the drum|rob fairbanks

Irresistible Holiness

One of the most befuddling (when I say befuddling, I mean I just can’t figure it out) things about Christianity for me is the juxtaposition between Jesus’ holy and our holy.  When Jesus, the most holy and pure person ever, rubbed shoulders with the non-religious (“sinners”) they were amazingly attracted to him, but when most Christians come in contact with the non-religious (“sinners”) there are adverse reactions.  You’ve seen the reactions toward Christians – they are haters, homophobes, judgmental, bound up – all reactions to Christians trying their level best to be…you got it, holy.

There is consistent and strong evidence that suggests that most people still find Jesus incredible attractive, at least intriguing.  The evidence is even stronger that people don’t find Christians that way. Christ followers are to be holy yes, but there must be something different in the balance here.

In 1953, C.S. Lewis wrote in a letter:

“How little people know who think that holiness is dull. When one meets the real thing, it is irresistible.” 

Irresistible?  That might be worth rediscovering.

I believe that there must be a reorientation of our understanding of holiness.  Instead of an externalized “we have to look or act a certain way” type (usually a form created by some ecclesial authority), I really believe that we must look carefully at what our model, Jesus portrayed for us.

Here are a few ideas that might help:

1)    Never react

You have heard the saying, “Never let them see you sweat.” Well, I don’t want to be disingenuous, but it would serve us well to move away from our own reactive posture. One reaction generates another. I have made an internal vow that I will never react to someone else’s behavior, regardless if I am in agreement with it or not. I could be just freaking out inside, but on the outside, I want to behave and act with love and honor toward whomever I run across.  Why? See #2.

2)    Recognize the Imago Dei

Ever person you see, every man or woman you lock eyes with was created uniquely in God’s image. Sin has certainly injured that, but there is still a deeply embedded dignity, ontology worth…even in the worst of the worst (although how does a scale on this stuff really work when each of us have sinned enough to draw the holy Jesus to a cross?). The Imago Dei actually has profound implications if we can live into its truth. We can treat people different, with honor beyond what their behavior might warrant, because of who they are, not what they’ve done or are doing.

3)    Learn about humility

Part of the reaction Christianity gets is because of its desire for control and power. I know, you may not see it this way, but think about this.  Why do people get mad or reactive? Answer: Because something is being taken from them. For many, I might say, most Christians, believe that our country was started as a Christian nation (debatable, but not at this time) and feel like it is being hi-jacked by _________________ (you feel in the blank).  The upshot of this is a reactive posture toward culture.  Need I remind you that our battle isn’t against flesh and blood (Ephes 6)?

4)    Spend time pondering the Gospels

This is really the main reason I think there has been a “red letter” (reading Jesus' words, as opposed to Paul, et al) shift in many people view of Scripture.  We need to read the Gospels slowly, read them often, and read them believing. I read years ago in a Eugene Peterson book (from Eat This Book) that we are to read Scripture meditatively.  He described this notion with an ancient analogy. He said the idea of meditating on Scripture was liken to a dog gnawing in a bone. If you have ever seen that, the visual image lurches out at you. A dog tirelessly grinds on a bone in a hundred different directions, seeking to mine out every possible prospect of meaty goodness (you gotta think like a dog to really get it – ok, just like me eating a T-bone steak). When was the last time you meditated on Jesus’ life found in the Gospels? There is something captivating and reorienting about Jesus…how he lived, what he said, how he responded, how he showed compassion…

and yes, how he was holy.

Question: Have you ever been injured by Christians (or the church) trying to be "holy?"

What about the Spirit?

By Josh

In class we have been talking about and reading so many things about becoming a “missional church”. But I have noticed a lack of recognition and dependence on the power and guidence of the Holy Spirit in both the discussion and the books. Everyone has so many good ideas of ways to reform the church and make it into what God intended it to be…..which is not a bad thing in itself; the problem lies in the fact that Christians often take an American entrepreneurial approach in this reforming, and I can’t help but wonder where the guidance and submission to the will of the Spirit is in all of this.

 

It is important to remember that even Jesus, the incarnated Son of God, was led around by the Spirit much like a child is led around by his mother (Matthew 4:1, Mark 1:12). We must also remember that Paul was led and directed by the Spirit in all of his missionary ventures (Acts 13:4, Acts 20:22). In Romans it declares that the Sons of God are led by the Spirit (Romans 8:14). Should we not as Americans, who often have very little in depth vision into the will of God, not rely on the guidance of the Spirit much more than these men did?

 

Yet we see Christian after Christian pursuing missions or pursuing the ministry without ever have consulted the Spirit for guidance. Christians need to be constantly submitting themselves in prayer to seek to know what the will of God is as revealed to them through His Spirit. And until we figure this out, the majority of our church plants will continue to fail within the first few years.

Have We Really ‘Forgotten’ How to Do Church?

