There are lies, damned lies and statistics. Mark Twain link
The SBC admits that baptisms are down and that membership is declining. Yet, many SBC megachurches claim to be experiencing tremendous growth. This growth does not appear to be affecting the SBC bottom line. Since Elevation is an SBC church and the SBC keeps track of numbers, we will focus this post on megachurches and the SBC. However, Dr Duncan's research is apropos to most, if not all, megachurches.
As an aside, Elevation, Fellowship, and many other churches, including some here in the Raleigh area, do not put "Baptist" in their name and many of their attendees have no idea that they are Baptist. My husband has related a number of humorous conversations he has had with people he meets in his work who ardently claim that their church is not Baptist and are shocked when he proves it.
Do you ever wonder about the claim of high numbers of salvations and baptisms at these megachurches? If you attend a megachurch, do you ever question the always rising statistics? Do you ever feel vaguely uncomfortable when people claim that the church is experiencing an Acts 2:40 miracle?
Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.(NIV)
The new word in hip megachurches is "metrics" and you can be sure that your megachurch is discussing this ad nauseam. And those metrics always "prove" that your church is converting people and baptizing them in droves, by gum! What is being claimed at Elevation is being claimed by megas all over the country.
TWW published a post Church Planting: Is It About the Gospel or Acquisitions?
The great evangelical movements of today are not a vanguard. They are a remnant, unraveling at every edge. Conversions. Baptisms. Membership. Retention. Participation. Giving. Attendance. Impact upon the culture at large. All are down and dropping.
Unfortunately, some real "metrics" disprove the claims of massive conversions and baptisms. Read the full post to get a better picture. Suffice it to say that your mega is more than likely not growing by new conversions and new baptisms. From that post:
Mega churches primarily grow by:
- Transfer from other churches.
- Baptisms of the children of church members.
So what is really going on? Dr James Duncan has nailed it over at the Pajama Pages. Last week, we posted his excellent analysis on book sales and megachurches: How Steven Furtick Turns Mediocre Books Into Mansions. Like that post, this post explores actual numbers.
For those of you who have not yet read about Dr Duncan, we highly urge you to do so.
Dr Duncan is an associate professor of communication and the department chair for communication at Anderson University in Anderson, SC.
This is how we introduced him last week.
Today, we present a blog post written by Dr James Duncan of the Pajama Pages. Dr Duncan was the victim of, in our opinion, one of the most despicable instances of intimidation by a church. That church, NewSpring, is "pastored" by Perry Noble who is on the ultra secret Furtick compensation committee. All Christians who follow megachurch nonsense should be aware of this awful story. You can read about it at Holy Rage at the Spring. Dr Duncan, thankfully, won his lawsuit against this contemptible behavior. Thinking Christians might well ask why Perry Noble is on any committee at Elevation.
This is a lengthy post in which Dr Duncan effectively, step by step, builds his case. The video at the end is added by TWW for a good laugh.
How Steven Furtick engineered a spontaneous miracle 11
While we’re on the topic of Steven Furtick’s marvelous manipulated numbers, now is as good a time as any to look back on his 2011 spontaneous baptism event where he carefully manipulated his congregation to herd them through his baptism factory.
For a bit of background, Elevation had experienced a couple of lean years for baptisms, which may be why Furtick needed something big to move the numbers. Here’s how Elevation reported its 2010 salvations and baptisms.
Elevation’s salvations and baptisms for 2010
The real story of the numbers is hidden by the tricky way the data is presented cumulatively, which means that the line will never go down. The numbers claimed in 2010 include all the baptisms and salvations from 2006 through 2009 as well. If you look at the actual numbers for each year, you see something very different.
Elevation Salvation & Baptism Statistics
|
Year
|
Salvations
|
Baptisms
|
Percentage Baptized
|
|---|---|---|---|
| 2008 | 2,437 | 1,243 | 51 |
| 2009 | 3,545 | 193 | 5 |
| 2010 | 3,688 | 289 | 8 |
| 2011 | 7,699 | 2,158 | 28 |
| 2012 | 6,097 | Not reported |
? |
Baptism by full immersion is the most celebrated sacrament of the denomination that helped start Furtick’s church. As will be detailed below, Furtick and Elevation solved this problem by meticulously planning a baptism ambush when they would emotionally manipulate as many of the congregation as possible to be baptized immediately.The spike in baptisms in 2008 came from Elevation’s first “spontaneous” event, when they baptized 1,044 over two weeks. Outside of those two weeks, they baptized another 199, which is a similar rate to the two years after it.
So, even though this Baptist church was adding thousands of salvations, it was unable to get more than a relative handful to follow up with baptism. Either Furtick wasn’t preaching baptism, or he was preaching it poorly, but if you’re a Baptist preacher, you really ought to do better than have only 5 percent of your conversions be baptized.
Before the criticism, a some words of praise. Furtick rightly tells his congregation that they should not seek to be baptized if they have been baptized before as adults, even if it was in another church and even if they’d prefer a more meaningful experience now. His pal, Perry Noble, doesn’t restrict re-baptisms the same way.
Now, returning to regular programming, the problems with this event:
Emotional Manipulation
In the moments before his call to action, Furtick tells his audience (at 50:20 in this Elevation video),
You know God is calling you, and if you feel that in your heart, let me assure you that is the Holy Spirit of God calling you. It is not emotional manipulation. It’s the presence of God drawing you and calling you. So in just a moment, I’m going to count to three. When I say “three,” at every campus I want you to move into the aisles and go to the exit where the ushers are stationed at your campus.
No manipulation, all God. Let’s check that.
As part of the promotional package for Sun Stand Still, Elevation offered what it calls a Spontaneous Baptism How-To Guide (Word doc), which is long on manipulation, and short on the Holy Spirit.
On the Sun Stand Still website, it describes the event in miraculous terms:
Sun Stand Still is about believing God for the impossible. At Elevation Church in the summer of 2011, we saw God move in one of the most amazing ways in the history of our church…
We baptized 2,158 people over 2 weekends. It was unbelievable. It required audacious faith in a God who provides.
The preface to the guide also frames the event as a Sun Stand Still miracle.
As a church we pray Sun Stand Still prayers all the time. We are constantly asking God to do something that seems impossible and then believing that he is going to pull through.
Most recently we prayed and asked God to lead thousands of people to take a public stand in their faith in Christ through baptism. God blew our minds and in two weekends we saw 2158 respond and be baptized.
Except that it didn’t blow their minds at all, and the results underperformed what they expected would be possible. We know this because they explain how they ran the numbers from the 2008 event which showed that 16 percent of attenders responded to the invitation to be baptized. They say they expected the same number the second time, and even used the 2008 numbers to estimate the proportion of females to males (60/40), from which they calculated exactly what size clothing they needed to have on hand for people entering the pool. From the guide:
You will want to calculate the number of each item to be purchased based on your projection of how many people will be baptized, the number of men vs. women, and the breakdown of sizes.
The 2011 event, even with the knowledge gained from the first run, only yielded a 13 percent response, down almost 20 percent from the first time. Elevation almost certainly over-prepared and had hundreds of clothing items they never needed to use. They would have been prepared to baptize at least 1,600 in the first week, but baptized only 1,428. Now, preparation is not necessarily emotional manipulation, though it does suggest that they were relying on the power of raw numbers as much as they were on the feeling in the heart that Furtick assured them was from God. How this blew their minds, I really don’t know. Since 2008, Elevation reported that they saw 14,932 new conversions, of which only 2,640 were baptized, either spontaneously or deliberately. That’s a three-year salvation-to-baptism conversion rate of 18 percent.
Rather than advertising this as a model for other churches to follow, this is a model that should embarrass them and prompt serious change. Perhaps the vast majority of those 15,000 reported salvations, weren’t. What happened to the 12,000 people who “made a decision” at Elevation yet didn’t get baptized? For a Baptist pastor who cared for his flock, that ought to be mind blowing.
For the few that Elevation did baptize, their how-to guide documents exactly how they used emotional manipulation them get people from their seats to the pool. Volunteers were placed throughout the campuses to make sure the baptism candidates maintained the emotional fervor that Furtick had created in the service. Here are some of the instructions from the guide:
[At the doors] Smile and clap showing people you are excited they came forward.
[For the 30-60 volunteers lining the hallway] Create an atmosphere of Celebration for those being baptized as they walk toward the changing rooms…this needs to be HUGE and over the top celebration!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[For the teams escorting people to the pools] Start in the hallway smiling, clapping and creating an atmosphere of excitement and help direct people to the changing rooms.
Have them take out their phones and tweet #follow that they are being baptized today!! …We created a hash tag on Twitter and tweeted individual stories. We had a crawl on our iMag screens of live twitter feed to build excitement during the Worship Experiences.
Perhaps you could classify this as encouragement for a decision already made, not manipulation. You could, though if this were a decision made with confidence and determination, there would be no need to constantly reinforce that decision. Why I classify these as manipulative comes from the very first action, performed just seconds after Furtick’s assurance that he wasn’t manipulating them. As you saw above, Furtick prepares them for action, then counts down from three (that should be the clue, right there). Look at what happens when he gets to zero:
15 people will sit in the worship experience and be the first ones to move when Pastor gives the call.
- Sit in the auditorium and begin moving forward when Pastor Steven says go.
- Move intentionally through the highest visibility areas and the longest walk.
Elevation has seeded its four auditoriums with 60 shills who pretend to be responding to the call. Their high-visibility movement is designed to manipulate others to follow. If Furtick was confident in his message and in the efficacy of the Holy Spirit’s call, he shouldn’t need fake converts.
This is even more interesting for Furtick’s restriction on re-baptisms. We know these 60 are official volunteers, so it’s almost certain all had already been baptized. That means that if they melted away out of the lines later on, their response in the auditorium was a lie. For good doctrinal reasons that even Steven Furtick understands, they never ought to have responded in the first place. Not only are they lying, they are pretending to sinfully partake in the most important sacrament of their church. That’s serious stuff for a pastor and church to be encouraging.
(It’s possible these were people who needed to be baptized, though there’s nothing in the document that indicates how the church would find the 360 people that would have been needed to cover its four campuses meeting a total of 24 times over the two weeks. He would need to have recruited twice as many people as Elevation baptizes in a whole year, and have each one agree to participate in the trick and keep quiet about it. It didn’t happen.)
Perhaps Furtick realized that his own preaching wasn’t enough. Look at Elevation’s numbers again. Without a mass event, Furtick couldn’t convince more than about 200 in any year to be baptized, so he needed to add manipulation to his message. In his book, Influence, Robert Cialdini describes a persuasive method called Social Proof, the idea that “the greater the number of people who find any idea correct, the more the idea will be correct.” The reason the 60 volunteers were asked to stand was to assure the people sitting behind them that instantly responding to the Furtick Countdown was right. Cialdini gives a few examples of this, but in one he describes the persuasive genius of Jim Jones.
