitutional Marriage Amendment votes in November. This is a winnable war. And, unfortunately, the freedom to proclaim the Gospel hinges on the outcome of this election.

CALIFORNIA YOUTH / YOUNG ADULT STRATEGY
In California, there is exciting news coming regarding the activation and training of armies of youth and young adults across the state.

We hope that sharing about these “game plans” will energize you with the emerging strategy in your respective state. We know that you, in Florida and Arizona will, under the anointing of the Holy Spirit, develop their own plans. We are not expecting you to replicate what we are doing here. We do want to encourage each other, however.

CALIFORNIA MEDIA STRATEGY
We would like to share with you what we are learning here regarding a media strategy. Frank Schubert (Schubert-Flint Public Affairs Company,Sacramento) and Ron Prentice (ProtectMarriage.com) will share the broader, California statewide media strategies, hoping these insights will be helpful to our Florida and Arizona brothers and sisters.

FASTING AND PRAYER
Here in California, we are focused on a 100-Day Prayer Period will launch July 28, ending at the election, November 4. Within that 100 day period, there will be a 40-Day Statewide Fast, from September 24 to November 2. Individuals may fast portions or all of the 40 days, as they are led, or they may fast in “relays” as teams. If you feel it is pleasing to the Holy Spirit, we invite our pastor friends in Florida and Arizona to join us in this prayer and fasting period.

(Simply as a point of information, may we share regarding one more event here: A culmination of this 40-day period will be The Call (see www.thecall.com). The Call California will be held at Qualcomm Stadium in San Diego, on Saturday, November 1, from 10 AM to 10 PM – involving 50,000+ men and women of God from every denomination – all united to create a climate of ongoing prayer and fasting in our state and across the nation.

We want to emphasize one more time that we are NOT sharing our events here in California because they are to be “laid on” Florida and Arizona. We merely share them to be an encouragement to each other. We will, in this prayer and share process, learn from you as well.

KEY ISSUE: REVIVAL
In our hearts, we know that what is really needed is more than a voting victory in November. What is needed is revival and an avalanche of Holy Spirit-given evangelism. That is why we pray.

WEBSITES
If you have interest in listening to any or all of our 90-minute June 25 Statewide Pastors Conference Call, and to view the corresponding 200 PowerPoint slides, go to www.skylinechurch.org/marriage08.php and type in "marriage08" as a password. In addition, there are many practical materials that are applicable to all three of our states available at www.ProtectMarriageSD.com. Considerably more resources are located at www.ProtectMarriage.com

URGENT RESPONSE NEEDED NOW
Most importantly, join with us Wednesday, July 30, at 10 AM in California and Arizona, and 1 PM in Florida. Please consider hosting a site at your church. Contact Chris Clark at marriagequestion4@skylinechurch.org if from Arizona or marriagequestion5@skylinechurch.org if from Florida, or call 619-415-5453 ASAP if you are willing to host. Online registration for the meeting will be available on www.protectmarriagesd.com Please register on-line to insure sufficient materials are available for those attending at each location.

Brothers and sisters, this IS winnable!

We pray blessings on you – Florida and Arizona – this day.

Your pastor friends… in this ultimately victorious battle,
Jim Garlow, Skyline Church, San Diego
Chris Clark, East Clairemont Baptist Church, San Diego
Miles McPherson, The Rock Church, San Diego
Jack Hibbs, Calvary Chapel, Chino Hills (LA area)
Jim Franklin, Cornerstone Church, Fresno
Dudley Rutherford, Shepherd of the Hills, Porter Ranch (LA area)
Timothy Winters, Bayview Baptist Church, San Diego
Along with 1600 other CA pastors and Christian leaders who love Florida and Arizona

Culture Clash, Part II

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 22:18:00 +0000

The Lakeland Outpouring is hot. Not only is that obvious by the tens of thousands who’ve trekked to Florida from near and far, it’s just as evident by the heated responses you can get online these days by simply including words like Lakeland, Todd Bentley, outpouring, healing and revival in a blog. As meetings hit the three-month mark today, people are still asking the same question: “Is it really revival?” (For an answer to that, check out the upcoming issue of Ministry Today in September, which includes an array of opinions from seasoned revivalists and respected leaders.)

Yet equally as pronounced—and fascinating, in my opinion—are the virtual tongue-lashings you’re bound to get nowadays no matter how balanced (or unbalanced) you try to be with your comments regarding the Lakeland scene. No, I’m not just reacting to those who posted their thoughts regarding my previous writing—which were mild compared to most online threads I’ve followed. What intrigues me more is the all-or-nothing approach so many online opinionators have adopted.

It’s called throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I know because I’ve been prone to some major baby-tossing myself. In fact, not to one-up the Apostle Paul, but it wasn’t too long ago that I could’ve been nominated as Chief Tosser among tossers.

When I threw myself into the charismania waters of the Toronto Blessing, Pensacola Revival, prophetic movement and other moves that have come in the past 15-plus years, I often struggled with making sense of some of the “extra-biblical” matters I regularly encountered. Having come from a Southern Baptist, “if it’s not in the Bible, it’s not of God” background, it was already a bit of a stretch for me to explain what exactly went on when someone was “slain in the Spirit.” At times I wanted to jump out of the flow because I was so frustrated by the (often unspoken) emphasis on the extremes, the manifestations and teachings that required reading between the lines of Scripture. And I grew tired of playing Duck Duck Goose with identifying what was “truly” in the Spirit and what wasn’t. Like many who have made a similar leap of faith, I still wrestle with these issues.

The problem, however, is that as soon as you admit to such a struggle in certain circles, your “Spirit-filled” level supposedly plummets while your “religious spirit” quotient rapidly rises. To appear “with it” and in the Spirit, you either suck it up and withhold all questioning or, like many I’ve seen during these years, you get thrown out of the rapids and left to sit alone on the slippery slope of the riverbank. With no answers or resolution in sight, your questioning quickly morphs into acerbic criticism, which turns into pure bitterness—which eventually leads to dismissing the whole Spirit-filled experience. Most of us know at least half a dozen people who’ve been down this path and ended up tossing the baby out with the bathwater.

This is what I’m questioning when I mention the Lakeland Outpouring. It’s the culture we’ve created. A culture that is enveloped in the Lakeland experience and has been on full display at each of the previously mentioned moves of God. It’s a culture in which miraculous healings are fused with a flesh-fest of celebrity, where people can experience unprecedented heights in authentic, Christ-exalting worship and yet hours later leave a meeting utterly confused. And although this environment may propel many deeper into Holy Spirit matters, it also leaves countless wounded and abandoned in its wake.

I am convinced God is trying to redeem such a culture through this current move. As I hoped to convey in my previous blog posting (but obviously didn’t), we are an odd but beautiful mixture of flesh and spirit: 100 percent spirit and 100 percent flesh, as was our Savior, Jesus. Christ never once abandoned the spirit realm, but neither did He forsake His status as a Spirit-filled container of flesh. He did His Father’s will through both, but in doing so, He had to overcome the culture surrounding Him.