By Troy

As a Theology major at Whitworth, I’ve had the privilege of reading a wide variety of Christian literature. I’ve read through the Bible, numerous early Christian primary sources, biblical commentaries, etc.  One consequence of my extensive reading is the tendency to become a literary critic. For me, the older the book, the more weight and authority it carries (this is a generalization). After reading Ignatius, Clement or Irenaeus, it’s easy to see how these works have survived the centuries. But I tend to read contemporary authors more critically. In other words, they haven’t stood the test of time yet.

 

In class, we are reading Forgotten Ways (2006) by Alan Hirsch. After slogging through the book, I was left disappointed by the wordiness and ‘fluff’ of Hirsch’s writing (and the excessive use of charts!). Although Hirsch does offer some valuable insight for contemporary church leaders, I found the book characteristic of ‘emergent church’ literature. Forgotten Ways is full of emergent buzz words such as missional, organic, fluidity, ‘authentic Jesus movement’ that appear to be cutting-edge. At least to me, these words are nebulous and vague. After more than two hundred pages, it’s still not clear to me what mDNA and the Apostolic Genius are! I felt the book was just another attempt to formulate a ‘successful’ 21^st century church.

 

Hirsch confidently asserts: “the Apostolic Genius lies dormant in you, me, and every local church that seeks to follow Jesus faithfully in any time. We have quite simply forgotten how to access and trigger it” (22). This seems to suggest thatwe possess the keys to unlocking the Apostolic Genius; and when/if we find it, the Church will flourish. There is little mention of the working of the Holy Spirit or God as Lord of the Church. And have we really forgotten how to do church? I agree that the church-growth and attractional-church models aren’t healthy, but the church has managed to survive two thousand years. There is no magic model to success, as “unlocking the Apostolic Genius” suggests.

 

I agree that mission is a critical aspect to the Church, but I also affirm the importance of true worship and diligent study of Scripture. Mission is not superior, but rather goes hand-in-hand with worship, theology, liturgy, and sacrament.

 

Like other contemporary ‘emergent’ authors, Hirsch is simply offering a new model for “doing church.” New
styles of doing church come and go like many other fads and trends. Well we have not ‘forgotten’ how to do church, Hirsch does offer excellent insights, provoking critiques, and challenging applications. But in my opinion, Hirsch is neither a diligent biblical exegete nor a careful historian. Hirsch  is no Irenaeus, but we can add his opinion (with grace) to the Christian melting pot as we progress towards renewed expressions of the Church.

A new perspective of the Lilac City

By Troy

Yesterday in class, four local pastors stopped by to give real-life examples of the missional church in action. Colby Ivey from Inland Church in downtown Spokane, Justin Byreans from Kaleo Church in Otis Orchards, Dave Wilkenson from the Porch in West Central, and Eric Blauer from Jacob’s Well in East Central.

 

 I’ve always seen Spokane as just a pit stop in the grand scheme of my life, but this class (and especially this session) has given meaning, roots, and a new perspective of the Lilac City.

 

Some of my favorite thoughts from the morning:

 

- Church planter Dave Wilkenson expressed some regret that he started The Porch with a focus on the worship service instead of ‘doing mission.’  He said if he were to start over, he would have put less focus on gathering for a service, but focus on serving the neighborhood. This angle on church keeps reoccurring in the readings. Healthy churches seem to emerge from people doing mission in a particular neighborhood/setting rather than beginning with a worship service.

- The Church will persevere through this age. Despite difficulties, struggles, and persecution, God is Lord of the Church. In light of this fact, church planting becomes less nerve-racking. The God of the universe is fighting with you. My friends and I have semi-fantasized about starting a church, but the odds seem stacked against us. Yet I was encouraged by the words of Colby Ivey: “What if Jesus really gets a hold of this thing!?” We are called to be humble and faithful witnesses of the Gospel and it’s exciting to see how Jesus works through us.

- Eric Blauer compared church planting to the bench press. Starting a church is like benching heavy weight. When it becomes too heavy, you have to call for help. We need to continue to increase our weight, challenge ourselves, and get stronger.

Belong > Believe > Behave

By Peter

Until taking this class I had never really given much thought to how most churches I have been in take the attractional method for growing the church.  In class today we talked about how an attractional method attempts to bring people into the church, have them believe what they hear, start behaving appropriately, and then this will enable them to belong (Believe > Behave > Belong).  On the other hand, with an incarnational method a person is first invited to belong, once they have spent time belonging in the community they might come to believe, and finally this belief will lead to a change in behavior (Belong > Believe > Behave).  

I have not tried to “convert” many people in my life but the few times that I have it was
definitely done according to this first strategy.  I always just tried to argue with them and logically get them to believe the gospel.  When this didn’t work and we just ended up in a big argument, I was left feeling frustrated and disappointed with my “evangelizing” skills. 