Although he was without question a man of rare dynamism, the power he wielded strikes me as coming less from his remarkable personal style than from his understanding of fundamental psychological principles. His real genius as a leader was his realization of the limitations of individual leadership. No leader can hope to persuade, regularly and single-handedly, all the members of the group. A forceful leader can reasonably expect, however, to persuade some sizable proportion of group members. Then the raw information that a substantial number of group members has been convinced can, by itself, convince the rest. Thus the most influential leaders are those who know how to arrange group conditions to allow the principle of social proof to work maximally in their favor. (p. 156)
Furtick isn’t Jones, but their persuasive techniques are identical.
Favoritism
Although Elevation didn’t and couldn’t know who would answer the call, it did have means of filtering people according to specific desirable characteristics once they were on the move. They mainly wanted young people with compelling stories.
Besides the 15 shills, you’d imagine that the first people to reach the changing areas were the ones who most wanted to be baptized. Never mind letting them go first, however, as Elevation preferred young people. From the guide:
The first people going into the changing rooms have got to be people who move quickly, they must be changed and out in stage in a few minutes. Pick young energetic people, not necessarily those who are there first.
(I am not quite sure what the “out in stage” means here. I seems they may have had a tank set up on the stage where they wanted this first group to go, and then the older, slower Elevators could be baptized in relative privacy outside.)
Most of the participants were expected to remain essentially anonymous, treated with not much more attention than a tire change.
Think of the [changing] room in terms of a NASCAR pit stop, it has to be a quick in and quick out.
Two attendants were assigned to marshall groups of 12-14 people, and one of their first tasks was to ask the group to share their names in order to write it on a specially formatted name tag.
As the group is sharing names, the host prints the name tags that are Legible and places the name tag on the outside shoulder. Depending upon the tank it could be right or left, but the shoulder that is away from the baptizer so the tag is not obstructed during photos. Write the name in two lines and leave room for a tracking number to be written in the upper RIGHT corner of the name tag.
Not everybody got reduced to a number, though. If you had a good story, the church wanted to know much more than your name. The marshals were to be on the lookout for video-worthy biographies.
You are looking for 1 or 2 great stories in your group. When you ID those individuals, place a “black wrist band” on them so that the video crew can interview them after they are baptized. After they are baptized help ensure they go to the video recording area.
The pair of hosts were also assisted by media team members who were also hunting for good stories.
[We need ] (2) people working with hosts and circulating amongst the team mining great stories and pushing them up to the video crew.
At NewSpring, where Furtick’s friend Perry Noble pastors, they have a motto that says, “Every number has a name, every name as a story, and every story matters to God.” At Elevation, every name has a number, some names have a story, and one or two stories matter to Pastor Steven.
So What?
This is all being done for a good cause, so why does this matter, anyway?
More Fakery About Numbers
Elevation Church says it’s all about the numbers, but only when they want to be. Some numbers, like the pastor’s salary and book-deal information, they won’t reveal. Other numbers, like annual baptisms, they hide behind charts designed to paper over the almost complete inability of their pastor to persuade people to be baptized without special events. If anything, the chasm between reported salvations and baptisms tell us that something is terribly wrong. Either the salvations aren’t actually there, or the church is full of unbaptized, disobedient believers. The numbers, while large, are terrible.
Low Confidence in the Message
I don’t know what Pastor Furtick was preaching about baptism in 2009 and 2010, but it either didn’t exist or it was spectacularly unpersuasive. Elevation Church is Baptist, so you’d expect that they would carefully preach and teach that doctrine to each new believer. If baptism was so essential in 2011, why did they let the thousands of new believers since 2008 walk in spiritual disobedience and partial blessing? You’d hope a Baptist pastor would care about that.
Low Reverence for the Doctrine
If you had a couple of friends who, while dating, told you that weddings were a special, sacred event, and then you learned that they flew to Vegas one weekend and got hitched in a drive-through chapel, you’d reconsider whether they actually believed weddings to be important at all. I don’t know what other Baptist churches think of Furtick’s (Noble, too, for that matter) 30-45 second walk-through number-on-your-chest baptisms, but I’d cringe at how the central sacrament of the denomination was being mistreated.
Little Respect for the People
One of Baptists’ criticisms of infant baptism is that the rite is meaningless to the recipient, which is why they distinguish it as believer’s baptism; you need to believe before you’re baptized. Baptists also emphasize the volitional aspect of the sacrament, so that the participants’ attitude is one of informed obedience in an exercise of a free will. Although Noble allows do-overs, Furtick does not, so his flock only get one chance at a moment that will change their lives. Why not teach the people well and let them think about it and own their decision? How many people will look back at that special moment and regret that they were merely a pit-stop project for a pastor who needed to boost his baptism balance sheet.uu
Lydia's Corner: Ecclesiastes 4:1-6:12 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:7 Psalm 47:1-9 Proverbs 22:16
Two words: MONEY TALKS.
And “Souls Saved(TM)” are just the units of Christianese Money.
Michel Foucault once warned that neoliberalism would inevitably lead to the “financialization” of life itself. Non-economic areas of life would become subject to economic calculation and manipulation.
Whenever I see numbers and charts and reports about numbers of baptisms, etc., I think of his words and shudder.
What you say about SBC Mega churches not using Baptist in their name is true. A friend whose wife has been employed as a secretary at such a church for some time did not know that the church were his wife worked was SBC. My son who works with this man told him it was SBC. The man denied it was SBC convinced that he was right. The man then asked his wife if it was SBC and found out that yes it was. Even then the man said that it still was not a real SBC Church. This man has been a member and volunteer at the church for some time himself. Sometimes I think the reason these churches are SBC is so that the employees can participate in the SBC retirement program.
Couple of thoughts:
Baptism is not considered a sacrament by Baptists. It is an ordinance, and there is a huge theological difference.
But that said, I’ve had the misfortune a couple of times of sitting under preachers not getting enough baptisms to mark down on that annual letter. So they begin preaching John MacArthur’s Lordship Salvation in order to convince you you never were converted or saved, but are a false convert. So come get dunked again.
Good info and analysis.
One point … Baptists generally don’t refer to baptism as a sacrament; they call it an ordinance.
“Alas for you, lawyers and Pharisees…”
They might as well have a big top-style tent in the parking lot at this place; it’s truly a circus.
Would one of you please provide theological definitions for the terms “ordinance” and “sacrament”? That would help me understand the significance of the difference. Thanks in advance!
Actually not that different from Juicing the book sales figures onto the Best-Seller lists. Never mind if it’s Legal(TM) or not, it’s pretty underhanded.
I speak as one who has been fired as a youth pastor at a church, after six months on the job, for failing to raise the numbers of the youth group to what the church board considered an acceptable number, without that expectation having been discussed in advance of accepting the job.
So, while having been, in my own opinion, the victim of church “metrics” used very, very badly, I’m wary about being dismissive of the entire concept of “metrics” as having relevance in the evaluation of a church or religious institution. (I am also mindful that I may be incorrectly reading into your take on the concept of “metrics”)
As I’m certain you know, “metrics” is just a word for standards of measurement. Speaking for my self, what I have found to be one of the most difficult parts of processing my role as a pastor is knowing how to accurately evaluate my own performance. It’s terribly subjective (which is true, of course, of many vocations), and I know that I’ve always struggled to know what criteria I should use to evaluate my own performance
I don’t put a lot of stock in statistics. If one were to evaluate ministers purely statistically, you would have to conclude that Isaiah was the worst minister in history, and that Jonah was truly elite. Ultimately, I know I have to simply ask myself the question, “Have I been faithful in doing what the Lord has called me to do today, imploring Him to allow me to be a part of what His Spirit is accomplishing in the world, and marked by the fruit of His presence in my life.” But there’s no getting around the fact that, as I try to honestly answer that question, I’m answering it completely subjectively. And it sure is nice to have some kind of objective criteria (“metrics”) with which I can try challenge my own answer to that question. Like school grades, they are dumb numbers that only tell a small percentage of the story of a student’s intelligence, progress, and application, but remain useful nonetheless, when seen in true perspective, for helping a students, parents, and teachers in the evaluation process.
None of this is to excuse the way megachurches notoriously use numbers as a sole criteria of evaluation, the way churches of all sizes can care more about numbers than actual human beings in their care, or the way that Furtick seems to be, in this case, using his “metrics” as the pretext for a victory lap. But I think in any organization, including churches, metrics play a legitimate role in the evaluation process, if only a small one.
“There are lies, damn lies, and statistics”
Lucy Pevensie wrote:
Being facetious, “Sacraments” are Romish Papist and “Ordnances” are Biblical Protestant.
More accurately, I’m not sure what “Ordnance” means (except to joke it’s Protestant for Sacrament), but it seems to be less binding or important than a Sacrament.
As far as I know about Sacraments, they are from two to seven actions which express spiritual realities in physical acts. They also seem to be rites of passage and/or the Church saying “This Is Important”. The Seven Sacraments recognized by my church are:
* Baptism (joining the church and/or commemorating birth, as we do infant baptism)
* Confirmation (receiving the Holy Spirit and/or commemorating coming of age similar to a Bar Mitzvah)
* Matrimony (getting married and forming a new family unit)
* Holy Orders (vocation to the clergy)
* Confession/Reconciliation (taking care of sin and getting right with God)
* Healing for the Sick (often associated with “Last Rites” commemorating death)
* Communion (partaking of Christ’s body and blood and the Life of the Age to Come)
In my tradition, Confession and Consecrating Communion can only be done by ordained/consecrated clergy (Holy Orders).
The Lutheran tradition and other first-generation Reformation Protestants acknowledge only Baptism and Communion as Sacraments, but I don’t know the details. I think Ordinances are a downgrading of the other five below Sacramental status, but again I’m not sure.
In addition, there are “sacramentals”, physical objects or acts that while not Sacraments per se express spiritual reality in physical form.
@ Headless Unicorn Guy: “Protestant” for sacrament is … sacrament.
some of us have them, though not as many as in the RCC. (Lutherans: baptism and the Eucharist/holy communion; Anglicans: at least 2, possibly more.)
@ numo: We have confirmation, too, but it’s not viewed as a sacrament. (Not even sure why, come to think of it. Must look that up.)
@ Headless Unicorn Guy: oops! Sorry, I hit “reply” before reading to the end of your post…
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Actually, it is more drastic than that. Historically (that would be when I was in SBC) they denied that anything was a “means of grace” not even baptism or communion. When SBCers use the term “grace” it is a different understanding from the RCC understanding of grace. When I was in RCIA I just about could not understand the catholic understanding of grace–but now I think that the churches that have sacraments have a better understanding of grace than do the SBCers.
Don’t forget that there are lots of kinds of baptists. I don’t know about most of them.
An ordinance is just something that is symbolic and you are supposed to do it as an act of obedience. It, in and of itself, does not accomplish anything nor is it a means by which God imparts grace to the person. How sad.
@ Lucy Pevensie:
The basic concept of a “sacrament” is that it is something which transmits grace, that, in effect, is necessary for one to be holy or “sacred”. It is something that is sanctifying.