I believe the same can be done at Lakeland. Obviously, it doesn’t help when people jump to the conclusion that this outpouring is entirely “not of God” or, even more presumptuously, that it’s the work of the devil. That’s just as bad a case of baby-tossing as those who’ve given up entirely on the charismatic journey. Can the enemy creep into our misguided, scripturally unsound interpretation of what the Holy Spirit wants to do in Lakeland? You bet. Can leaders get caught up in the charismatic celebrity culture that rears its ugly head (as it’s always done) during such a series of meetings? Yep. But having seen firsthand the hunger among God’s people—including Todd Bentley and those leaders associated with Lakeland—for an authentic, Holy Spirit-saturated move, I think it would be somewhat foolish to say God isn’t at work. As always, He’s simply waiting on us.

Our challenge, then, is to not point the finger exclusively at Bentley or other leaders, though they embody much of this confusing culture. Neither is it to foolishly dismiss the entire outpouring as a farce. Instead, let’s seek to establish God’s kingdom culture in the midst of the mangled one we’ve created. And that, I believe, includes repenting for being able to coast down the winding river of recent movements while seeing a legion of lost, discarded and confused believers sitting on the banks, contemplating their complete exit from faith—because of us, no less.

Culture Clash

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:52:00 +0000

After experiencing the Lakeland Outpouring in person for the first time earlier this week, I returned home feeling like I’d just swum in a pool filled with oil and water. Every move of God involves a clash of elements: sin vs. salvation, flesh vs. spirit, pride vs. repentance … the list goes on. Yet I believe God’s current movement in Lakeland is exposing the mixed elements that have comprised the charismatic church culture for at least a generation now. The good news? Something’s gotta give. And my hope is that, like water yielding to oil, we’re the ones who make room for God.

Monday night’s apostolic commissioning of evangelist Todd Bentley began with the ceremony’s organizer, Peter Wagner, calling it “an event [that] could well have historic implications not only for the Lakeland Outpouring, but also for our nation and for many other nations of the world.” Those opening remarks set the stage for what simultaneously became an admirable display of ministerial government and a nauseating example of what’s wrong with our movement today.

One minute we were being reminded—as has been the case throughout the Outpouring—that this was all about God’s glory, that it had little to do with Todd Bentley. The next, Bentley was announcing to GOD TV viewers and those among the crowd of 10,000 what cities Todd Bentley would be visiting and what stadiums Todd Bentley would be filling in the months to come. One moment the emphasis was being placed on how revival fires would spread through average, uncommissioned Joes; the next moment, we were presumptuously instructed to “hold our applause until the end” of Wagner’s roll call of the big names in attendance.

I, like most people, am all for God showing up through unconventional means. I love it when He surprises some of us and offends the rest by using the underdogs, the oft-forgottens, the unimpressive and the downright weird among us. It comes as no surprise to me that God might use a sold-out, tattooed, pierced 30-something to stir hunger among His people. And above all the distractions, criticism and controversy surrounding the Lakeland Outpouring, this is clear: God’s people are hungry. Starving, to be exact. We are all—leaders included—desperate for God’s glory to change this earth and bring His kingdom. That, along with such elements as repentance and holiness, lays the foundation for true revival.

But I wonder how firm our foundation currently is given the celebrity-centric ministry culture we’ve created. We cry out for a move of God that’s pronounced through nameless, faceless people, yet we’re all too often reminded of who’s sitting on stage, who’s in the building, who’s holding the microphone, who’s attending what conference, who’s leading worship, who’s prophesying at the church across town …

Is anyone else seeing a culture clash here?

There are obviously other issues—from extra-biblical theology to extreme manifestations to teachings on angels—that have turned the Lakeland Outpouring into such a divisive move. But I believe underneath these fundamental yet surface issues lies a cultural war that is apparent not just every night at the “revival tent” in Lakeland, but also in Spirit-filled churches across our nation. God is looking to promote His kingdom culture, and we keep diluting it with ours.

What’s exciting is that we are all in this together. Ché Ahn, who helped preside over Bentley’s commissioning, spoke the following night in Bentley’s absence and at times gave a beautiful example of what great leadership can look like in these messy times. At the point where most well-known ministers would begin to inadvertently “hog the mic” as they lay hands on the sick and keep all eyes on them, Ahn followed what I believe is God’s underlying desire: letting the saints do His business. Not an elite few or just those who have obvious giftings, mind you. “This is the day of the saints,” Ahn said as he led almost 10,000 “average Joes” to lay hands on the sick among them and pray for each other. “This is something for all of us to do. … Not all of us have the gift of healing, but all of us have the responsibility or the role to heal the sick. … We all carry the anointing!”

I refuse to be an armchair quarterback of what’s going on at Lakeland, or of any of the leaders involved, for that matter. I am just as at fault for creating this culture as the next person—and that includes the honorable and gifted “names” that I’m targeting here. Again, we all want the same thing. We all want to see God changing lives, communities, cities, nations. We want to see the day when the “glory of God fills the whole earth” (Num. 14:20).

But like the Israelites wandering in Sinai, we can either make another trip around the mountain, or we can change and enter into the promised land of true revival. We can learn from past mistakes and fizzled revivals and be truly saturated with the Holy Spirit, or we can remain a diluted mixture of flesh and spirit. We can continue to shine the spotlight (even unintentionally) on ourselves, or we can truly follow Jesus’ example and become servant leaders who have no problem stepping aside as the Lord walks into the room. It’s God’s culture or our own.

Please Stay With Me to the End of This Sentence

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 18:04:00 +0000

The latest issue of Atlantic Monthly includes a fascinating article that asks, "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" Beyond just covering the changes since the "information highway" entered our everyday existence, writer Nicholas Carr wonders what affect the Internet is having on our brains—more specifically, how we read and process information. Some highlights from Carr's piece:

Over the past few years I’ve had an uncomfortable sense that someone, or something, has been tinkering with my brain, remapping the neural circuitry, reprogramming the memory. My mind isn’t going—so far as I can tell—but it’s changing. I’m not thinking the way I used to think. I can feel it most strongly when I’m reading. Immersing myself in a book or a lengthy article used to be easy. My mind would get caught up in the narrative or the turns of the argument, and I’d spend hours strolling through long stretches of prose. That’s rarely the case anymore. Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages. I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do. I feel as if I’m always dragging my wayward brain back to the text. The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.
... And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation. My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles. Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.

I highly recommend that you spend a few minutes reading the article. It's not stuffy or overly techy, but is a must-read for anyone who deals with people in this twittering, texting, terabytes-per-second-consuming wiki-culture. (Yep, that means everyone.) The ironic thing, however, is that if you're like me, you probably won't read every word of it. You'll glean through paragraphs, taking only the most outstanding info that catches your eye. And that, folks, is exactly the point.

Reading has changed. Media and our interaction with it have changed. But more importantly, our entire approach to communication has changed. And as a pastor, that affects absolutely everything you do in your approach to people. Yes, the gospel remains the same. The principles of God haven't changed. But just as Christ spoke to both His disciples and the masses using stories, analogies and language of the day, we must communicate with the same timeliness, the same relevant connective tissue. I'm not talking about technology, though that's a major part of it. What I'm referring to is having at least an awareness of the light-speed pace at which people interact with you now and "consume" your message—both spoken and unspoken. Once you get that part down, you'll notice a difference in how you craft a sermon, make announcements, counsel a couple, or even how you have a simple conversation with the Starbucks girl who makes your coffee each morning.

When it comes to communication, it's a different world. So how has this affected you?

Seeking to Blame

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 17:32:00 +0000

The latest from the story that won't die ...