Doing ministry incarnationally puts relationships first and lets God do the work of converting someone to believe the gospel.  I find it to be a great relief knowing that someone else’s salvation is not up to me at all but is totally the work of the Holy Spirit.  We just need to seek out where God is working and join him there.  God is not found only in our churches and we are not responsible for bringing people to him by trying to attract them to our church.  We need to meet people where they are, make them feel like they belong in the community by demonstrating God’s love for them and leave the rest up to God. 

It’s tough to point the finger

 By Trevor

In class, we are continually learning about the necessity of a church to live missionally and that an unhealthy church is one who does not live missionally. Karl Barth said that if a church is living without a mission it is a dead church and Hugh Halter also says that if a church lives for its members, it should be dissolved. I don’t agree with this.

Granted I understand that a church is to live missionally and it is the prominent biblical model of church. But I have a very hard time saying that a church that is not living missionally is a dead church or needs to be eliminated. For even Christ says to his disciples, “whoever is not against us is for us” (Mark 9:40).  Granted that church is not living missionally which maybe it should be, but maybe it is also the rock of faith that its members depend on. Maybe it’s the community of faith that helped a member deal with a suicide in the family, or supported a member’s family when they lost their job. Regardless it is still working to further the kingdom of God and the Holy Spirit is still working through it. Even though it may not be reaching out incarnationally or maybe fully engaging in an attractional model, it is still has a pastor and a congregation which I’m sure are figuring out the best way it knows to live in a community of believers.

Whether we have missional churches or missionally dead churches we still have churches; and I think we should be wary of accusing those who are in the same ministry as being “Dead.” If our goal is unity of the Christian church, the last thing we need is more division by declaring good churches and dead churches.

 

Kids in Sunday School?

By Laura

It is interesting to me that family is such a central part of the Church, and yet families often do not go to church together. Well, they go to church together, but once they get there the kids are put in the care of others to have their own time of age-appropriate biblical learning, while the adults attend the main service without ‘distractions.’ As I have grown up, I have seen both positive and negative aspects of this practice in the church. Personally, I went through children’s Sunday school as a child, and later participated in multiple youth groups as a teenager. These were all great places to grow in my faith in fun ways with people my age, while my parents were able to have more in-depth teaching with older adults. This was good.

But at the same time, I think much could have been gained from eliminating such a big separation of age (and often gender). Parents are the ultimate role model that kids look up to and learn from, and I believe that I could have learned a lot from attending church services with my parents, even as a child, and observing how they worshiped, learned, and interacted with fellow brothers and sisters in Christ. There are times when I am under the impression that parents send their kids to child-specific programs to learn about God, and they feel that their duty to raise their children in the faith for that week is complete.

I don’t think there is anything wrong with having programs formatted for kids and others for adults, but I agree with Hugh Halter when he says, “Discipleship of the whole family must begin by handing back the primary ‘teacher’ role to the parents. Church-based ministry should augment- not replace- what they receive at home.” I don’t know if this means including children more in the main ‘adult’ life of the church or finding a better way to merge the two groups to incorporate families more, but I do know that children are likely to mature in their faith as they see their parents growing and living out their faith not just on Sunday, but on everyday of the week.

A multi-faceted Gospel (i.e. the “good news” is not as monolithic as we often make it) « Stirrings

I have been preparing for Christian Associates’ 2nd annual North American conference called “Connect.”  On Saturday morning at Connect, our 80 or so participants will wrestle with how we “embody the gospel communally.” The premise is that we default to expressing the good news in quite individualistic fashion, making it harder for normal people to really comprehend the beauty and breadth of God’s message in Christ for the world. The gospel is most clearly understand when embodied by communities that believe it and act as signs, foretastes and instruments of the now-and-not-yet Kingdom of God (as the great missiologist Lesslie Newbigin reminds us).

via dansteigerwald4ca.wordpress.com

A great blog by my friend and colleague, Dan Steigerwald.  He draws heavily from a short essay from Tim Keller as he addresses the many facets of the Gospel.

Let me know know what you think.

What is the Gospel? (HT: Out of Ur)

There has been much discussion about the meaning of the Gospel.  What is the Gospel?  Entrance into to heaven?  A list or propositions?  In this video, Dallas Willard talks about what the Gospel is and how we live in it.

 What do you think about Willard's perspective?  Do you think he captures the essence of what the NT calls the Good News?

The Mystery of Good Friday - HT MH

After attending the services at our church last night, I am still speechless. Good Friday commemorates perhaps the greatest mystery in the history of the world. How is it that God Himself—the Creator of the Universe—can suffer death at the hands of His creatures?

via michaelhyatt.com

I have been following Michael Hyatt for some time (please check out his site for a wealth of good stuff) now and really appreciate his thoughts and writing.  He normally writes into issues of leadership and productivity, but found this a good re-blog for today – Good Friday.

Peace to you all!

Rob