An ordinance is something that the church recognize was ordained by Jesus Christ that may exemplify or testify to the presence of grace, but does not confer or yield grace.
I will have to quit reading TWW or else go get psychotherapy of some sort. Never mind. Here goes.
OK, I have a personal story to tell which relates to this post. Back in the day when i was a child (older child) I used to play my violin at various religious services. Usually some modification of Sweet Hour of Prayer, preferably soulfully with plenty vibrato. Whatever. So one time I played at this revival and three of us got recruited to act as shills. I did not want to, but I was a kid and was scared to say no and besides, what about the music. I guess I thought I had some sort of obligation at that point. None of that makes any sense, but I was a kid, for crying out loud. Anyhow, we were supposed to just walk down the center aisle (after a few verses of Just As I Am) and on cue, and take a seat on the left front row pew. That’s all. We did not have to pretend that it was a “rededication of life” though everyone would assume that. Nobody announced our names nor made any statement, and we were supposed to pray for the lost while we sat there. So we did.
By the time I got home somebody had already called my parents and told on me. It was not pretty. However, I had already figured out that most of what went on at church was tarnished at best, so there is no story of lost faith or anything here. It is just my “testimony.” I have been delivered from my past as a religious shill. There you go.
Re-baptism is a hot issue. I think getting dunked 4, 5, 6, times is ridicilous. I have no problem with infant baptism either and have a deep amount of respect for Catholics. The downside to infant baptism is that the infant does not really have a say in the matter. I was baptized as an infant.
I was baptized at an Evangelical Free Church in 2000. I was brand spanking new to evangelicalism and when I was baptized I thought it was the thing to do. Many fundagelcials sadly called Catholcisim a cult, and in my warped mindset I did at the time also. When I was baptized I thought it would help me with difficult issues in my life, and my imagine my surprise when a day or two later I’m still dealing with those issues.
The thought I put into this upcoming baptism on November 24 is much different. I went through hell over the past nearly 6 years. I was angry, burned bridges, I myself was struggling with being burned by evangelicalism. And I went off the deep end. I went so far in the opposite direction that I thought and believed myself to be agnostic. I identified with that mindset for a while and rejected anything Christian. I realized in the past 4 months that I went too far. These last 5 to 6 years haunt me. They loom in my past with deep regret. I can’t believe I went to the Reason Rally in DC. I can’t believe how argumentative and caustic I became. I want to move forward but feel chained by my past. That’s the reason why I made the decision to get baptized. I’m more mature about my decision at 39 than when I was 26. I’m comfortable with what I am committing to. I know that I am still going to be dealing with brokenness and dealing with guy issues for the remainder of my life. Baptism I am hoping will mark an end to one era of my life and the start to another era.
That’s why I am moving ahead with baptism. I need to have a fresh start and find some way to put the years 2008 – 2013 behind me. That said…my intent is to have this be the last baptism when I am alive. Will you see me get dunked every couple of years? God no…that is ridicilous. And that type of rebaptism is a mockery to the process.
I was baptised twice. The first time was when I was saved when I was nine years old. The second time I was about 30. During my teens and 20s I was rebellious and only sporatically attended church. When I acknowledged Jesus’ lordship over my life and started really serving God I decided to be baptised again. The church I attended encouraged baptism under those cirucumstances and I felt it was a wonderfully symbolic way to show my recommittment to God. The Assembly of God church I attend now encourages everyone to say the “sinner’s prayer” at every service so that those who are doing it for the first time don’t feel embarassed or whatever they might feel if they were the only one doing so. Not sure I agree because if they are too frightened to publically proclaim Jesus in church are they going to proclaim him elsewhere? Hopefully as they mature as Christians that changes. I am saying all this because statistics about salvation and baptism don’t mean a whole lot only the heart change as the person invites Jesus in and lives a new life. Also, how the church I attended at the time of my second baptism counted my baptism has nothing to do with what it meant to me and God.
I think Nancy captured well the difference in concept between a sacrament and an ordinance. The Catholic concept of a sacrament focuses on the activity as a means by which God imparts His grace (favor) to the recipient. Many Protestants use the term sacrament (for baptism and communion), as they also as a means by which God imparts His favor to some degree or another. Historically Baptists have used the term ordinance meaning that which has been ordained, or commanded) to indicate their belief that we partake of them in obedience to God’s commands but not as a means by which He imparts His favor to us. Baptists typically see grace as supernaturally imparted to individuals directly and inwardly by means of His Holy Spirit alone. Personally I don’t think that’s “sad,” but neither do I think it is sad that other groups believe differently. It’s just a difference or disagreement on a tertiary doctrine, in my opinion.
JeffT wrote:
Perhaps I should update this saying to:
“There are lies, damn lies, and metrics”
@ Caleb W:
Wendell Berry has written extensively on the very thing Foucault describes.
It astounds me how even what should be the simplest and most basic of acts of the Christian church, baptism and communion, are so divisive. Infant vs. adult baptism, immersion vs. sprinkling, is the baptism you received earlier in your life ‘good enough’ to meet the requirements of another church, and on, and on. Christianity has gone off the rails.
My wife was baptized two times. When she moved her membership 30+ years ago! she was listed as two people. ( she had been baptized at 7 during a revival and later at 12 when she as she says, ” was not influenced by older kids”….)
If you’ve been baptized 2, 3, 4, 7 times, I wonder…..and no there is not growth in the SBC…the members are just moving around….
We spoke about ministers in today’s church on our radio program last evening…..we are pretty much of the mind, that ” Jesus has left the church building……”
K.D. wrote:
I heard Elvis left too…
@ JeffT:
Oh, did nobody tell you? The final judgment is a multiple choice quiz on doctrine, and you better make a passing score or else.
I have to say that manipulating baptisms is worse than hiding where the money goes to me. Baptism is such an intimate and personal moment. To think that you were baptized at a moment when manipulation by a preacher was at work could make you question so much of your life in Christ. These actions are reprehensible.
@ Junkster:
Thanks for that helpful explanation, and it's great to hear from you. 🙂
JeffT wrote:
How winsome of you! 😆
Treading warily, as I understand it the sacraments in the RCC are supposed to convey the thing they signify. High Anglicans are similar, so infant baptism actually conveys the new birth, the child ‘is hereby made regenerate’.
The reformation reacted against this by and large, emphasising faith instead, expressed amongst those who morphed into baptist denominations that the candidate must have exercised faith in Christ themselves to be baptised. I don’t think baptists all necessarily think that baptism (and communion) cannot be a means of blessing to believers though, more they must not be the object of a person’s faith, a substitute for faith in God.
The real point is not how many are baptised, but how many have a genuine faith in Christ. Indiscriminate infant baptism can be legitimately criticised for fooling people into thinking they are right with God when they are not (widespread in the UK in former years), but manipulating people into getting baptised for statistical purposes is no better, it ought to be something a believer decides is God’s will for them based on their reading of the NT. Obedience is not something you can manipulate people into, they’ve got to do this themselves or you just get outward conformity to religious ceremonies, which is pretty pointless even if it does keep the statistics favourable.
A friend joined a mega church — one of those in the Association of Related Churches (ARC). One Sunday, I went to visit there out of support for the friend. They announced that they’d be having baptisms in the ocean that afternoon.
I had never been immersed. I had always considered my infant baptism to be sufficient, and through 25 years of a zillion opportunities, I had never felt compelled by reason or emotion to be baptized; had never had any desire to be baptized, and saw no reason to be baptized. They didn’t make an emotional appeal — it was simply, ‘if you want to be baptized, show up on the beach at 4.”
But an odd thing happened. Suddenly, my mind changed, and I thought, “Well, yeah, I’ll be baptized.”
I stood in the water, awaiting my turn, feeling completely unemotional — this was just something I was going to do once in my life as an act of identifying myself as belonging to Jesus. Just a simple thing.
I will not tell you what happened as I stood there in the water, because I do not want anyone to think that their baptism experience needs to mirror mine. It would’ve been fine if I had remained completely matter-of-fact about the issue. I will simply say I was baptized, and I will never forget it. I was the last of 82 people in the water that day.
Since that time, my friend discovered that this church manipulates numbers like crazy. They count all the staff members for every service (4 per week-end) which adds several hundred to the week-end total, and they inflate the actual numbers. Then, they allow and count people who are baptized and re-baptized every single time, several times a year, and there’s no real teaching about baptism whatsoever. Their sermons are all variations of “God created you to do great things, so kick the sin out of your life and do great things for God” – nothing but works. My friend left the church, as hundreds have done, but new people seem to walk in every week until they, too, see the light.
But all that in no way lessens the fact that I was baptized or the impact of that moment on my spirit.
The church I currently attend holds baptism when people ask to be baptized — not when they announce an opportunity. I like that.
Bottom line: Baptize all you want, but don’t go crowing about the numbers!
Junkster wrote:
Maybe, but I think it is part of some larger issues. One is differing ideas of faith vs works, as in what is faith, actually, and what are works, actually and what does that mean? Some people seem to feel (I don’t say think) that anything that involves any sort of action is actually works, hence there is something about the traditional sacraments that incorporates action/works and therefore one must not think that way. Kind of sola fide on steroids.
I also think that it has something to do with an attitude toward the creation itself. There can be an attitude that is almost gnostic-influenced in making everything spiritual and rejecting everything that involves the material world as we know it. Such that the water and the bread and the wine, in being only symbolic, are somehow more spiritual as an idea than as actual material substances. A separation, if you please, of the material and the spiritual as somehow opposed to each other. Personally, I think that the incarnation refutes that idea.
And third, there is the idea of superstition, as thinking that the water and bread and wine are somehow magical substances in themselves in some way. I imagine that some people do fall into that trap.
But there is an attitude involved also. If the eucharist is a sacrament, then I could have the feeling that I have been invited to the table of the Lord and that he plans to meet me there is some way that we do not understand. It is invitation and welcome and blessing. If it is only an ordinance, then it is something I must do because of obedience. I have been command with one more order to appear and comply, so as not to make God mad. Hence the word “obedience.” Not to say that is what everybody thinks either way, but I see these different nuances of attitude.
Nancy wrote:
John 14:15, Jesus:
“If you love me, keep my commands.
Luke 6:46, Jesus:
“Why do you call me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do what I say?
I do not agree with the Roman Catholic Church’s position on grace.
For many years, they taught that
1. grace is available only through RC priests/functions, and that
2. grace is something that one can run out of or low on and must be recharged by getting more via Mass or some other official RC person/ service
I believe the Bible teaches grace is God’s unmerited favor and is available to any believer who asks Him of it (one does not need to get God’s grace via a priest or church service/ function)
As to the original post.
What Furtick (and other famous mega church/ seeker friendly guys) are doing is not Christianity. It is really shameful and a disgrace.
I think a lot of people are turned off by gimmicks, but that is all what most churches are offering these days.