Last August, after assessing the results of an extensive survey of his church, Willow Creek Community Church's Bill Hybels uttered a four-word sentence—"We made a mistake"—that spawned a host of blog posts and news stories, along with a case of rampant "I told you so"-itis. Though Hybels went on to candidly explain Willow's struggles with producing true disciples rather than mere churchgoers (which the survey's results proved), the miscorrelation had already begun: Seeker-sensitive doesn't work! Christianity Today seemed to lead the charge with a blog post in October titled "Willow Creek Repents?" and a follow-up article in May about all the changes the church was supposedly making is response.

I'm not exactly sure why it's taken this long, but Willow finally posted a direct response from Hybels on its Web site today. In the posted video of a Q&A session with Willow Creek Association president Jim Mellado, Hybels called CT's latest story "an unfortunate article that was written without a proper understanding of what we're actually doing these days." And in a loaded response to the blog, he added, "I don't think when you make a strategic adjustment it qualifies under the term 'repent.' I think every evangelical knows that's kind of a loaded-up term, and I think someone wanted to get some action on a blog."

Not too long ago I blogged (also candidly, I might add) about my lack of a definitive opinion on the "seeker-sensitive vs. traditional" debate. Part of our problem, I believe, is that it's not a simple methodology question. Obviously, seeker-sensitive churches aren't in the wrong for reaching out to, as Hybels calls them in the video, the "irreligious" crowd. Any attack on that intent is absurd. Just as absurd, however, is dismissing the assessment that maybe we're not fully allowing the Holy Spirit to move when we program every worship service to be yet another "sit back and enjoy" spiritual ride.

I don't know. I really don't. I'm glad Hybels and Willow Creek are trying to set the record straight, but what might be the bigger issue here is why so many of us seem to want this ministry approach to be proven faulty. I've heard the arguments that a watered-down gospel is no gospel at all. True. But if we're all in the same boat, if we all wake up each morning needing the same daily dosage of God's mercy and grace to cover our failures, that means none of us is the definitive expert on ministry and what it means to fulfill the Great Commission. It means (without stating this too simplistically or couched in excessive naiveté) that we're all trying our best to share the good news of Jesus. So although many of us have a problem with seeker-sensitive worship services being more tightly scripted than some Oscar-winning screenplays, I wonder if by pointing that out we're not harboring a "they've missed the boat" attitude and thus exposing our own—now what did Hybels call it?—mistake.

A Falling Nation and a Rising Revival

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 13:59:00 +0000

I've spent enough time working in the newsroom of a local newspaper to know it isn't my cup of tea. Apparently, those are words journalists are never supposed to utter, but hey, I'm just being honest. It didn't take long to figure out what the newsroom environment does to most people. While searching under every rock for the truth, writers morph into cynics as the world and its harsh sadness eats away at every sense and sensibility. Whatever survives is calloused, be it relationships, dreams, perspectives, etc.

I'm hoping that's not the case for veteran journalist Christine Wicker, who recently released her latest book, The Fall of the Evangelical Nation: The Surprising Crisis Inside the Church. A title like that normally wouldn't catch my eye since we've been blitzed by so much evangelicalspeak in recent years. Do we really need another person's take on the rise or fall of evangelicalism, what it means or doesn't mean to this year's presidential election, whether there's a changing of the guard or not—yada yada yada?

Yet Wicker and her latest project piqued my interest mainly because a severely condensed version of her take on evangelicalism's decline showed up in the op-ed section of Sunday's Dallas Morning News. More precisely, she has me interested because of how much her words ruffled me. I'm not easily offended, yet almost every paragraph of her article sparked a response in me—from anger to agreement. Now that's good writing.

Some quotes from Wicker's piece:

The idea that only one little part of one kind of religion has the only way to God has begun to seem more and more unlikely. It has begun to seem rude. Un-Christian, even. And evangelicals, who don't like being boorish any more than anyone else, have become less and less willing to relegate their neighbors to hell. So we have a completely formless god of great power and instant accessibility romping around, rescuing millions whom everyone else had given up on. Then we have more Christians getting squeamish about proclaiming hegemony over heaven.

Evangelical leaders defend their stance by claiming that God doesn't change and that neither does sin. But sin does change. Slavery wasn't sin once. Now it is. Taking a wife and a concubine wasn't sin once. Now it is. And God—or our understanding of what God is, which is all we actually have—changes, too. When societies change, their interpretations of God change. Their readings of the Scripture shift. Human understandings are remolded so that faith can remain vital and effective during new times.

Whether evangelical intransigence is pleasing to God isn't anything that humans can ever be absolutely sure of. If it is pleasing to him, God may send a great revival that will sweep the country and restore them to their place of predominance. Such revivals have happened before. They could happen again.

Wicker comes from Southern Baptist roots, which I mention simply because it indicates to me that she knows exactly what she's doing. She's been immersed in the language and knows she's riling up a major segment of her readers. And yes, I believe her view is extremely skewed toward the Baptist world (again, she's smart enough to consider her Dallas-area audience). But through all her caustic language, I find it strange that her landing point is a question of revival.

We are in odd times, aren't we? And what I love is that God can speak through anyone, anytime, to remind us that He does not nor will not abandon His church. Thankfully, that church isn't the evangelical movement, nor is it the declining denominations. Talk about the declining church is cheap nowadays. According to every expert and analyst, we're becoming ineffective, powerless, scattered, divided, hypocritical and small.

Hogwash. The church is approaching what could be her finest hour. Whenever darkness grows thicker, light doesn't become irrelevant—it becomes brighter. A single pure flame lights up an entire room; think of what thousands or even millions can do. Even if there is only a remnant of "pure" lights left in this falling nation, that's still enough to rest on the assurance that God's people—His church—we are alive and well. Do we need revival? Of course. Does our nation need a radical spirit revolution that reforms our culture? You bet. Yet thankfully, every revival and reformation starts with a single spark. Call me an optimist, but I believe more than a single spark exists today. I believe we have more than just a hope; we have a future, just as God has said.

Big Dreams for a Small Church

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Mon, 19 May 2008 19:47:00 +0000

I've always been a big fan of small churches. That's partly because I don't fully understand how megachurches "do" real church, and partly because I prefer the rawness, freedom and community that comes from a smaller worship gathering. Is it awkward at times? You bet. A little clumsy and unpolished? Sometimes. Yet those elements, to me, are exactly why small churches are such a treasure.

I love that there doesn't have to be soft music playing behind every prayer, altar call or offering. I love that you can get to know—really know—the people sitting next to you, and that building real relationships isn't an option when it's impossible to hide among the crowds. (What crowds?!) And maybe more than anything, I love that small churches allow everyone to be a key, active part of the body. No sideline-sitters (or at least not for long), all players. Because in small churches, everyone brings something of value.

My wife and I are currently experiencing the natural highs and lows of leading in a small church. I've never seen a church so poised for growth, and yet I'm excited because at the heart, growth isn't really the issue—being the true body of Christ is. Sure, we'll all rejoice when we begin to see God bringing dozens of new people in the doors each week. But for now, there's an excitement knowing we're simultaneously ready and still being prepared, yet the point is not how many people show up on Sundays but whether we ministered to God and those He's given us for now. We are a church full of individuals facing tough issues and rough times—which is yet another reason I feel blessed to be there. Because if there's one thing I know about God, it's that He loves hanging out with the down-and-outers!

Mayday, Mayday!

