Thought the old design was ugly so changed it again. Sorry if you don't like blue! To begin with, regulars might find that the old design still displays when following links you had gone to before the update. Just click refresh to fix it.
I have just read a brilliant "must read" post by Julie R. Neidlinger on why she walked out of a church she attended as she seeks a new church in a new area (hat tip to Stu). It is brilliant! One part of it reminded me of a conversation we had at a recent Family Forum at our church about how we can be hospitable to the many new people coming to our church. Do we organise or roster someone(s) to "be nice to the new people" (as if being nice to new people is a ministry!) and plug them into some group, or do we just actually try being Christians and be welcoming to new people like we would a visitor who came to our house? (We went for the latter and not the former)
1 Cor 4:13 - "We have become the scum of the earth, the garbage of the world (another translation - the scrapings from everyone's shoes) - right up to this moment."
I'm doing a 'Bioethics' paper through Carey and need to get Christian responses to stem cell research.
What is 'a Christian' response to the use of human embryos to obtain stem cells for research?
What of the use of adult stem cells?
Are there situations where the deliberate death of an embryo for stem cells is justifiable?
Does the age of the embryo make a difference?
Where should the line be drawn??
Lots of responses please...
I'm preaching in a few weeks and I'm exploring the issue of "when God is silent".
I'm interested in what others think about whether God chooses not to speak to us and why (is it him not speaking or us not hearing - or something else). What is your response if/when you can't hear God - how does it make you feel? How does it affect what you believe about God? What impact does it have on your faith?
I got this in an e-mail this week (sorry of it upsets any Americans who might read this blog!):
I came across Barbara Rossing's book The Rapture Exposed: The Message of Hope in the Book of Revelation a few years ago and bought a copy for myself. Whilst it can be provocatively polemic in parts I found it to be an excellent book to debunk some of the strange and speculative views of Revelation (e.g. Left Behind) that dominate many of our churches and give a much broader, healthier and more faithful approach to Revelation Here is a clip of an interview of Barbara Rossing talking about (against) Rapture theology:
.jpg)
Thank you Lauren! She has spotted the obvious that I hadn't - the globe on the coin with Domitian's son on it cannot represent the earth as the ancients thought the earth was flat (see Rev 7:1). I've been looking forward to finding out more on this one since you raised this on Sunday Lauren. As you say, the globe definately does not represent the earth. I think Janzen's words are "The globe represents world domination and power" rather than the globe as the earth. I might have been misleading in my comments on Sunday's 1st service (I was clearer in the 2nd service that it was the seat of authority but I will clear it up this coming Sunday). If anyone can shed further light on what the globe represents please share it with us! There might be a lolly in it for any NBC people and an online hug for others... It's easy to access info online about it by googling "coin" and "domitian" and "son" another useful word is the technical word for this sort of study - "numismatics". Be careful where you read because not everything online is trustworthy. But if anyone comes across anything good or are a scholar that can help us out, please share it with us.
We're underway in our series through Revelation at NBC (you can download sermons from the series here - the date it started was July 6th). I'm planning to post some helpful online resources for people to access as we journey along. If you're looking for a really helpful resource for the letters to the 7 churches in their historical setting, have a look at Craig Koester's page here.
I’m holed up in bed at the moment with a bronchial virus (think disgusting green phlegm everywhere). One good thing about it is that it’s given me some time to respond to my mate Stu on the future of the church. Stu was interviewed by someone on this very topic and he wondered what my thoughts might be. So I thought I’d better respond.I wrote a dissertation that touched on this from a Baptist perspective (if anyone wants a copy just leave your e-mail in the comments):
Trying to predict the future of the church is fraught with danger. There is a randomness about history that has a habit of biting us in the bum. Who would have predicted the growth of millions of new Christians in the last 30 years in Asian nations while their political regimes actively suppressed Christianity? However the continual reality of the church in NZ (and in the West) for at least the last 40 years has been decline – not just in terms of numbers but its influence and role in society. Newspapers used to publish the resolutions passed by denominational Public Questions Committees. Even if they disagreed people still listened to what the church was saying. Today, at least for Baptists, there is no Public Questions Committee because no one cares what the church says – no one is listening. As Michael Jinkins says the only thing that seems to be growing in mainline churches is more and more literature about its decline.