People are sincerely confused, lost, hurting, want a relationship with God, and they want close friendships and a support network (they want people to lean on when they are hurting or in need, or for companionship, and this is especially true for adult singles).
But instead of providing a way to grow closer to God, or providing a close knit community, a lot of churches are making a dog and pony show out of church, and they are only concerned with numbers, and making the preacher more wealthy.
If people want entertainment, they can go to a movie theater, watch TV, or go to a rock concert.
I’m not opposed to some music in church, and am not necessarily opposed to big video screens and stuff, but IMO, church should be more than that, more than the trappings.
I can’t believe a preacher would have fake converts walk forward to coax those on the fence to get to their feet and go forward. If someone steps forward to be baptized (indicating a desire to follow Christ), it should be 100% their choice.
Mega church preachers are making a mockery of the faith. If there is a God (and I usually assume there is one, but have doubts lately), I wonder why He allows this stuff to continue.
As a SBC pastor of over 4o years I tell you big baptisms are not necessarily the indication of a healthy church or a growing one.
Anyone else remember when Bobby Welch spent his SBC presidency driving the “Baptism Bus” around the country? “Everyone can….baptize 1 Million More!” It made me so snarky. No, I cannot do the work of the Holy Spirit. Did God give you that number? And I can’t baptize anyone anyways, because I am the WRONG GENDER.
Thanks, HUG, Junkster and others, for your responses to my question, makes more sense to me now.
Eagle, thanks for sharing your story. A new baptism for you makes great sense.
Nancy, I appreciate what you said about one’s attitude towards sacraments/ordinances. Food for thought.
As far as Elevation’s metric system… I don’t think there’s any way to measure the height of my disgust.
The metrics of Jesus Christ:
“When many of his disciples heard it, they said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples were grumbling about this, said to them, “Do you take offense at this? Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”
After this many of his disciples turned back and no longer walked with him. So Jesus said to the Twelve, “Do you want to go away as well?” Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life, and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” (John 6:66-69, ESV)
I think this is more than an Elevation problem, and more than a mega-church problem. I think it is a theological problem. Notice how they list “salvations”, when what they really mean is professions of faith or the sinners prayer. And baptisms is a poor metric when baptism is seen as little more than something we do (multiple times) to declare that we “really mean it this time”. I think of the parable of the sower. Neither of these things indicates deep roots or lasting fruits. This is why Jesus said “you will know them by their fruits.”
I appreciate the Scripture cited by TW; I have often thought that the church growth movement misses ignores the inconvenient Scriptural truth that Jesus seemed to be very unconcerned with numbers as a sign of approval or validation.
And then some of my more radical holiness friends see baptism as something only God can do, baptizing you in the Holy Spirit. No water needed.
And every time you eat or drink having prayed and given thanks, you have taken communion.
Something to think about.
Mother wrote:
OT comment.
Mother, I smiled at your comment, because I recognize that Baptists take a lower view of Baptism than Catholics. But, in emergency situations, I could do a baptism that is considered valid.
Lucy Pevensie wrote:
They’re just Juicing the numbers like Furtick or Elron getting a book onto the Best-Seller lists.
My maternal grandfather was a butcher and my paternal grandfather used to design hog kill machinery for Hormel. So baptisms at Elevation = pigs being herded through a slaughterhouse to the meat line? Ewwww. Not pleasant. Baaaaaaad picture in Hester’s head.
And putting already-baptized plants in the audience to manipulate gullible people into fueling your numbers game? Um, not okay, Stevie. Screwing around with the sacraments is a no. A big no. Just…no.
@ Anna:
I’m Lutheran and I believe the case is same here.
Daisy wrote:
These controlling mega church guys are scared to death of anyone in their congregation having a strong relationship with God. Because if their congregants had actual, strong relationships with God, then the controlling mega church pastor wouldn’t be able to control them like they do.
They are already ticked off that they can’t control you and me.
Of course those guys aren’t going to promote getting closer to God, not really. They may give lip service to it. But it’s not something that they really truly want. It would destroy their own little (and expensive) kingdoms to actually focus solely on the Kingdom of God.
@ Anna A:
I am a methodist, and I have no idea what the methodists think about that. But I would do it nevertheless in an emergency situation.
Mother wrote:
Then the “wrong gender” can’t make disciples or teach them about Jesus either?
Mat 28:19 “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,
Mat 28:20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”
I’m not aware of scripture that prohibits women from baptizing.
Mother wrote:
Mother,
Churches, denominations & sects that insist upon cast-in-concrete-biblical-gender-roles regardless of gifting and aptitude, will not survive the 21st century.
At some Baptist churches where I have been a member, a parent sometimes baptizes one of their children that has made a profession of faith. BTW, that is the Baptist standard, that the person has made a profession of faith in Christ with some knowledge of the commitment that means (although some churches/pastors are a bit weak on that). Baptism becomes a testimony, a statement of a changed life and of a commitment to Jesus as Lord and Savior. It is done because Jesus commanded us to baptize those who become disciples (followers) of him. That command was made to all of his followers. And the best translation would be “As you go, make disciples of all nations . . ..” It is to be a life activity of all Christians.
@ Muff Potter:
Muff, please put quote marks around “biblical”. Gender roles are not biblical, but may be “biblical”!
@ An Attorney:
You’re right. My bad. The word -biblical- should have been enclosed with quote or tick marks.
“@ Mother:
“And I can’t baptize anyone anyways, because I am the WRONG GENDER.”
Victorious: “I’m not aware of scripture that prohibits women from baptizing.”
+++++++++++++++
no scripture whatsoever. just one of the many gender role “guidelines” generated from the tinker toy tower of conjecture.
“Guidelines” which end up morphing into things which “scripture commands“. I marvel at that one.
I think people accept these unfounded restrictions, seeing them as commands, because it’s a good measuring device to evaluate how well they’re doing. Something concrete for charting progress. A reason for self-congratulations. And concrete enough for something to market, for building a business, a career.
it’s just that all this is entirely a figment of the imagination.
@ Muff Potter:
@ An Attorney:
Better still is Biblical™.
I can get that on my keyboard by pressing shift+alt+2, and I’ve found that on other keyboards too, though you might have to experiment. But that’s worth doing anyway, when you have an idle moment, because it’s surprising what’s hidden in there behind the keyboard’s plain beige façade. (I found ç by trial and error too, and of course that was just an excuse to use it.)
Or try Biblical®. (alt+r – endless fun in there.)
Love and hugs,
Nick
@ Anna A:
No emergency required as far as I can tell, or believe.
elastigirl wrote:
You too have a way with words. Your comment should be nailed to the great oaken doors of the Church Universal.
Okay, I have to do this:
ORDNANCE: military supplies including weapons, ammunition, armor, vehicles, etc.
ORDINANCE: an authoritative decree or direction; something ordained or decreed by fate or a deity; prescribed usage, practice, or ceremony
The apostle Paul tweeted this:
I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, so that no one may say that you were baptized in my name. (I did baptize also the household of Stephanas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized anyone else.) For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.
@ Ken:
Well, it seems that Paul wasn’t concerned about ‘who’ did the baptizing 😉
Next Big Box post is up.
http://scarletlettersblog.wordpress.com/2013/11/10/how-to-evaluate-a-suitor-tbb/
Hey Dee – Jared Moore’s 250 Top Christian blog post is up. I have a question. Is TWW a discernment blog?
http://jaredmoore.exaltchrist.com/christian-truth/top-250-christian-blogs-2013-2014/
emr wrote:
Thank you — thank you! I’m reminded of an episode on the tv show “Sleepy Hollow” last week, when the female policeman said she was gonna call in the Calvary. Groan. That show had me at ‘hello’, but lost me at Calvary.
The cavalry uses ordnance. Calvary is often spoken of by those who conduct ordinances.
Julie Anne wrote:
“Discernment blogs have been intentionally left off this list. The reason why is that many discernment blogs search for failures to write about, and thus, they end up using logical fallacies, connecting dots that don’t exist, and making unfounded accusations and speculations.”
*
That’s the answer.
*
@ Nickname:
A pet peeve of mine as well. Thanks for posting!
@ Bridget:
Quite. When Paul himself was baptised, Ananias is simply described as a disciple and a devout man. I assume he did the baptising, it’s strongly implied if not said outright, so no ordination papers in sight here!
The person doing the baptising is the least important person involved in the whole thing.
Well, well, well. So apparently there are discernment blogs (plural) which would have been in the top 250 if they had not been “eliminated” by choice. That is encouraging. “Discernment” along with common sense are sometimes so sorely lacking in humanity including American christianity that it is good to know some folks are trying to do something about it, and apparently some folks are hearing the message. Yes!
@ Julie Anne: Poor Jared. He only has gotten attention when he has put up the listing. So, he is hoping to get recognized again. No one reads his blog otherwise. He threw the discernment stuff in, hoping that someone will pay attention to him.
Understand, this is a guy who is spending time writing a blog that no one reads while his church does not have a website or a phone number. I even offered to set one up for him as well as give his church a phone. I just went over to see if he spent some time setting up a website. From what I can see, nada. He’s too busy writing lists and letting people know how you can get into a PhD program even if you have a dubious academic history.
@ Nancy:
No one reads his blog. The only time he gets attention is when he does his list. He uses discernment blogs to get attention. The question to ask-why does he think he should make such a judgment?
The SBC is in decline in terms of memberships and baptisms. People are leaving the church. And people like Moore, who cannot get the gumption up to take care of his church and get them online and get them a phone, spends time finding lots of obscure blogs that are not being read , just like his and claim that they are in the top 250.
Oh yeah, and this discernment blog offered to show him how to set up a website for his church and to give a phone to his church but he is too busy trying to make himself a part of the “inner” crowd. Piece of advice-take care of those who you are supposed to serve, first.
@ Seneca: You know, you should contact Jared. He could use some people commenting on his blog. The two of you are peas in a pod.
@ Nickname:
@ An Attorney:
I have a mind block on this word. I also constantly misspell “separate.” I have stared at both of them, tried little tricks to remember and still screw it up.
@ Julie Anne:
JA, this is just my opinion after reading Moore over at SBCvoices for many years. He has been trying desperately to build his national brand. He comes off as being quite enamoured with John Piper but also the SBC Calvinist wing of Mohler, Dever, etc. He writes a lot but ironically has hever once mentoined the problems with Mohler defending and promoting CJ Mahaney. Funny how that works.That has been totally ignored by those guys as if it does not exist.
He hawks his book on Harry Potter quite a bit anywhere he can. Let’s just say he is very obvious. He won 2nd VP at the SBC conention with something like 300 votes (few in the hall during vote and most attendees now are Mohler followers)
Not sure why his “list” carries any weight. I do remember a time he got on the TWW gals and they wanted to speak to him but he claimed his rural Kentucky church had no phone. They even offered to provide his church a phone.
I would think the church having no phone is quite convenient. More time for writing books, blogging lists and building your brand on OPM. Of course they all do it nowadays so I guess that makes it right whether it is Piper or Jared Moore. It is just the proportality that is different.
dee wrote:
This is an excellent idea!