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Mon, 19 May 2008 19:18:00 +0000

I just discovered this 40-second clip and couldn't help but share it—first, because it's hilarious; and second, because I wonder if it doesn't hit a little too close to home for some of us. Are Christians—both individually and corporately—really responding to people's cries for help, or do we only respond when people speak exactly the same way we do—namely, in Christianese?

Are We Doing This?

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Wed, 07 May 2008 14:13:00 +0000

I caught this story on the wire a week ago and was waiting for someone to cover it more extensively. (Leave it to ESPN to produce a tear-jerker.) On the surface, it's an amazing example of true integrity and character. But beyond the Hallmark moment, I think every pastor will see a picture of what the church can be when we work in unity for kingdom purposes rather than for our own agendas or glory. Although that usually involves sacrificing personal victories and dreams, when we opt for this higher ground—as this story shows—the end result is always more powerful and life-changing.

The Great Debate

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Thu, 01 May 2008 14:11:00 +0000

While running down my list of blogs I read daily, I followed a slight rabbit trail and stumbled upon this slice of modern American church. Ignore the main post and just read the comments not for entertainment's sake, but for a pure example of the pointless battles we wage so passionately in Christendom today—against our own brothers and sisters! In this case, it's Tim Stevens, a pastor at a well-known yet typical community megachurch in Indiana, who gets the brunt of the acerbic responses. He recently wrote a book, Pop Goes the Church, that says we should—how dare he!—engage the culture by using relevant language. But as you'll see in the postings, he quickly becomes the emblem for an entire church movement.

Call it "seeker-sensitive," "community," nondenominational," "interdenominational" ... the decripts for this movement all seem to mesh into a similar form. Essentially, it's the "new" church of the past 20-plus years continuing to redefine itself today, trying to reach people via a cultural relevancy that has been declared absent in the church at large. On the other end, of course, lies those who remain dedicated not so much to tradition (although some would argue that) but to the purity of a gospel that should stand alone. In the words of one commenter, it believes you don't need to "prop Jesus up" with thematic messages, slick packaging and rock 'n' roll introductions. Both movements are multifaceted and represent a myriad of styles, methodologies and fundamental principles. Yet we continue to argue which is, for lack of a more precise measurement, better.

For some, the argument is over whether the church is actually broken. For others, it's a dispute over methodology. For those honest enough to admit their personal bias, it's a preference issue. But I encourage you to take a step back from whatever you feel is right and simply assess the heated reactions we often bring to the discussion table. Rather than truly discuss matters and search for truth, we're quick to fire our preloaded guns—once again, at our own brothers and sisters. The comments at the above link show we are at the point—and have been for years—of absurdity. Does this really matter in the grand scheme of things?

I'll admit, I still struggle with the debate between "seeker-sensitive" (I realize I'm over-generalizing here) and the more traditional (note: not necessarily antiquated). I've experienced the positives and negatives of both firsthand, and I've heard years' worth of impassioned arguments for and against each. I am part of an extended family that often derides the seeker-sensitive church's stigma of a watered-down gospel, lack of discipleship and entertainment-based services. This family believes whole-heartedly that a full dose of God's glory and His Spirit's powerful movement is what essentially transforms individuals—not styles or methods, although both play a role in church life. At the same time, my natural family is deeply steeped in a thriving movement that continues to expand. Lives are being changed. Those who have tossed church aside are being reignited with a newfound relevancy of what it means to be a Christian. While this family admits it struggles at times with the maturation of true disciples, it cannot deny that its methods are changing individuals, families and communities.

So where do I land? Most leaders have an opinion. I'll be honest enough to admit I'm still not there yet. At times I wonder if we've missed the boat—on both sides of the lake. I question this new church in America and its lasting effectiveness, just as I question the "old" church and its supposedly waning effectiveness. Both seem to pale when I look at some of the rising, revolutionary churches I see abroad. Yet all of them, at least in intent, aim for the ultimate goal of establishing God's kingdom on earth through the hearts of people. And to me, that makes the bigger issue not how we're "doing" church but whether we're actually being the church—which starts with our fervent love for God and one another.

What's Happening in Lakeland?

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:48:00 +0000

re·viv·al (rĭ-vī'vəl) n.
1. The act or an instance of reviving.
2. The condition of being revived.
3. A time of reawakened interest in religion.
4. A meeting or series of meetings for the purpose of reawakening religious faith, often characterized by impassioned preaching and public testimony.

The word revival is used a little too flippantly among Christians, yet the intent is usually pure. We want to see the Holy Spirit changing lives. We want to see Him healing bodies, hearts and lives to the point that people are never the same. Obviously, our desire is to have this happen as part of our daily lives—to walk as Jesus did, following the Father's lead and leaving a trail of signs, wonders and miracles. Yet when this happens in a remarkable fashion, for a remarkable length of time, we label it as a revival.

That same element of time will tell whether what's going on in Lakeland, Fla., is a revival. One thing is clear, though: God is moving. Check out the on-the-scene reports from my coworkers at Charisma and from the local media. GOD TV has been broadcasting the evening services live, and you can watch archived streaming videos here. I'm sure I'll blog more about what's been dubbed as the "Florida Healing Revival" or the "Lakeland Healing Outpouring" as or if it continues. But for now I'll simply echo the phrase used countless times during my days with the Vineyard movement (which also knew a thing or two about revival): "More, Lord!"

Building Better?

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 13:44:00 +0000

LifeWay Research released a fascinating survey today on church buildings that may come as bad news to many pastors. Turns out the "unchurched" don't necessarily go for churches turning contemporary—at least not when it comes to architectural style.

Researchers showed 1,684 adults—all of whom essentially hadn't been to church in the previous six months—four pictures of church buildings with various architectural styles. By more than a two-to-one ratio, participants opted for the Gothic cathedral building over more contemporary options. Just as surprising was that the unchurched repeated this preference for the traditional in choosing among various foyers and worship centers. In fact, the run-of-the-mill contemporary sanctuary with multiple projection screens and stadium seating actually came in dead-last, as did the wide-open, family friendly foyer.

Obviously, this is both startling and a little upsetting for thousands of pastors who have ridden the wave of church design and construction that says a less "churchy" building is a bigger draw. But before all you old-timers start saying "I told you so," let's dig a little deeper on both the research and the results:

Consider the exterior options. Aside from the cathedral, the other three church buildings presented were not (in my opinion) necessarily cutting edge or wildly contemporary. None were refurbished warehouses, I.M. Pei lookalikes or emblems of innovation. Given the selection, I'm not sure I would've voted for any of these three either. To a degree, they reek of mass production rather than the artistry so often shown in a cathedral.
At the same time, this speaks volumes about our cultural and spiritual climate. Through all the mile-long shopping malls, Super-Duper Wal-Marts, and megachurches, people are still hungry for intimacy and community, even as it's reflected in architecture. One respondent even mentioned wanting an "intimacy that's transcendent." Isn't it interested how the tables have seemingly turned? What was previously considered a cold, detached worship environment may now be seen as a warm, inviting locale for tight-knit communion.
Remember, these are unchurched adults. Just because they prefer the look of a church building doesn't mean they're more likely to actually show up in that building. I'm not trying to be a complete cynic here, but the reality is church buildings rarely draw people. Sure, they can facilitate a connection, and they can certainly make for a smoother transition (i.e., not be a detraction). But even LifeWay's survey found that 36 percent—the largest segment—of respondents said the design of a church building makes no difference in how much they enjoy their time there. It's an eternal truth: The church is people.