In my mind the best commentator on the trends of the church in New Zealand is Peter Lineham. He’s written 2 recent articles – “The Current Status of the Church” and “The Shape of the Future Church” in the recently published New Vision New Zealand Vol. III (Auckland: Tabernacle Books, 2008). It seems likely that that the church will continue to decline (Lineham projects that the total rate of Christian profession could easily fall from currently being just below 50% (it was 90% in 1956) to 35% in the next 20-30 years unless the church can win back 20 and 30 somethings) and it will have a very different make up. There will be less Europeans in it, hardly any Maori (whose young people appear to be less interested in what seems to them to be a European religion), and more and more Pasifica and Asian people. The New Zealand predictions follow well the evidence that Phillip Jenkins has shown in his work on the coming shift in the balance of power in the global church – the days of European domination of Christianity are numbered. I’m not going to predict whether mega churches will keep growing or if micro niche churches will start popping up all over the place. As a side note, Lineham shows how the movement towards mega churches mirrors the trends in wider consumer society and retailing – the decline of the family operated shop and the rise of shopping malls, franchises and large chains. I wonder if the niche churches represent the organic shops or the boutique Mediterranean supplier? Lineham also notes the decline of the 80-200 member suburban church and the rise of the mega church and that instability is a big issue for mega churches - 66% of people attending churches have attended their church for less than 5 years! If you want to read more about the likely future reality of the church is trends continue, have a read of New Vision New Zealand Vol. III.
What I am especially interested in is how the church should respond to all this – how can we save the church? The decline of the church creates a significant fear within it and its leaders, what Jinkins calls thanataphobia – a fear of death. We are dying, what can we do to survive? Whether it’s mega this or emerging that, churches are doing what they’re doing in order to appeal to prospective religious clients and therefore survive. In this vision of things, the church must save itself. For Stu this means that the church needs to become more appealing by doing the things that people want to be part of because as Stu says “The onus is on us – not God – us.” Whilst I agree with Stu’s heartbeat (a desire to see the church be all that it could and should be), for me I see things a little differently. For me, I’m not so comfortable with the idea that it’s all up to us and, being an anxious person, the ideas I come up with when my anxiety is heightened (we must save the church!) are very different than the ideas I come up with when I soothe myself and consider things a little less anxiously (and I'm sure this is true of the church and its leaders). So what follows is me trying to help soothe the church's amygdala (the part of the brain that plays a significant role in emotional functions and fear reactivity). I’m always open to critique and engagement and what comes next comes in the context of adding to a good conversation:
I worry that the idea that the church has to save itself detaches the Risen Christ from the church and makes him to be an absentee landlord. John Webster notes how much church life is predicated on the on the assumption that God is only real, present and active in so far as the church’s moral action or spirituality makes God real, present and active. He says the idea that the church is now responsible for its own future “is a miserable burdening of the church with a load it cannot hope to support.” Webster is hugely helpful in pointing out that the gospel is independent of the church, precedes it and calls it into being, the church is not in its creaturely capacity the primary bearer of responsibility for witness to the gospel. God is the first witness to the gospel whose sum and substance is Jesus Christ. “In the power of his resurrection and in the energy of the Holy Spirit, Jesus Christ goes ahead of the church and testifies of himself in the world… He – not the church – is the true witness. He – not the church – is the light of the world.” The primary agent of the church’s witness is God in the Risen Christ through the Spirit’s power. “God’s own witness does not dissolve into that of the church; the church does not replace him, but simply witnesses to the witness.” I think this is so crucial and yet so missing in all the churchly talk about the church’s future. The future of the church is with God in Christ by the power of the Spirit.
Michael Jinkins sees the church’s decline and possible death as a gift, giving the church an unparalleled opportunity to comprehend and to render its life. “When the church faces death, in point of fact, it encounters a critical moment when it may know the power of the resurrection.” The church is not called to save itself, it’s already got a saviour and he knows his way from death to life pretty well! As G. K. Chesterton wrote: Christianity has died many times and risen again; for it has a Saviour who knows the way out of the grave. The church’s life does not depend on its own competence, expertise, planning or relevance, the “church’s life depends on the power and faithfulness of God to raise the Body of Christ from every death, because its life is a continuing participation in the death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ.”
In the book of the Revelation John the seer writes to the 7 fragile churches in Asia Minor who are facing significant problems externally and internally. Externally there is pressure to conform to the ways of Rome and worship the Emperor with the likely threat of violence or death (see the martyrdom of Antipas Rev. 2:13) or economic exclusion for Christian traders who did not have a seal indicating that they had sacrificed to the Emperor and therefore no one would buy, sell or trade with them (see Rev. 13:14-17). Internally some were leaving the church, others were denying the faith and others were significantly compromising the faith. John begins by offering them a vision to sustain them (Rev. 1:9-20). The vision is not about the church simply pulling its socks up (although that is part of it!), it is primarily a Christophany, a magnificent vision of the risen and glorified Jesus Christ. He is said to stand among the seven golden lampstands (Rev. 1:12-13) and later we read that he walks among the seven golden lampstands (Rev. 2:1). The seven golden lampstands we are told by John the seer are the seven churches of Asia Minor and with seven representing wholeness it must also refer to the whole church throughout time. The image is of the Risen Christ standing with his church and moving in and through his church. And his first words to the church are: “Do not be afraid.” I think there’s a good reason that these are his first words – thanataphobia is not new in the church! “Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. I am the Living One; I was dead, and now look, I am alive forever and ever! And I hold the keys to death and Hades.” This is an image of the Risen Christ, standing with his church and moving amongst it, who holds the keys to life and death for the church. The church is nothing without the immanent presence of the living Risen Jesus Christ by the power of his Spirit.