Based on how often some ‘evangelicals’ rail against discernment blogs, I have to ask, is discernment a sin? Do I need to repent for being discerning or face perdition?
@ JeffT:
In answer to those two questions: “yes” if you are a female, and while you are at it see your doctor for hormone studies because you are not a “real woman”, and “maybe” if you are a male because you obviously do not recognize your rank in the pack.
Julie Anne wrote:
Thanks for the link. looking forward to seeing who’s on the list and who is not…
@ JeffT:
Great comment!
@ JeffT:
Based on the number of times we are told ‘not to be deceived’, the answer has to be not discerning is a sin. To cease to question something, to test the spirits, is to pave the way for being led into all kinds of religious deception.
Discernment blogs are a different issue, and need judging (i.e. discerning!) on a case by case basis. Some are an excellent source of information that can be truly liberating to those caught up in church malpractice, especially where they think they are the only ones or are being rebellious. Others can be little more than spreading gossip or the ruminations of those who have some agenda they are obsessed with, meaning their main concern is self, not helping others. I can understand evangelicals not being happy with that.
My own flirtation with religious deception was largely the result of a failure to continue to think for myself, and to have the courage of my convictions. But it’s really nice to know you are not alone when that happens.
@ Ken:
Great comment, Ken.
One of my favorite books is 1 John. Here was my wake up call in the midst of what passes for Christianity today:
24 As for you, see that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. If it does, you also will remain in the Son and in the Father. 25 And this is what he promised us—eternal life.
26 I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray. 27 As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him.
Maybe Moore would let us be part of the list if we put a disclaimer as Tony Miano has suggested. In a recent blog post he suggested to women that if they blog, they should consider putting a disclaimer saying that their target audience is Christian women – – that way men will know not to sit under them and be taught by them.
Julie Anne wrote:
That might be a little uncomfortable, don’t you think?
It always cracks me up when someone speaking Christianese says, “I have been sitting under Pastor so-and so.” Sitting under? Who in the real world talks like that?
Julie Anne wrote:
I just went to the Challies blog to check out MacArthur’s response to Strange Fire critics, and right up at the top in red is MUST READ– In the Crosshairs of the Discernment Bloggers (Challies’ April response to a TWW article, which doesn’t link to the article or mention TWW by name, thus confusing many of his readers).
Julie Anne wrote:
Oh good grief!….slapping forehead…
The whole idea of someone “sitting under” another person is based on the erroneous idea of “pastoral authority”. If we are “sitting under” anyone, it is the Holy Spirit. No human being can displace the authority of the Holy Spirit in our lives. And any who attempt to do so are being heretical and denying the lordship of God in the lives of each and every believer. And those who teach that also teach a lot of other falsehood, excerpting a few verses to make a case and ignoring the greater weight of the entirety of scripture and Christian experience.
Any who claim you are “sitting under” their teaching (and thus that they have authority over you) are false teachers, aka wolves in shepherds clothing.
@ An Attorney:
But teachers are one of the gifts of the ascended Christ to the church. If someone abuses this as a means of gaining control over personal ‘disciples’, then I agree with you this is wrong, but ‘sitting under’ a good teaching ministry can be a liberating experience, a beneficial thing as you would expect from a gift from God.
@ Ken:
The problem is that the term “sitting under” implies that the person is also under the authority of the teacher, and that is a wrongful interpretation of the scripture. Being taught by a teacher is no sin, but putting oneself under the authority of a teacher is. The teaching and the learning are gifts from the Holy Spirit, and the teacher deserves no special allegiance or respect, beyond what any Christian owes to every other Christian.
@ Nickname:
Nickname,
Are you surprised? I’m gonna wax snarko-rama here and say that about the only thing the new generation of TV screen writers and actors know how to do well is push tiles & apps around on their ‘smart’ devices.
Steven Furtick: “If You Know Jesus, …Elevation Church Is Not For You…”
Elevation Church is not a true New Testament “Church”, in the ‘biblical’ sense, as outlined in the New Testament Book of Acts, but a christian outreach ministry that requests that the un-saved give this 501c nonprofit corporation money citing the bible as the source of the request. Once the individual makes a profession of faith, they are strongly encouraged to attend religious services elsewhere in the community, as this is a 501c non-profit who’s stated purpose is to seek and save the lost. Once ‘saved’ this church is not for you, is the saying. This ministry is akin to the old tent ministries where a traveling evangelist would set up a tent for a season, and preach the message of salvation to all those of the community in attendance. Only Steven Furtick is acting as a “stay in the community” evangelist, electronic media notwithstanding . The long term results/effects of this 501c religious not-for-profit corporation, is yet to be determined.
Christians are to be forewarned: “If You Know Jesus”, Steven Furtick says that his church is not for you.
____
Notes:
Video: Steven Furtick – What is the purpose of this church? Here the Pastor of Elevation Church, in Charlotte NC. expounds upon ‘why’ his church exists…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wILPzCyWYk&feature=youtube_gdata_player
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevation_Church
The church description here does not include stating the intended purpose of this 501c religious non-profit ‘church’.
—
@ An Attorney:
OK, we have a problem here, because there is some real difference of opinion in this area. There is a difference in educational concepts in this country, and it is natural that some people will see it one way and some another in church.
For example, I notice you are “an attorney.” I am not, but my father and my son and my daughter in law are. I have watched (paid for, actually) the educational process which turns out lawyers, and it seems to be that you guys are trained to think for yourselves and even to be argumentative and confrontational from the get go, and you are rewarded with good grades in school and later success in practice if you do it well. I admire that and respect it. If we did not have an adversarial legal system how would one get at the truth, let us say, in court. And even then it is not perfect. So, no, I did not see any evidence of law students or lawyers being under the authority of the teacher. Learning from, yes. Under the authority, not really. Not like in health care for example.
Medical education is different from that, especially in the clinical years. It is hierarcical and authoritative, and even if the “attending” is wrong, he/she is still in charge and that is the ultimate signature which has the most weight unless/until the state and the medical boards and the specialty boards and the people who either do or do not grant admitting privileges stamp the imprimatur on the forehead of the student/trainee. There is a real and even legal aspect of being under the authority of the teacher/mentor/attending/etc. Would anybody, for instance, want a medical student or a PGY1 to have just as much say so about their diagnosis and treatment as the more educated, more experienced person who had passed the exams, met the requirements, been doing it longer and has treated cases like yours before? Not I.
So when we all go to church, we go with different educational experiences and philosophies and expectations. I do respect the teacher, relative to the role of teaching, more than I respect the music director in the role of “teaching” when it is his Sunday night to “preach.” And scripture says that they who teach will be judged more strictly. I want a lawyer when I am dragged into court, and I want a surgeon when I have surgery, and no they are not equal in the sense of equally able in their performance of various functions. Surgeons are lousy lawyers, and who wants a lawyer to operate on them? And I want a pastor/teacher/bishop/elder who knows more about what they are saying than I do before I struggle into my panty hose and endure having to sit there and listen to somebody talk that long. And for that I will honor them appropriately and expect that they be paid a double portion if they do it well and I will pay attention and allow myself to be influenced (maybe) and hold them to a higher standard than the guy down at the other end of the pew.
Lawyer types and doctor types have to learn how to live together in church situations, because we seriously have a wider world view gap between us than the gap between the young earth people and the old earth people. If I find out how to get that done, I will write a book, get rich and retire to my own private island.
@ dee:
just imagine my brit husband saying it (or Allan Rickman), and hear it in your mind: “Sepahruht” “sepahrayt”
@ Nancy:
Before becoming a lawyer, I was a scientist and was married to a doctor in training into her residency (post internship) who had been trained as a biochemist and had written a book for nurses on managing pre-term infant blood gases under the direction of a med school professor. And she experienced being overridden by a more senior resident and seeing an infant die as a result of that, b/c the blood gases got out of whack. I also did research with the medical school on selection of people who would be more likely to be more patient sensitive, and with doctors on pediatric appendicitis diagnosis. Have been around the medical community and understand where you are coming from.
However, my beliefs regarding relationships among Christians come from my studies before law school (law school was rather late for me). The Bible teaches that all Christians are priests, and there is nothing to suggest that some Christians are to be considered more important that others. All of us have a direct relationship with God and our only mediator is Jesus. Therefore, no man (or woman) is to be “over” us or “in authority” over us with regard to our faith.
I have been in class at church with people who are seminary and religion professors, great thinkers about the Bible and our faith as well as great teachers, people who have written the books and whose names you would recognize, but who are not preachers or “pastors” as we define those terms. But in class, we interacted as equals, one with knowledge gained from their academic careers and others with perhaps less, but all of us under the tutelage of the Holy Spirit. And those professors did not claim a special religious “authority” over anyone, including the students in their seminary classes!
And I also believe that the most important person in the doctor-patient relationship is the patient, who is the person who makes the initial decision and hopefully the final, out of the office decisions, about the need for and compliance with the ministrations of the doctor. A major problem in the medical profession is the “god complex” and it infects some lawyers too, but is usually referred to as a “judge complex”. Both professions need a big dose of humility — we are employed to serve. And the same is true of those who occupy the pulpit.
Ken
You write…
“But teachers are one of the gifts of the ascended Christ to the church.”
Was Wondering – Where is this in the Bible?
Where a “Mere Fallible Human” is a GIFT of Christ – to “WE?” – His Body? – His Ekklesia?
His Called out Ones? – His sons? – His Disciples? – His Ambassadors? – His Church?
1 – Seems Jesus, has a different idea – He taught His Disciples NOT to be called Rabbi/Teacher.
For you have “ONE” Teacher, the Christ. Mat 23:8 NKJV,
2 – ALL shall be taught of God. John 6:45
3 – ALL things, shall be taught you by the Holy Spirit, God. John 14:26
4 – ALL truth, will come as the Spirit of truth guides and leads. John 16:13
5 – Jesus, as man, does nothing of himself, and is taught of God. John 8:28
And John, the apostle, said – “You need NOT that any man teach you.”
1 John 2:26-27 KJV
These things have I written unto you concerning them *that seduce you.*
But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you,
**and ye need not that any man teach you:**
And, In the Old Testament God says – “He, God, wants to instruct us and teach us.”
Deuteronomy 4:36
Out of heaven he made thee to **hear His voice,**
that **He might instruct thee:**
Psalms 32:8
I will **instruct thee** and **teach thee**
in the way which thou shalt go: I will *guide** thee with mine eye.
Had to learn the hard way – Through many years and many tears…
Jer 17:5 KJV
Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, –
Ps 118:8-9 KJV
It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.
It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in princes.
And the best “Teacher” – Is…
{{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}
@ TedS.:
Reminds me of an episode of Family Guy. But let’s not go there.
Ken – Anyone
It does take a step of faith to believe and trust
that Jesus “can speak to you” and **teach you** “ALL” truth.
And we do have some examples; 1 – Jesus, 2 – Peter, 3 – Paul.