One of the keys to this study was the underlying question asked by Cornerstone Knowledge Network (CKN), the company that solicited LifeWay Research. Here's what one CKN representative had to say: "Despite billions being spent on church buildings, there was an overall decline in church attendance in the 1990s. This led CKN to ask, 'As church builders what can we do to help church leaders be more intentional about reaching people who don't go to church?'"

We would do well to continue asking similar questions, even when the results aren't what we'd hoped for. Especially when they're not what we hoped for.

Church MythBusters

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 13:54:00 +0000

My brother-in-law is fascinated with urban legends. His DVR is loaded with every episode of MythBusters ever made. He's always finding new sites on the Internet that reveal the absolute truth behind some far-fetched tale. So I'm guessing he would get a kick out of two statistics released this week, and how they shed light on a couple of church myths.

Myth #1: 50 percent of all marriages end in divorce, whether you're a Christian or not.
False, and false again. How many of us have heard a pastor use this in a sermon/rant about how bad things have become? Maybe you've even used it too. I've heard this all of my adult life, and not until the past few years (after a little digging) did I discovered how badly skewed this morbid statistic is. I won't go into all the details, but somewhere along the line—probably in the late 1970s, when the overall number of divorces really started booming—this urban legend got started. Some explanations account for the fact that when you look at the sheer number of marriages and divorces in a single year, there's a virtual two-to-one ratio. The problem is, however, this doesn't factor in all the millions of marriages still existing. Bad stat.

The Barna Group's latest study echoes this with a relatively small sampling of 5,000-plus Americans. Thirty-three percent of those polled had been divorced at least once. Among born-again Christians, that rate essentially remained the same (32 percent), while for evangelicals it dipped slightly (26 percent). Is this difference enough to prove that a walk with God automatically makes you divorce-proof? Of course not. But it also echoes the fact that significantly less—about half, in fact—people are getting divorced than what you hear.

Myth #2: Muslims are taking over the world.
OK, maybe I'm exaggerating this myth a bit, but it's the sense you get once again from many misinformed pulpits. There is some definite truth to the feeling that the Muslim world is expanding. It is, and at a rate that should prompt every Christian to a renewed level of awareness and action. You know something's going on when even the Vatican is announcing that it is "no longer at the top" and that "Muslims have overtaken us." It should be clarified that by "us," Monsignor Vittorio Formenti means Catholics, who comprise 17.4 percent of the world's population. His big announcement was that Muslims have now surpassed that mark, making up 19.2 percent of the world.

Once again, let's keep some perspective on things. Although there are an estimated 1.3 billion Islamic believers worldwide, this still ranks second to Christianity at large, which, factoring in the multitude of various denominations and groupings, tops the 2 billion mark. That's about 33 percent of the earth's population. Again, I don't mean to downplay the impressive growth of Muslims in the past several years, but I also don't want to see another "wow" statistic misinterpreted.

Bottom line: Put on an investigator's hat before spouting a startling and oh-so-sexy pass-along statistic. That's hard as a pastor, given the limited time you usually have to do such research. It's much easier to just echo everyone else's latest shock tool, and it's certainly more effective in hammering home a point about the need for Jesus, revival, social revolution, etc. But given our statistic-frenzied culture, the real revolution may start with telling the truth rather than skewing it.

From the 'Miscellaneous' Folder

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:43:00 +0000

It's time to unleash a few links still sitting in my "Miscellaneous" folder ...

Who knew we were the ones defining what can and can't send us to hell?
I just gotta know ... how in the world do you misplace a $1 million donation?! Not lose a million, mind you, but actually give it to the wrong organization. Do you know how much paperwork has to be filed to see a grant through? Wow. I feel bad for Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who's getting all the blame.
I know there are other issues besides what's presented in this article about an Asheville, N.C., house church getting the boot. Regardless, it's still a sad, tough situation. I love the beautiful simplicity of "pastor" Amy Cantrell's reponse: "We're expecting God will provide." Right on.
Looks like Fort Worth's Broadway Baptist Church finally has some closure after months of a public battle that put the pastor's job on the line. Only problem is, what happens when your church lets you stay—by a mere a two-thirds vote?
Finally ... normally I wouldn't bother posting something like this since it usually just fuels friendly fire, name-calling and disunity. But I found the clip below of Faithful Word Baptist Church pastor Steven Anderson intriguing, funny, disturbing enlightening, pitiful and challenging—all at the same time. I have a hard time believing this guy isn't just acting. (After digging around a little, it appears he's not.)

Pastors for Presidents

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 20:10:00 +0000

Don’t think it’s by chance that pastors are playing a huge role in this year’s upcoming presidential elections. People seem to forget that they’ve long been at the heart of our nation’s political process—and will continue to be.

It was impossible for the mainstream media to ignore the pastors-and-politics connection when Mike Huckabee, a former Southern Baptist pastor and denominational leader, stepped into the ring—then befuddled everyone by sticking around. Then came the hubbub over Barack Obama’s relationship with his pastor, Jeremiah Wright of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, who just happened to be a longtime supporter of Nation of Islam’s Louis Farrakhan. And as the apparent next contestant in the “Who’s Your Pastor?” political game show, John McCain recently found an endorsement from San Antonio pastor John Hagee to cause more of a stir than he’d hoped.

By now it’s obvious that the evangelical vote, no matter how fragmented, is still a hot ticket. What else explains the smiles among candidates as the roll call of Christianity’s biggest names—and their valued endorsements—continues? There’s an interesting shift that has taken place, however, in this wild electoral season. Call it the “new evangelical vote,” the “rising vote of social justice-based believers”—however you dub this development, it boils down to an age-old scenario that’s been a cornerstone of American politics since the Founding Fathers: a local pastor preaching his heart out on biblical values—values that, yes, connect directly with how we vote and just might line up with a particular candidate.

This used to be called “normal”; now it’s called into question. Such is the vacuum created when generations of pastors resigned from the political arena and allowed their sheep to fall prey to a “separation of church and state” agenda. (After all, when pastors don’t speak, someone else always will.)

I invite you, dear pastor, to find a place in history when pastors have ever been excluded from the American political process. You are, and always have been, the key to declaring God’s truth among the people—in every arena of life. That doesn’t mean you’re endorsing Obama, McCain, Huckabee, Hillary Clinton, Ron Paul or anyone else for that matter; it means you’re urging people to vote as followers of Christ, just as you’ve always done.

On that note … I’ll probably be plugging these again in the future, but I can’t think of a better time to promote two articles we’ll be running in upcoming issues of Ministry Today. If you’re a pastor and unsure what you can and can’t say from the pulpit in regards to politics, you won’t want to miss Mat Staver’s article “Pastors, Pulpits & Politics” in our May/June issue. If, on the other hand, you subscribe to the belief that pastors shouldn’t be part of the political process, I strongly urge you to check out David Barton’s piece in the following issue.

Sex Sells ... Especially in Church

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 21:49:00 +0000

Sex sells. Yes, even in church. Especially in church.

That's what the folks at Relevant Church in Ybor City, Fla., are finding. After brainstorming with church leaders about how to help couples struggling with issues of sex and money, pastor Paul Wirth launched a challenge to those in his Tampa-area congregation this past Sunday: For the next 30 days, have lots of sex. In fact, have sex every day.