If Christ rules and reigns over the church and he really does hold the keys to life and death for the church then the church can stop farting, fussing and obsessing about its future. We have feet of clay and he has feet of burnished bronze, let him bring the church through to his future and we can get on with serving the world. I remember hearing someone say of the church and its growth – the tide will come in and the tide will go out. You can’t make the tide come in by throwing a bucket of water at it (e.g. our programs or alternative this or mega that or Missional this and emerging that) nor can you make it go out by taking a bucket of water out of it (e.g. our screw ups and mistakes). The tide will come in and the tide will go out, if you’re there when the tide comes in, lucky you, make the most of it. If you’re there when the tide goes out, hang in there!
When I was inducted into the ministry my mentor Brian Smith gave me Herbert Butterfield’s “principle” from his book called Christianity and History. This last weekend I offered it to Mike our new youth pastor as the ribbon of steel I think we need for ministry. Butterfield, a Cambridge historian, surveyed Christianity throughout history and noticed the randomness that exists in history. History is always changing and going down paths you never expected. Butterfield searches for some solid ground to place his feet on but notes that it can’t be historical realities because you can’t trust them, they’re random. In the end he finishes with one principle that is a ribbon of steel for me in ministry – “hold fast to Jesus Christ and to all else be totally uncommitted.”
I love what Michael Jinkins says about the church trusting in the power of the resurrection. Jinkins asks, can we not imagine announcing in word and deed the gospel of Jesus Christ to a culture held captive by consumerism? Can we not imagine proclaiming the good news that people are neither consumers nor products to be sold? It will be very difficult for the church to proclaim this gospel convincingly if it too gives in to the temptation to repackage itself as just another commodity. Finally, Jinkins asks, can we not imagine a church that is attractive to others because it does not desperately need them for its institutional survival? A church living in fear for its own self-preservation does not draw others to it, but a church that courageously holds up the cross of Christ in its corporate life and that trust in his resurrecting power has, as St. John tells us, the power to draw all humanity. It is when the church, unconcerned about its survival, recklessly gives itself over to Christ and trusts in his resurrecting power to bring it out of all deaths that it is most attractive. I think the future of the church is with God in Christ by the power of the Spirit and therefore the church needs to be a lot more reckless and a lot less interested in survival…
Ok so I reckon that ... is THE best punctuation to use in any correspondence. An exclamation mark was my favourite punctuation for its drama but it doesn't have the mystery and suspense of ... What do you think is the best punctuation...? (It's very addictive...)
I'm starting a series on the book of Revelation in a month or two and I've spent a lot of time reading books and articles on it. I thought I'd post some of the helpful things I come across from time to time to do with Revelation. So far the best pithy quote comes from David L Barr and his book Tales of the End. He helpfully says about the use of numbers in Revelation that they (the numbers) are "qualitative not quantitative"; they signify qualities not quantities. If people who were trying to read Revelation remembered that there'd be a lot less hurt in the world (seriously!).
If you're looking for access to good scholarly material on Revelation your first stop should be Revelation Resources.
BAndy has a great post below that I hope sparks lots of discussion. He's asked me for some "quotes" from Sunday's sermon. The problem is that I don't use many notes so I'm not sure if the quotes he means are mine or someone else I quoted (let me know BAndy). Sunday's sermon was on Acts 15 and the reality that Christian faith is not a bounded set (with lots of rules and cultural traditions to abide by in expressing faith) but a centred set (centred on the grace of Jesus - Acts 15:11) and therefore looks and tastes very different in different contexts. Instead of giving lots of quotes I'll post a few you tube videos of what worship can look like in other parts of the world:
I have been saturated in the European church scene my whole life. Surrounded in funny little rituals like bowing my head when someone prays, dressing nicely on a Sunday and holding hands when saying grace. There are so many more that I wouldn't be able to name because I don't see them as cultural rituals but Christian rituals. The things that Christians do.
I wonder what our church would look like if we stopped trying to make "European" Christians. What does a church for "Maraenui" Christians look like? I have a feeling if we were serious about providing a comfortable environment for the locals then the process is that we change and then then come, because if it were the other way around I think we'd be waiting a while. Like, forever.
What are some other cultural rituals that we as European Christians perform? What things could we do in our churches to make certain minorities (in the church attendance sense) feel more comfortable?