1 – Jesus, as man, declared, “He” could do nothing of Himself – My Father has taught me.
John 8:28
…I do nothing of myself; but as **my Father hath taught me,** I speak these things.
John 5:30
I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just;
because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.
John 5:19
…The Son can do nothing of himself, but what **he seeth the Father do:**
for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.
2 – Peter understood that Jesus was the Christ, the son of the living God.
Jesus declared that Peter was blessed because;
1 – Flesh and blood “did NOT” reveal that to him.
2 – The Father, “did” reveal it.
Mt 16:17
Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona:
for **flesh and blood hath NOT revealed it** unto thee,
but my Father which is in heaven.
Here’s Jesus, the greatest teacher ever, as man, NOT taking the credit.
He taught Peter, it’s the one who lives “in you” that **teaches you.**
3 – Paul declared that “his gospel” was NOT of man,
he received it from God and he conferred NOT with flesh and blood.
Ga 1:11-16
…the gospel which was preached of me is NOT after man.
**For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it,**
but by the revelation of Jesus Christ…
…16-To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen;
immediately **I conferred NOT with flesh and blood:**
Who better to “interpret scripture” than Jesus?
My sheep “hear MY Voice” – I know them – and they FOLLOW ME.
And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold:
them also I must bring, and they shall “hear My voice;”
and there shall be “ONE” fold, and “ONE” shepherd.
John 10:16
One Fold – One Shepherd – One Voice – One Teacher
{{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}
I have a confession. I was one of the 15 “plants” in the audience one Saturday night (both services–I volunteered to plant in both!). The Ed Young wannabe came to me prior to the service, told me what was going to happen, and asked if I would “lead” the way out for those that would want to stand and get baptized. While they weren’t asking me to pretend to be one to be baptized, they did say that my “movement” would be an ice-breaker, a seed of action, that would encourage those less bold to move behind me.
I thought I was going to literally lead the group over to the area where the baptizing clothes would be exchanged and names amassed. Funny think happened when I got over there, the other staff, Ed wannabes, were already there, doing the job, and “didn’t need me.” Basically, my role was to be a “show” of movement that would encourage others to move as well. I didn’t figure that out until after the second service that night, when the exact same thing happened. When I confronted my ‘handler’ about it, he basically blew me off asking why I didn’t want to see people get baptized. I wonder how many others were in the show that night.
Good news, 100’s were baptized that night. Bad news, Ed only heard of those baptized as he was whisked away in his MB at the close of the service. But this “manipulation recipe” was done 5-6 years ago, and when Furtick writes about it, it is simply a download from his daddy, Ed Furtick Young Jr.
Be ‘creative’. Put on the show. Tell the story at your buddy’s conferences. Write a book about the stories. Rinse. Repeat. Buy a big house and a plane.
Pathetic.
@ A. Amos Love:
The most obvious passage on teachers is Ephesians –
“And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry …”. Teachers are also third after apostles and prophets in 1 Cor.
Whilst I don’t disagree with your basic contention the Holy Spirit teaches all believers, the means to this end surely includes the gift of teaching, those who can bring the word to life and apply after careful study. It strikes me we need to avoid the extreme of getting everything ‘direct’ from God, or being too subservient to human teaching authority as though some had special access to God denied to lesser believers.
All believers can witness to their faith, but not all are evangelists. All believers can and should read the bible for themselves and learn doctrine, but not all are teachers. Both teachers and evangelists help to equip the church in their knowledge of God and witnessing respectively.
@ An Attorney:
@ An Attorney:
Good, I am glad you understand, because all the examples and analogies I know from life are medical. Fortunately, most people have been sick at one time or another and understand this too. But since one of the major issues of many of the discussions at TWW and elsewhere has to do with authority, I am about to comment way too much in the interest of discussion on this issue. We desperately need to understand each other (all of us) in this matter. Sometimes understanding breeds compassion.
As to your reply, this still leaves us with the issue that there are people who see it one way and people who see it another way and some way must be found to still make “church” function. I see no middle ground here. For example, I am so sorry that the child died, that is tragic. The resident was obviously a jerk or an idiot. This, however, tends to illustrate my point… that the person with the most knowledge/education/experience needs to be the primary decision maker. In this case, according to what you have said about her background, it was your wife, at least at the level of the blood gases. The jerk knew better than to do what he did, and bad apples need to be weeded out of the profession. But it looks to me like your wife would be the last person to have the idea that one opinion is as good as another and/or that training and experience do not carry with them a measure of authority, it being that because some jerk ignored her knowledge-based authority in that matter. I wonder if the actual attending physician would have been so threatened by your wife’s level of expertise that he would have done the same thing. My guess is not, but not all of the mess gets weeded out.
Let me stop here and say “hi” to your wife. Hi. I see you are a pediatrician? God love you. I could not have done that. I am a radiologist (retired) Before that I was a nurse. And before that I wanted to be. I have been slapped down without cause more times on the job than I can count, much less remember, mostly when I was a nurse. But after I went into practice most people did not mess with me–twice. You can tell your husband that some of the “god-complex” is learned by dealing with bullies during training. Impotent rage-rage where you can’t take it out on anybody-that was always the worst kind for me. But to watch a death you could have prevented? God help you. I am so sorry.
Let me add this by way of example and analogy. You know, I suppose, from this blog, that I have cancer, have recently had surgery and am now finishing up radiation treatments. For the past seven weeks I have been sitting daily in the ladies dressing room of the cancer center chatting and listening to other patients tell their story. You are correct that the patient either does or does not decide to go along with medical recommendations regarding treatment. I have been surprised, however, at some of the decisions made by some of these ladies. Some of the decisions have (and I speak statistically) lowered their chance of survival–that is their choice. Let me repeat that–they may have chosen an earlier death. But when I hear them talk about “my doctor said” and why they made that decision, it is evident that sometimes they did not understand what was being said, or else not enough was said. I am not the only one who has observed that. Some of the other patients have noted this, and one of the surgeons noted this. So again, they may have chosen an earlier death not of necessity but through ignorance. Here is my point. It is one thing for a person to really have “informed consent,” but quite another for them not to understand. It is one thing to make a choice that may be tragic while doing it with full knowledge, but quite another to think you have chosen well when you have only acted from misunderstanding. This may not be entirely the fault of the health care provider, because people tend to hear what they want to hear and delete the rest, no matter how hard you try to get through to them, but a good lawyer could pin the doc to the wall nevertheless. Because the responsibility to be sure the patient understands stops with the doc. But what if nobody really did try hard enough to communicate?
Translating that to the church situation, if we all think that we all have the same (as in equal) understanding and that “my opinion is as good as the next guy” and if we are mistaken (like some of the ladies I mentioned seem to have misunderstood) regarding the understanding of scripture, for example–whose fault is it I make terrible decisions based on my ignorance? All mine, or is some of it shared by a system that lets me think that highly of myself without challenging me to rethink that position? If we say that knowledge and understanding do not carry with them some degree of authority as well as responsibility then what is the other conclusion? That knowledge and understanding gained through education and experience do not carry any degree of authority against anything anybody may say or think just so long as they claim particular revelation from the Holy Spirit. Whoa, now. Anybody can say that about the Spirit, and how would anybody else know whether to take it seriously?
I believe you when you say that you have studied scripture, All of us have. We could sit here and slight bible verses back and forth and then disagree about what this or that scripture means. It is also evident that you feel strongly about your position. So do I. Again, for example, you say that we are all priests. Indeed. It also says let not many of you become teachers. So, a priest is not automatically a teacher. There is the comment that teachers will receive a stricter judgment. So how does that translate into an equality of function/judgment/authority or whatever? And here we are. You see one thing and I see another. Based, I think, on our own backgrounds and experiences. And thus we have come full circle. If we hold the health care industry to informed consent, and authoritative speaking and, to borrow a phrase, if we demand a clear sound from the trumpet from the doctor, and do not do that with the church, are we not saying that the body is more important than the soul? That we value the body most? That you can think anything you want about God, but you better get it right about your liver/pancreas/whatever?
Here is what I think (and I am not trying to insult you, I am just disagreeing.) If it is cancer then let the tumor board speak with authority and let the patient know that, and if the patient opts out then it is against medical advice. That does not mean that the patient cannot do it, obviously. It is their body and their life. And similarly let the theologians and church councils and such wrestle with the issues and then speak with authority and if the individual opts out it is contrary to church teaching. That should not mean that the individual person could not do it of course. And if the individual disagrees with this or that he should know that he is disagreeing with church teaching, not just think that everybody has his own opinion and nothing really matters, anyhow.
And apropos of all our troubles and in remembrance of the almost season “God bless us every one.”
@ Ken:
Ken, that is partly the result of bad translation! You should check out the issue of verbs being converted to nouns, and functions to positions in the translation process.
@ Nancy:
First it is an ex-wife, who left me with the bill for her medical education when she ended our marriage, almost 40 years ago. Second, I have a Ph.D. and a J.D., but I am not a pediatrician. My research interest was in the research process, and I have a background in research design, statistics, etc., and worked with the principal researchers who were pediatricians and surgeons who were concerned about the high rate of false positives and false negatives in cases of suspected or possible appendicitis in children.
I understand the problems of decision making by patients. Most patients are not sufficiently educated or knowledgeable to process the information necessary to make a good decision and the medical professionals rarely have the time to provide sufficient information and education. So they put their trust in their doctor, often make the wrong decision, and are never the wiser. It is one of the biggest ethical headaches for the medical profession.
We are all to be priests, but not all to be teachers. It is a calling. But in the church, teaching is a function, not a position, and does not carry authority over other Christians. (BTW, Jesus taught against the Apostles having authority over other Christians!!!!). We are all on level ground at the foot of the cross. The church operates best when all are functionally equal, and decisions are made by the congregation meeting in prayer, rather than some being boss over others.
There is a 500+ volume library in my home on the Bible, theology, translation, etc. I have been a teacher, deacon (and vice chair of deacons), chair of the personnel committee, chair of the budget committee, etc., in several churches operated on a generally democratic basis — all members equal. I have been the CEO of several businesses, where being the boss was a necessity, but worked to have participatory decision making where possible. I have worked in a variety of other businesses as well, and have been employed in universities. There are environments and issues where authority is necessary. Church and Christian life is not an environment where “authority” is appropriate.
FormerFellow wrote:
In other words, you were the SHILL.
Is “Ed Young wannabe” an ex-Carny like Anton LaVey?
FormerFellow wrote:
Thank you for sharing your story. As you know, I did my time in Ed’s House as well. Ed is a master at manipulation and has done this deal with baptisms and with enhancing the coffers.
Today I got an email from a person in our neck of the woods who told us that he, too was plant for baptism. His pastor is a friend of Furtick’s and goes by the name on this blog as “The pastor Whose Name Shall Not Be Spoken.”