Ultimately, the point of his "30-Day Sex Challenge" is to help couples purposefully create time for increased intimacy, which will then make way for better communication and improve their relationships. As for singles in the church, they're urged to refrain from sex for the month (hopefully something they're already doing on a continual basis) and concentrate on going deeper in their own relationships without getting tripped up by physical issues.

"When you talk about sex, everybody expects the church to say God hates sex," Wirth says. "That's just not true. I really believe that God wants us to have great sex. ... Relationships are at an all-time low, and no one seems to have a handle on how to make them work right." He's arguing that his church—and this challenge—can help.

I had planned on blogging about this Monday morning, as it had sat on my radar for a few days prior. Then it became a story within a story, something not only incredibly indicative of our times, but also worthy of discussion that goes beyond the catchy sex tags. Here's why ...

As you can imagine, the media has eaten up this story. I've watched as it's quickly gone from a three-paragraph blurb on a small Tampa news site to Fox News, to the AP, to a two-page spread in the St. Petersburg Times, to every type of media outlet around the world. Definitely viral ... and the wordplay potential has certainly made attention-grabbing headlines. Meanwhile, church marketing blogs I regularly read have applauded the efforts of this small, hip downtown church full of 20- and 30-somethings. Doesn't every young, hip leader love it when you can stop a crowd mid-bustle and hold their attention for the required 0.2 nanoseconds with something that remotely, maybe, just might have to do with God or church or something?

I'm not trying to sound facetious. (OK, at least not too much.) I like what Relevant Church is doing with this, and I know the intention well because it rings true in every pastor's heart. We do whatever helps people so that, ultimately, they can step further aside and watch God move in their lives. I'm also in agreement with marketing guys who say churches shoot themselves in the foot most of the time by being irrelevant, lacking purpose and fumbling both the packaging and delivery. Hey, at least Relevant's leadership was smart enough to launch a Web site to coincide with the series (which, by the way, has apparently received so many hits it blew up—last I checked the site was still down).

So my objection? It's not an objection, not even a concern ... just a thought. I wonder if there will ever be a time when marketing isn't a church function, when we don't have to reek of "whatever gets your attention." A time when God is relevant by Himself, sans the cool sermon series, edgy Web designs, promotional videos and rock-band intros. Obviously, this is the age we live in, and we must reach people where they are, just as Jesus did, with whatever means it takes. So maybe I'm being religious by wondering in the first place. Maybe I'm just still in rant mode. Or maybe at this point, in a culture that has filled each second with 100,000 options and declared God's relevancy irrelevant, it's a moot point.

Warning: Political Rant Ahead

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 17:07:00 +0000

I don't think I'm alone in saying this may be the most volatile political season our country has experienced in generations. I, like many of you, find myself at a crossroads: While I'm more passionate about the political process than ever before, I'm also beyond the point of being exasperated with it. For the average Joe, it's annoying enough that the media frenzy surrounding this November's election seems to have started around, oh, 320 B.C. But for those who actually like the fact that The Biggest Loser or another CSI rerun have been routinely pre-empted by a televised debate, there's a greater annoyance: this season's brash, blatant and maddening media bias.

You don't have to be a political junkie (which I'm not) to realize this is nothing new. In fact, it's very old news when you consider the machines that have run the parties for decades. And yet can you ever remember such a barrage of hyped-up public debates, forums and Q&A sessions that overtly squelched the predetermined "losers"? Regardless of where this season ranks in terms of dirty politics, it still scares me to see the effects of such coverage on the common voter.

Case in point: My wife was at a coffee shop the other day, where at the next table two older women adamantly discussed their dislike for Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John McCain. It became obvious that the women were Christians, so my wife was curious about their interest in other candidates. "I'm sorry, but I couldn't help overhearing your conversation," she said while leaning over to their table. "If you don't mind me asking, who are you voting for?" Neither had decided, but they certainly knew who they weren't voting for. "So what about Mike Huckabee?" my wife asked. Both paused for a while, shrugged a bit and then matter-of-factly stated that he probably wouldn't win.

[Warning: Editor rant ahead]

Therein lies the heart of the current problem. It's one that's equally frustrating for fans of Ron Paul, who I think beautifully epitomizes the stirring, rabid underground movement that is fed up with conventional party politics. Paul and Huckabee are two different candidates, with unique positions, unique theories and unique followers. And both, we've been repeatedly told for the past year, are surefire losers. Can't win. Don't have enough cash. Don't have the support of key figures. Don't have the evangelical vote. Don't have enough charisma, experience, hair, Armani suits—you name it, they've been doubted because of it.

Surprise, surprise ... here we are, mere months from the party conventions and at least two of those "losers" are still hanging on, despite a process that is bent on dismissing them. They're certainly not surviving because of air time. Mainstream media outlets have, as usual, been successful enough to brainwa—er, convince the general public who the real winners are. As a result, we stand a few delegates away from McCain gaining the GOP nomination. Still, I believe people are finally catching on to the reality. When Ron Paul gets invited to a two-hour debate but isn't asked a single question, you know something's up. Or when Mike Huckabee is asked to attend the same event yet only gets tossed the token "evangelical" questions, it's just as infuriating. It doesn't help that major Christian leaders have added to that frustration by either supporting those who seemingly contradict their core values or, as in the case of guys like James Dobson, offering endorsements that reek of settling for the "best remaining choice"—and too late at that.

So who wins in all this? I honestly don't know. On one hand, I'm confused by Christians who say they stand for certain fundamental values but refused to get behind a former pastor and denominational leader simply because he supposedly wouldn't win. And on the other hand, I feel for a 10-term Congressman who is propheticly bold enough to call this a political scam—while being a victim of it. What I do know, however, and what gives me hope for the future, is that things are being exposed. Slowly, yes ... but at least they're being exposed.

[End rant]

What to Do When Your Own Congregation Thinks You're Demon-Possessed

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 17:07:00 +0000

I saw this clip on Tim Stevens' site (from Granger Community Church) and thought it worth posting here. For every pastor that's been through anything similar to what Mark Beeson is talking about, this is definitely worth the 6 minutes viewing time.

What Charismatic Leaders Are Talking About

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:26:00 +0000

We just wrapped up the Charismatic Leadership Summit held here at Strang over the past two days. And while my mind is going 180 mph trying to process some of the dialogue that went on, I wanted to quickly highlight some of the thought-provoking statements that resonated among this group that included some of the most renowned and respected charismatic-Pentecostal leaders around. (I'm intentionally leaving out which leaders said these to avoid detracting from the statements themselves.)

"You've exited your calling when you seek to please people."
"I think [humility] is something that in many parts here in the West is sadly lacking. There's an arrogance, there's a pride, there's an assumption that we do it best, we know what we're talking about. There's not the humility to learn from those who maybe aren't as wealthy, who don't dress right. They don't speak English very well, they don't have degrees and they don't have slick books with their pictures on the back of them. Their videos and TV stuff is way behind, it isn't cutting edge. But humility demands that we learn to listen and learn. The heart of this gets back to that posture of humility before God."
"One of the reasons that the reformation of justice or transformation of society makes a momentary impact and then 20 years later seems to dissipate (of course there are exceptions to that) is that the vessels of reformation and change don't have an intentionality about sustained connectedness with the Lord or to passing that on to the next generation--which is the key, I believe from Jesus' words, to sustained change in society."
"The overriding power of a church is in simplicity."
"Why haven't we seen sustained results after the many revivals? I think it has to do with the lack of keeping a kingdom culture DNA."
"I am committed to still believing that we don't have to acquiesce or surrender the power of God in order to win a generation. If we're going to win the Muslim world, if we're going to win America over, we need to demonstrate the power of God. ... There should be a continuity of 'We believe' even to the ballot box. We can’t articulate a message of righteousness, justice, holiness and integrity and a commitment to our core Christian values and then surrender them for the sake of political expediency at the end of the day."
"Moves of God and revivals themselves are not the endgame; the kingdom of God is the endgame."