The problem I have with said baptisms is the reality of them. I know far too many people who have been baptized because of manipulation and not because of the Spirit. One of them, Eagle from our blog, will be getting baptized, for real this time, in a couple of weeks.I look forward to being there for the event.
The more we talk about this, the more it will be read. I got a call from World Magazine today about this very post. Hopefully, the reality of the manipulation will become more well known and cause some of these guys to play it right.
@ dee: PS The guy from World said to me, “You don’t look like a troublemaker.” So, who thinks I’m a troublemaker?
@ dee:
Dee a troublemaker?!? He must have been entertaining a bad report 😉
@ dee:
That amused me. When I looked at your info with picture you actually looked, well, you know, um, how can I phrase it, OK I’ll say it: ‘normal’. 🙂
Still, if you will insist on hewing down the altars of Baal, you’re bound to be considered a troublemaker by his fans.
Some of the discussion earlier on reminded me of something a former pastor of mine (didn’t have the title, but did do the job!) used to say:
The apostle Paul did NOT say ‘he gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some to be manipulators and entertainers’!
Ken wrote:
If it has to be one or the other, sounds like he got the right one!
Ken
I have lots of Questions – And Doubts – When You write…
“The most obvious passage on teachers is Ephesians” (I’m familiar with Eph 4:11-12)
“And *his gifts were*… some pastors and teachers…” (Which Bible Version? I’m NOT familiar)
“the means to this end surely includes **the gift of teaching,**”
Yes – I’m familiar with this teaching – I was ordained – And told: Amos is this GIFT. Oy Vey 🙁
Pro 29:5 A man that flattereth his neighbour spreadeth a net for his feet.
My Pastor/Teachers – Who taught me: *They* were a Gift from Christ to me…
My Pastor/Teachers – Who taught me: *They* also had *the GIFT of teaching*…
Also “Flattered Me” and told me: Amos was this GIFT from Christ to the church…
Also “Flattered Me” and told me: Amos has this GIFT of teaching…
Wow – Amos was “Special.” – Amos was important to the Kingdom of God – How could I refuse such great wisdom coming from men with “Titles and Position?” Who were a GIFT from Christ to me?
As you can probably tell – I NO longer believe what My Pastor/Teachers taught me. 😉
It’s very humbling – Thinking you’re a special GIFT – And have a special GIFT – And God shows you what you were teaching is wrong, error, doctrines of men, commandments of men, traditions of men, and NOT the Bible.
Eventually – Had to rip up my papers – And become one of His Disciples…
When you believe the lie you start to die…
Thank you Jesus – You are the author of life – New Life…
Ken
I NO longer believe these statements are true?
“Pastor/Teachers” are a GIFT of Christ to the church. (Like I was taught.)
And – “Pastor/Teachers“ have *the GIFT of teaching.*
Here are some questions to think about…
Are – ALL “Pastor/Teachers” a Gift from Christ to the church? – If NOT? – How do we know?
Do – ALL “Pastor/Teachers” have “the GIFT of teaching? – If NOT? – How do we know?
And – How accurate do Pastor/Teachers have to be? – How many errors are they allowed?
Before these Pastor/Teachers are considered a “False Teacher?” A “False Prophet?”
I mean – If pastor/teachers are this GIFT from Christ to the church? And this GIFT teaches lies?
How can we trust jesus – If He gives us a GIFT that is NOT Accurate? Truthful?
There are now thousands and thousands of denominations. And many more Pastor/Teachers.
Most tell you they believe the Bible is the Word of God – And they all disagree about sumptin.
And ALL pastor/teachers will say they – Teach the truth of God’s Word – Yet they ALL disagree.
So what is a poor little sheepie supposed to do? – To find this so-called GIFT from Christ?
1 – Is a Pentecostal pastor/teacher “this GIFT to the church? Teaching Continuationism?
Teaching, speaking in tongues, healing, casting out demons, gifts of the Spirit?
1 – Or, is a Fundamentalist pastor/teacher “this GIFT?” Teaching Cessationaism?
Teaching, the gifts of the Holy Spirit, toungues, healing, have ceased?
Which pastor/teacher is “this Gift from God?” – How do we Know? They dis-agree?
Which one has this “Gift of Teaching?” Which pastor/teacher can I believe?
2 – Is a Reformed pastor/teacher “this GIFT” to the church? Teaching Calvinism?
2 – Or, is the Dutch Reformed pastor/teacher “this GIFT?” Teaching Arminianism?
Which pastor/teacher is “this GIFT from God?” – How do we Know? They dis-agree?
Which one has this “GIFT of Teaching?” Which pastor/teacher can I believe?
3 – Is a Lutheran Pastor “this GIFT” to the church? Teaching infant baptism?
3 – Or, is a Baptist Pastor “this GIFT? Teaching believer baptism?
Which pastor/teacher is “this Gift from God?” – How do we Know? They dis-agree?
Which one has this “Gift of Teaching?” Which pastor/teacher can I believe?
You get the drift – Lot’s of pastor/teachers – Lot’s of different teaching – Lot’s of Error…
Lot’s of Commandments of Men, Doctrines of Men, Traditions of Men…
And NOT the Bible… 😉
Seems most, if not ALL, I’ve met with the “Title” pastor/teacher…
Ain’t the GIFT – As I was told – And – Ain’t got the GIFT of teaching. 😉
Amos, I agree with you. It is a misunderstanding of Paul’s writing, based in part on mis-translation, buoyed by mis-interpretation.
Hester wrote:
“There once was an author named Ayn
Who wrote everything would be fine
If all the Elite
Were packers of meat
And the rest of humanity, swine.”
@ A. Amos Love:
You raise an interesting point, and one not easy to answer. I suppose the gift of teaching ought to comprise making the sense of scripture plain, whereas what you have described is doing the opposite, imposing on it a theological structure, usually with the ending ~ism. Having a conclusion and then going to the bible to select passages that support it, whilst ignoring others that don’t quite fit.
Ken – An Attorney (And I’ve been agreeing with, and enjoying, much of what you have wrtten.)
This is a passionate topic for me – Lot’s of Abuse by those who say there are This GIFT.
I have a different take today on Eph 4:11, since escaping the bondage of…
“Today’s Corrupt Religious System.” – And the Commandments of men, Doctrines of Men…
And the Traditions of Men they teach that “Nullify” the Word of God. Mark 7:13 NIV.
Eph 4:1-2 starts out…
I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord,
beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called,
With *ALL lowliness and meekness,* with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;
In my experience…
I never met anyone, teaching they were This GIFT – Who walked in “lowliness and meekness.”
And – IMO – Everyone who mis-appropriates the “Title/Position” pastor/leader/reverend…
Is already, by example. teaching error, comandments of men, and NOT the Bible. – Because…
NOT one of His Disciples had the “Title/Position” pastor/leader/reverend – leading a church.
What did His Disciples know 2000 years ago? – That, His Body, His Church, misses Today?
In the Bible – can you name anyone who had the “Title/Position” – pastor/leader/reverend?
Jesus, is the only one I find, in the Bible, with the “Title/Position” – Pastor/Leader/Reverend. 🙂
When you believe the lie you start to die…
Ken – An Attorney
And – When this pastor/teacher tells you, he has this GIFT and is this GIFT to the church…
Isn’t he thinking of himself more highly then he should. A No, No. Rom 12:3.
And isn’t he – Speaking of himself, seeking his own Glory. A No, No. John 7:18.
When you teach you’re “Special” it’s difficult to walk in “lowliness and meekness.” Eph 4:1-2.
Very hard to remain humble, elevating and calling yourself, “A Gift of Christ to the church.”
Very hard to remain humble, elevating yourself, telling others, you have *the GIFT of teaching.*
Jesus, as man, humbled Himself, made Himself of NO reputation,
and took on the form of a “Servant.” Phil 2:7-8.
Seems, when you speak of yourself and call yourself, 1 – a pastor/teacher/leader, 2 – a Gift of Christ to the church, with, 3 – the GIFT of teaching? Aren’t you creating quite a “Reputation” for yourself? And “Elevating” yourself? – Yes?
And worst of all – You’re teaching folks – To focus on you – To learn from you – To follow you…
A Mere Fallible Human – And NOT focus on Jesus – Learn from Jesus – Follow Jesus. 🙁
Who called Himself – The “ONE” Shepherd – The “ONE” Teacher – The “ONE” Leader. 😉
If you teach, you are This GIFT, and teach, you have This GIFT, – Does that sound “Humble?”
Humble – dictionary – having or showing a modest or low estimate of ** ones own importance**
And – Are you, Denying yourself? – (What Jesus asks of His Disciples. Mt 16:24 KJV)
Are you, Forsaking ALL? – (What Jesus asks of His Disciples. Lu 14:33 KJV.)
Or, Are you, “Honoring Yourself?” Speaking of yourself? Drawing Disciples after yourself?
Jesus said “If I honour myself, my honour is nothing:” – John 8:54.
Jesus said, “He who speaks of himself seeks his own Glory.” – John 7:18.
Paul said, “Also **of your own selves** shall men arise,
….. speaking perverse things, to **draw away disciples after them.**” Acts 20:29-30.
What is popular is NOT always “Truth.”
What is “Truth” is NOT always popular.
Ken – An Attorney
And, Those who taught me they are “A GIFT of Christ to the church” would skip over Eph 4:7.
Which seems to say – This GIFT is grace, this GIFT is Christ.
Eph 4:7 KJV
But unto *every one of us is given grace* according to the measure of *the GIFT of Christ.*
And, Those who taught me they are “A Gift of Christ to the church” also taught me Eph 4:8
Eph 4:8 -Wherefore he saith, When he “ascended up on high”, he led captivity captive,
“and gave gifts unto men.”
They taught Eph 4:8 is about Eph 4:11, Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors and Teachers.
And they called them “Ascension Gifts.”
BUT – There are other possibilities to “and gave gifts unto men” from Eph 4:8.
How about – “and gave gifts unto men.” – “the Ascension Gifts” – refering to…
1 – Jesus. 2 – the Holy Spirit. 3 – Eternal Life. 4 – Spiritual Gifts. 5 – Saved by Grace.
1 – John 4:10 – Jesus is the GIFT of God.
2 – Acts 2:38 – You can receive the GIFT of the Holy Spirit.
3 – Rom 6:3 – the GIFT of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
4 – 1 Cor 12:1-9 – Talks about “spiritual gifts,” – word of wisdom – word of knowledge – faith – healing – working of miracles – prophecy – discerning of spirits – divers kinds of tongues – interpretation of tongues.
5 – Eph 2:8 – Our being saved by grace through faith – is “the GIFT of God.”
NO thanks – NOT interested in Mere Fallible Humans who call themself “A GIFT from Christ.”
Think I’ll stick with Jesus, and Eternal Life, and… As the GIFT of GOD… 😉
So – What do you think?
Is it possible “and gave gifts unto men?”
Could refer to something other than what we’ve been taught – pastor/teacher?
Jer 50:6
“My people” hath been “lost sheep:”
**their shepherds** have caused them to *go astray,*
1 Pet 2:25
For ye were as *sheep going astray;*
BUT are now returned to the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.
I’m Blest… I’ve returned to the Shepherd and Bishop of my soul…
{{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}
A. Amos Love wrote:
Matt 5:15 … nor does anyone light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house.
John Gill’s commentary on the Bible explains this verse:
“The design of the expression is, that Christ has lighted the candle of the everlasting Gospel, and given gifts to men for the ministration of it, not to be concealed and neglected, or to be used as the servant did his lord’s money, wrap it up in a napkin, and hide it in the earth. Ministers are not, through slothfulness, to neglect the gift that is in them; nor, through fear, to hide their talents, or keep back any part of the Gospel, or cover anything out of sight, which may be profitable to souls…”
A pastor’s giftings may cover a variety of areas and he is responsible to use them as are we.
An Attorney
Yes – Lots of agreement – What you write bears repeating, repeating, repeating…
@ Mon Nov 11, 2013 at 11:32 AM….
“The whole idea of someone “sitting under” another person is based on the erroneous idea of “pastoral authority”. If we are “sitting under” anyone, it is the Holy Spirit.”
@ Mon Nov 11, 2013 at 11:35 AM…
“Any who claim you are “sitting under” their teaching (and thus that they have authority over you) are false teachers, aka wolves in shepherds clothing.”
@ Mon Nov 11, 2013 at 11:57 AM…
“the teacher deserves no special allegiance or respect, beyond what any Christian owes to every other Christian.”
@ Mon Nov 11, 2013 at 01:32 PM…
“The Bible teaches that all Christians are priests, and there is nothing to suggest that some Christians are to be considered more important that others. All of us have a direct relationship with God and our only mediator is Jesus. Therefore, no man (or woman) is to be “over” us or “in authority” over us with regard to our faith.”
@ Mon Nov 11, 2013 at 05:02 PM…
“that is partly the result of bad translation! You should check out the issue of **verbs being converted to nouns,** and **functions to positions** in the translation process.”
@ Mon Nov 11, 2013 at 05:20 PM…
“teaching is a function, not a position,”
“(Jesus taught **against** the Apostles having authority over other Christians!!!!).
“We are all on level ground at the foot of the cross.”
“There are environments and issues where authority is necessary.”
“Church and Christian life is not an environment where “authority” is appropriate.”
Hi Victorious
I always enjoy your comments – and sometimes we even agree. 😉
You write…
“A pastor’s giftings may cover a variety of areas and he is responsible to use them as are we.”
Can you explain more fully?
NOT sure what you mean by “A pastor’s giftings?”
NOT understanding the Quote from John Gill and how it relates to “A pastor’s giftings?”
Because the – “John Gill’s commentary on the Bible” that you quoted
Does NOT mention – pastor/leader/reverends – Or pastor/teachers – Or pastors.
The closest I see him coming to “The Traditions of men” is Gill using the word “Minister.”
Which many today think – a Paid Pastor – is also a “Minister.”
Gill writes…
“Ministers are not, through slothfulness, to neglect the gift that is in them;”
But – It could read…
“**Servants** are not, through slothfulness, to neglect the gift that is in them;”
Because – The word “Minister” in the Bible, is often the Greek – diakano – diakonos – Servant…
In Thayers diakoneo is – to be “a servant,” attendant, domestic, to serve, wait upon.
In the Bible, there are more Greek words translated Minister”
Almost every time , (I haven’t researched every time.)
The word “minister” is used it refers to some kind of “servant” – a low place.
“Minister” in the Bible, never refers to a pastor/teacher/leader, as we see them today.
“Minister” never refers to a Paid, Professional, Pastor, in a Pulpit, Preaching to, People, in Pews.
No – For me – Minister in the Bible is a “Servant.” NOT a pastor.
“**Servants** are not, through slothfulness, to neglect the gift that is in them;”
For me – that GIFT is Christ – It’s Christ in us, “WE,” His Body, His Church, the hope of Glory.
God dwells in “WE,” His Body, His Church… 2 Cor 6:16,
The Father is in “WE,” His Body, His Church… Eph 4:4-6,
Jesus Christ is in “WE,” His Body, His Church… 2 Cor 13:5, Col 1:27, Gal 2:20, Eph 3:17.
The Holy Spirit is in “WE,” His Body, His Church… 1Co 6:19, Rom 8:11.
The Spirit of truth is in “WE,” His Body, His Church… John 14:16-18.
The Kingdom of God is in “WE,” His Body, His Church… Luke 17:20-21.
And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold:
them also I must bring, and they shall “hear My voice; “
and there shall be “ONE” fold, and “ONE” shepherd.
John 10:16
One Voice – One Fold – One Shepherd – One Leader
{{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}
Hello again, A. Amos Love
A. Amos Love wrote:
Of course we’ve engaged in this discussion before and imho are in “near” agreement. You are correct that the areas of serving, ministering, diakonos-ing, shepherding, pastoring, etc. are (to use your words) “a low place.”
BUT, “a low place” doesn’t necessarily mean an inconspicuous place. One can be highly visible and charismatic; very charming and captivating; engaging and humble, and still be considered “low” in terms of placement in the body of Christ. We need only to see Jesus and Paul as examples of these qualities/traits. Both were very prominent in their ministries while at the same time considering themselves servants. Jesus said He came to serve as opposed to being served and Paul viewed himself as the least of the apostles. Yet both had very important tasks? to perform in that service.
And, of course, Jesus is the Chief Shepherd who should be an example for “under” shepherds/servants who emulate His care of the flock. And I am in agreement with you in opposition to servants having authority over other servants. Wade has numerous posts correcting that perception and teaching today in many churches.
From following your beautiful and passionate postings, the area of your disagreement centers primarily on the word “pastor” and the authority many claim to hold. Correct me if I’m wrong. 🙂
Victorious
Yes – We “are in “near” agreement.” 😉 😉 😉
Yes again – “the area of your disagreement centers primarily on the word “pastor”
and the authority many claim to hold.”
I’d add – It’s NOT just the “word” pastor – The problem, as I see it, is also – the “Title” pastor.
Because – NOT one of His Disciples had the “Title/Position” – pastor/leader/reverend.
And Jesus, is the only one, in the Bible, with the “Title/Position” – Shepherd/Leader/Reverend.
Are – Today’s – pastor/leader/reverends – Taking the name of the Lord thy God?
And – Taking that name in Vain? Exodus 20:7… Seems like it to me… Oy Vey!!!
Do a quick word study on “Name” and “Vain” in Exodus 20:7. See what you find… 😉
In my experience with having been in “Leadership.” And…
In my experience with the Title/Position of **Today’s** “Pastor/Leader,”
“Titles” become “Idols” ………………. “Idols” of the heart. Ezek 14:1-11 KJV
“Pastors” become “Masters” ………. A No, No, Mat 23:10 KJV
An “Idol,” an addiction, difficult to lay down, hard to walk away from.
Because, **Today’s** “Titles” come with something “A Little Bit Extra.”
Power, Profit, Prestige, Honor, Glory, Reputation, Recognition, etc…
All “Idols” of the heart. Ezek 14:1-7. All those things Jesus spoke against.
All those things that are highly esteemed among men.
But – Is abomination in the sight of God.
Luke 16:15 KJV
…but God knoweth your hearts:
for that which is highly esteemed among men
(Power, Profit, Prestige, Honor, Glory, Reputation, Recognition.)
is abomination in the sight of God.
Job 32:21-22 KJV
Let me not, I pray you, accept any man’s person,
neither let me give “Flattering Titles” unto man.
For I know not to give “Flattering Titles;”
in so doing my maker would soon take me away.
Victorious
You mention Wade, and he agrees, and has told me, on his blog, as Blest…
http://www.wadeburleson.org/2012/08/it-honors-christ-and-is-biblical-for.html
“pastor is a verb, NOT a noun.” – “Pastor is NOT a “Title” of significance.”
Now, I think Wade is a nice guy, and I like a lot of what he says. – BUT…
When I challenged Wade on his still maintaning – “Titles” of significance – He “Ignored” me…
Blest said… @ Mon Aug 20, 10:19:00 AM 2012
Wade: Thank you for taking the time to give your opinion about pastors.
“The word pastor is a “verb” not a noun.” “Pastor is a calling of service not a title of significance.” “If I tell people that I “pastor,” I am telling them how I serve.”
It sounds like you understand a valuable truth for the body of Christ today but find it hard to put that truth into practice because of being in bondage to the doctrines of men (Col 2:22) and commandments of men (Mk 7:7) the traditions of men (Mk 7:13) that make void the word of God that many today have accepted as truth.
If you say “pastor is a “verb” “Pastor…not a title of significance” then why when I click on your “View my complete profile ” at the top of your blog I see on the about page this “title of significance?”
Occupation – “Lead Pastor” of Emmanuel Enid
https://plus.google.com/104502590427919906366/about
And when I click on this about page you have another “title of significance.”
Since 1992 Wade has been “Senior Pastor” of the Emmanuel Baptist Church.
….Wow – I just checked Wades sight…
Correction – Wade changed “Senior Pastor” here – to “Lead Pastor.”
http://wadeburleson.com/about/
Aren’t “Lead Pastor” and “Senior Pastor” nouns? And “titles of significance?”
Jesus …made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant,
and was made in the likeness of men… he humbled himself… (Phil 2:7-8)
If I’m known as “Lead Pastor” and “Senior Pastor?”
Isn’t that having a reputation?
If I tell people I’m a “Lead Pastor” and “Senior Pastor?
Is that honoring myself? Jn 8:54
Is that “seeking my own glory?” Jn 7:18. Jn 8:50.
———–
And Wade – Dis-continued the conversation.
Does Wade still desire to hold on to “Lead Pastor?” A “title of significance?”
Good morning Victorious
Just noticed…
You were also commenting on the same topic on Wades blog. – Aug 18, 04:34:00 PM 2012
“It Honors Christ and Is Biblical for Women to Teach Men”
http://www.wadeburleson.org/2012/08/it-honors-christ-and-is-biblical-for.html
I commented both as – Blest – and – A. Amos Love.
And…
I won’t fear when the doctrines scary
long as there is Victorious Mary
shedding light with vocabulary
coming straight from the heart of our God – 🙂
I am not a big fan of mega churches. It is impossible to really know the pastor and often the Pastor does not pastor, he CEO’s. That aside, I wonder how many said “I believe” on Pentecost but failed to be baptized. I don’t know many churches that are actively engaged in winning the lost that are 1 to 1 in professions and baptisms. Is that the bar we must jump to be considered “good?” I don’t read that but that kind of thing does not stop some. Are you “okay” if you baptize 80 % of professions of faith. I don’t know what the number is. What was Billy Graham’s numbers. I have seen some with -0- professions of faith in a year and -0- baptisms. I guess that is a better ratio. I guess I had rather see a church actively preaching the gospel with a 1000 professions and 100 baptisms then what I see most self-satisfied churches doing today.