And my personal favorite ...

"I have the privilege of interacting with a lot of international pastors and church leaders in the developing, underserved nations of the world. It's clear to me that God is raising up a new kind of leader in the body of Christ, a new kind of charismatic leader in this two-thirds world. He is raising up men and women who have anointing without arrogance, boldness without brashness, power without pride. I don't believe I've ever heard a sermon by a charismatic on James 2:5 that says, 'Has not God chosen the poor of this world to be rich in faith?' We think that those are somehow contradictory."

Barna's Body Work

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:45:00 +0000

I love the body of Christ. I love how God structured us each to be unique yet instrumental to the overall health of His kingdom work here on earth. Paul's description of the body at work in 1 Corinthians 12 has always struck me as one of the most liberating passages in scripture—particularly for ministers. Some of us function as the eyes, constantly seeing what lies before us; some serve as the feet, traveling tirelessly to places for the gospel's sake. Others work primarily as the hands, touching those around us with the power of Christ through us.

Then there are those of us who, like George Barna, David Kinnaman and the rest of the team at the Barna Group, get to be the brains of the bunch. I'm convinced that just as the human brain has millions of fascinating, intricate parts to it that help direct the rest of the physical body, so does the body of Christ have countless individuals whose insight and wisdom help us process what the rest of the body is reporting. In my opinion, the Barna Group serves as one of those guiding forces for American Christendom. No, I'm not labeling these guys the sole geniuses of the pack—though they are brilliant. I'm just praising them for the pivotal role they play in the lives of countless pastors and church leaders looking for some help in understanding those they're called to shepherd and guide.

And on that note, I'm excited to point you to the latest Barna study released earlier this week about the changing face of American Christianity. Bottom line: It's an exciting, challenging time for charismatic and Pentecostal churches nationwide. A few of the interesting nuggets to whet your appetite:

While only 8 percent of the overall population is considered evangelical, almost half of all evangelical adults can be described as charismatic.
One of every four Protestant churches in the United States is charismatic.
Among nondenominational congregations, four out of every 10 are charismatic.

Though George and David contribute to every issue of the print edition of Ministry Today, I'm especially excited about the upcoming March/April 2008 issue, in which George will be expanding on the study and offering some application specific to pastors and church leaders. You definitely won't want to miss it. (To avoid this happening, here's a helpful link. Because, after all, aren't shameless plugs from the "platform" part of our charismatic tradition? :)

Caught up in the Hype?

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 16:07:00 +0000

We all know evangelicalism plays a major role in today's political process. Old news. You can hardly turn on a news network today without hearing another talking head comment on the presidential candidates' faith—or lack thereof—and how it affects so-and-so's standing with a certain demographic. What I find interesting, however, is how many people can get caught up in the media frenzy of meshing the political and spiritual arenas. By caught up, I don't mean carried away; I mean literally trapped like a fish in a net that is slowly pulled ashore.

I wonder if Joel Osteen feels a bit like that after seeing the ripples caused from comments he made a couple of weeks ago—with one of those aforementioned talking heads, no less. On Dec. 23, the Lakewood Church senior pastor appeared on Fox News Sunday, chatting with host Chris Wallace about everything from his "Christianity lite" label from critics to the true meaning of Christmas. The interview, as always is the case nowadays with prominent leaders within the evangelical movement, eventually touched on the role of faith in today's political world. More specifically, Wallace steered Osteen into the heavily trodded territory involving Mitt Romney's beliefs and whether Mormonism is just another form of Christianity. Here's the exchange (click here for the video link, and here for the entire transcript):

WALLACE: And what about Mitt Romney? And I've got to ask you the question, because it is a question whether it should be or not in this campaign: Is a Mormon a true Christian?
OSTEEN: Well, in my mind they are. Mitt Romney has said that he believes in Christ as his savior, and that's what I believe, so, you know, I'm not the one to judge the little details of it. So I believe they are. And so, you know, Mitt Romney seems like a man of character and integrity to me, and I don't think he would ... anything would stop me from voting for him if that's what I felt like.
WALLACE: So, for instance, when people start talking about Joseph Smith, the founder of the church, and the golden tablets in upstate New York, and God assumes the shape of a man, do you not get hung up in those theological issues?
OSTEEN: I probably don't get hung up in them because I haven't really studied them or thought about them. And you know, I just try to let God be the judge of that. I mean, I don't know. I certainly can't say that I agree with everything that I've heard about it, but from what I've heard from Mitt, when he says that Christ is his savior, to me that's a common bond.

I refuse to join the ranks of online heresy hunters who have quickly run to the gallows with a pre-fitted noose for Osteen. Internet forums and the blogosphere are already jampacked with those continually crying how Osteen is weak on biblical truth yet strong on motivational, self-help "sermonettes." It's well-known that America's "smiling pastor" purposefully avoids hot-button issues. That's his schtick. Even Wallace asked him about this:

WALLACE: Unlike a lot of preachers, you don't—and I can sense a little discomfort on your part—you don't get involved in politics. You don't talk a lot about abortion and gays and the so- called social issues. Why not?
OSTEEN: Well, it started back with my father. He never did. And I just don't feel comfortable as well. I don't feel like that's my main gifting. And I feel like when I stay focused on encouraging people, and giving them hope, and helping them live their everyday life, I think that's where I can have the most impact. And I even heard Billy Graham say this, and I think it's true. Sometimes when you take strong stands, if you're not called to do it, you're dividing the audience you're trying to reach. I'm trying to throw a big net out there to say to anyone that God loves them and He's in control. And I think the moment ... even our church is so diverse. We have Republicans, Democrats, independents. And I think the moment I start saying, "Well, go this route," well, this group's going to just say, "I'm not going to listen to him because of the political stance."

The real tragedy in this, however, isn't just that Osteen hedged on a theological issue but that this is the second time he's done so before millions of those he's going after with a "softer" gospel." Some will recall his ambiguous responses on Larry King Live in 2005 to matters of Christ being the only way to salvation. He later issued a heartfelt public apology to the Christian community for being "unclear on the very thing in which I have dedicated my life."

I admired Osteen for that then, and I continue to admire him now for, among other things, choosing to reach as many as possible with an appealing message of hope. The guy would rather err on the side of inclusivity, projecting a gospel that highlights (almost solely) God's unconditional love, acceptance and life-changing power. But I wonder if you can truthfully represent such a gospel without ever mentioning its inherant exclusivity. Unfortunately, it seems that in becoming "all things to all men"—which is what I interpret Osteen's deeper intent to be—the gospel represented has become skewed.

YOUR TURN: What do you think of Joel Osteen's answers to the questions on Mormonism? Was he simply put in a no-win situation, or is he preaching a diluted gospel?

Shooting Close to Home

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 20:21:00 +0000

We all wear different hats. Most of the time I blog here while donning a magazine editor's hat. Today, though, I know of no other way to respond to Sunday's shootings in Colorado than by taking off that professional garb and putting on a more personal one. Not six months ago my family and I moved from Colorado Springs. We still consider it home. Though we didn't attend New Life Church, we know countless people who do. It's hard to live in that city and not have some connection to the church. We drove by it almost daily on our way to our closest friends' house. In fact, I recognized virtually every camera angle of the church campus offered to us yesterday as the news networks relayed the latest information. And though no one I know was killed or injured, the tragedy still hits home—hard.

The same is true of the equally senseless shootings at the Youth With a Mission base in Arvada. As a missionary kid who grew up in Hong Kong, I've been impacted by YWAMers my entire life. They are a wonderful and rare breed. Most recently my sister-in-law returned from serving on a YWAM team in Cambodia, and many of her friends lived in Colorado Springs and were semi-connected to the Arvada campus. (They also knew someone who was shot at New Life.)

There's a sense of déjà vu in all this. More than eight years ago, a friend of my wife's was gunned down at Wedgwood Baptist Church in Fort Worth, Texas. Seven people were murdered and seven more injured after a gunman stormed into a Wednesday night youth service and opened fire during a prayer rally. Some of my closest friends' lives were drastically changed that day, and the tragedy has never left them—or me, for that matter.

Things like this don't leave us, nor should they. And yet, as I scroll down the ever-increasing list of churches and ministries affected by senseless violence, I can't help but notice how this is about something that is anything but senseless. This is about the church. It's about the natural, foretold opposition against those who stake their lives on the name of Jesus. It's about a spiritual war being fleshed out with greater frequency on this earth, in this day and in our society.

I see this daily during my workday routine. Each morning after logging onto my computer I start by scrolling through a list of church- and ministry-related headlines posted online the previous night from around the world. Every day it's filled with stories of African Christians tortured, Filipino pastors gunned down or Indian believers martyred for their faith. And every day I'm struck by the same thought: How is it so easy for me to just keep scrolling down and treat these headlines the same as I would another Britney Spears headline? OK, that may be a slight exaggeration. But the reality is that those events have yet to become my reality. I don't comprehend them, therefore I'd rather not think about them. The only time I really let things sink in is when tragedy hits home—like now.

The worldwide church is deeply familiar with a violent opposition; for the American church, it's relatively new. Does this diminish the tragedy? Of course not. We are called to mourn with those who mourn. And I'm currently grieving two events that hit closer than I'd prefer. But in the midst of praying for the families who have lost loved ones, for a church and ministry facing an unexpected path and for a pastor (Brady Boyd) who, only months into leading his new congregation, must comfort them through the unthinkable ... in the midst of all this, I'm also reminded that the church in the United States is not the norm. We are far from the standard set by the church described in Acts. We hardly look like many of our sister congregations overseas who are regularly persecuted yet continue to grow in strength and number. We are, for the most part, a glamorous, comfortable people who are finally getting our makeup smeared through recent tears.

Wouldn't it be like God to continue to use such persecution as we've seen in recent years to reshape us into the church He wants rather than the church we've become? If we follow the belief that God does not cause this persecution but allows it (2 Tim. 3:12), then I know His plan is more powerful than any madman's bullet. He mourns while knowing we are stronger than our tears. We are His people, called by His name. That means not only will we overcome through Him, we'll be given the strength to glorify His name through the darkest of times.

YOUR TURN: What are your thoughts on the Colorado shootings? How did the news affect you? What do you see these latest attacks signifying for the church?

Evangelism Summit

noreply@blogger.com (Marcus Yoars) — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 18:33:00 +0000

Strang hosted an invitation-only, 24-hour "Evangelism Summit" last week that brought in some of the most respected evangelists within the charismatic-Pentecostal sphere. Maybe the biggest treat was seeing guys like Reinhard Bonnke, Rodney Howard-Browne and Larry Tomczak just shooting the breeze with the likes of Peter Lowe, David Shibley and Sam Rodriguez. Of course, when you get more than 40 well-known pastors and evangelists together in a room, it isn't hard to get some serious group dialogue going. And with Rice Broocks from Bethel World Outreach Center in Nashville, Tenn., mediating, that's exactly what happened around a single subject: evangelism in America.

The summit was based on the premise that what the American church is currently doing simply isn't working. Rice laid down the basics, citing Ron Luce's oft-referred 4 percent next-gen statistic, as well as those claiming that for every church opening its doors, three more close theirs. And of course, there was talk of faulty methodology, cultural and generational irrelevancy, a deteriorated credibility and an in-house disconnect between evangelists and pastors. All great points ... but not everyone bought into them—or even the summit's premise. And I found that to be maybe the most interesting part of the entire 24-hour period.

It was hugely important that these leaders met together. Their mere presence at the meeting proved evangelism isn't just a hot topic in need of being discussed, it's a (if not the) vital component of the church's calling in these days. However, we've still got a ways to go before we're on the same page with regards to the current dilemma. Not everyone believes the church is a sinking ship. Others swear it's just a matter of time before the United States, like Europe, becomes an entirely postmodern culture where Christianity is deemed obsolete. Some feel that's a matter of years away; while others believe it's mere months. Still others seem more bothered by the fact that the church has relegated evangelism to a calling, and the role of the evangelist to just that—a role.

Whatever differences of opinion there were, there was no denying that these men and women share a similar, unifying passion for the lost. It's the passion that brought them together. It's a passion that regularly requires them to sacrifice their family time for trips across the world to territories that have never heard the gospel. It's a passion that won't allow them to stay quiet. And it's a passion that's infectious.

The summit ended last week, but my head is still stirring with reflective waves. Whatever results from the meeting—a similar one with pastors in early 2008, an evangelistic onslaught of Nashville—it reminded me of these simple yet profound elements:

Evangelism is simply a lifestyle. That's become cliché, yes—but also forgotten.
Evangelism has its styles, methods and tools; but ultimately, it's about sharing some really, really good news. When you find out you've just received a special award at work, what's your first reaction? You tell others. How is that any different from telling others about the gift Jesus continues to give you? Yes, it's that easy.
Evangelism is a big word for story. We've all got one. Tell it. Better yet, live it.
Some people are obviously gifted in sharing their faith. And sure, if you're like me, that can be a bit intimidating at times. But seriously, how hard is it to strike up develop a relationship with someone? How hard is it to serve? How hard is it to listen, care or simply be there? (I'm preaching to myself here.) These are all just as valuable in the process of planting the seeds of salvation in someone's heart as the "preaching" part. And yet ...
The message has to be preached. At some point, things have to be defined. And this is what we're now discovering an entire generation has seemingly missed. It's why we have a nation that calls itself Christian while a puny minority are in fact biblically defined "born again" believers. Obviously, the "preaching" comes in different forms. It's best when it comes in the form of you—which is why, I believe, Christ extended a blanket calling of evangelism to all His believers, not just those who have the gift of this. He made you to share the good news of Him in your own unique way. I don't know about you, but that's liberating.

YOUR TURN: Is the church in America a sinking ship? Have we neglected evangelism in this country? Has it become just another "ministry" in the American church? If evangelism is on the decline, why? How can we right the ship?