Rich,
I enjoyed reading your testimony the other night (it was an older post of yours) and I'm generally impressed with the thoughtfulness of your posts and am encouraged when I see a young brother, such as yourself, truly committed to the Lord as it seems obvious to me that you are. I pray that God will continue to pour out His grace on you.
Regarding this post, having had fellowship at a Calvery Chapel for a couple of years in the recent past, my advice to you would be to make sure that you speak with the current leadership at the church and lay all your cards on the table. I would discuss with him/them in the most loving and honest way I could what my view of ministry is and what particular differences concerning doctrinal issues that I might have with them and see what their response might be. I'd want to know if I would be expected to keep any of my views to myself. In your particular case, I'd want to know that I would be free to lead worship in the way that I felt the Holy Spirit was leading me to and which I felt was honoring to Christ.
From the little I know about you from reading you here on the forum, my guess would be that they would ask you to restrain yourself in expressing any "opposing" opinions you may have to any of the denominational distinctives that Calvary Chapel holds. And that might be something that you're quite willing to do. But if I remember correctly, you're no longer dispensational in your theology, if you ever were, and I'm pretty sure they would want to squelch anything that even hinted at a different paradigm from theirs. Though I respect their right to believe what they want to, I don't respect their uncompromising attitude towards all things non-dispensational. I understand it, I just don't agree with. It doesn't promote the kind of unity that Jesus calls us to. That is my impression of the movement, anyway.
But God's best to you, brother.
In Christ,
l2j
To Affiliate or Not to Affiliate?
-
look2jesus
- Posts: 180
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 10:18 pm
- Location: Mesa, Arizona
Re: To Affiliate or Not to Affiliate?
And it is my prayer that your love may abound more and more, with knowlege and discernment...Philippians 1:9 ESV
-
DanielGracely
- Posts: 115
- Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 9:43 pm
Re: To Affiliate or Not to Affiliate?
Hi Rich,
I'm hoping you can draw some lessons from my own experience in some way. Over the years I was a worship team leader in a few churches and played the piano. I suppose this was a natural ministry for me because of my background (B.A. and M.A. in music composition). [BTW, like you, I live in N.J.] Some of the questions you ask are similar to ones I asked myself in the past. I have been out of traditional church now for about 2-1/2 years. These days I am seeking a house church or something larger, but one embracing spiritual gifts. There are no such fellowships I know of in my area, at least not without traveling a significant distance.
The conclusions I have come to about church have led me to a certain peace, yet also sadness. The latter is because I now feel more or less severed from the Evangelical church 'fellowship'. I think this is all but inevitable for the one who comes to no longer embrace the standard format--what some have called “the one man show,” i.e. the pastor dominated worship service. However, I tried justifying that format for some time. For example, when I first began attending my last church, I told myself the format would never really change (which it hasn’t, and almost certainly will not), but that if I wanted my music to have an influence in people’s lives I would need to accept the status quo. But I was okay with that because I was okay with the preaching at the time, and I thought that was reason enough to attend. So I fell in with how things were done there, and people came to know me as a musician. But most never knew me as a person with one of the spiritual gifts mentioned in 1 Cor., such as someone with the utterance of knowledge, which is the particular gift I believe I have. [This merely means I have a relative propensity (compared to others) for critical thought and dividing the Scriptures accurately. I realize that’s a self-assessment, but that’s the best I can do here.] BTW having a gift for the utterance of knowledge does not mean one has the teaching gift, nor even the gift for the utterance of wisdom, nor of faith, etc.
Several years later, I began to feel very conflicted at this church, because all three of its senior pastors did not agree with an anti-Calvinistic book I wrote, though as far as I know none of them read much of it. However, they did know I stood against the doctrine of divine, exhaustive determinism, which they accepted. They were very diplomatic about any discussion with me about my ideas, but it remained clear to me that if they did not agree with my position, then obviously they couldn’t believe I had the gift of the utterance of knowledge. Yet the main sermon-giver among the pastors believed (as stated in a Jan. 2007 sermon) that the gift of proclamation and knowledge were still relevant for the church. However, I never saw any venue for these gifts in the church, nor when I asked one particular elder to broach this subject to the elders did I receive satisfaction. Incidentally, the problem of giftedness is an obvious one in churches. Ask any congregant about who has the pastoral gift, and he or she will respond with the pastor’s name. But ask who in the congregation has the gift of the utterance of knowledge or of the utterance of wisdom or of faith, and be prepared for a blank stare, or else for hearing the pastor’s name repeated.
Long story short, I left the church. (At that point my wife and I had been through about 3 churches in 15 years.) At my exit interview with one of the pastors I drew an analogy between church and me with the Democratic Party and Ronald Reagan. When Reagan was asked why he left the Democratic Party, he replied, “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party. It left me.” That' s what I mean when I say I came to feel severed from the 'fellowship'.
Here are some of my conclusions from my time in churches as a musician and amateur theologian. Please keep in mind these conclusions are generalizations only:
(1)Churches do not change. (At least one person here has stated this same thing, and I agree.)
(2)Churches accept an unbiblical model for the formal worship service. Unfortunately, people in churches capitulate their gifts to the pastor, who is assumed to have most or all of the pertinent gifts. He is generally assumed to be the most wise, the most knowledgeable, the one whose teaching matters most, the one gifted in pastoring, the greatest in faith, etc. In my opinion this is a misguided view. Paul in 1 Corinthians implies that if one has gift A, he is not supreme in gift B, C, or D, etc., in any congregation of any real size. “To one is given ___, to another is given ___.” This is so the body of Christ might be interdependent upon, not independent of, one another.
(3)Christians are not taught that Paul’s discussion of spiritual gifts in 1 Cor. 12-14 is in the context of the formal worship service, nor that all Christians are expected to share, not necessarily every week, but at least routinely. Despite the plethora of semons I heard from pastors about the "Body," I never remember that fact brought out.
(4) Salaried positions as a general rule is unbiblical for an established local church.
(5) The “comely gift” is the one people pay for and the one for which pulpit search committees are created, namely, the “pastoral gift”. If you have an uncomely gift, it is held in low regard by the congregation. IMO the gift of the utterance of knowledge is among the uncomely gifts. Congregants tend to regard this gift with suspicion and see it as divisive, if or when it is expressed. Generally, it remains marginalized within the church.
(6) The Church tends to wrongly define “fellowship” as what they experience Sunday morning. But, in fact, the phrase in Hebrews, “not forsaking the assembly,” is preceded by the phrase “exhorting one another,” thus contextualizing what true fellowship really is. Where or when has exhorting one another ever been a part of many Evangelical churches? I have rarely, if ever, been in a traditional Evangelical church and seen this one-anothering practiced during the formal worship service. Yet such a practice would surely lead to a greater maturity among believers, since we learn faith best from the one gifted in faith, wisdom from the wisest, etc. Also, Paul said if one who was unlearned or was an unbeliever came into the assembly, he should be convicted by all. Is the unbeliever who attends your church likely to be convicted by ALL? Or by just the pastor, since he (presumably) alone does the exhorting?
(7) I merely enable a dysfunctional and unbiblical model of the formal worship service when I knowingly participate in allowing one person, the “pastor”, to routinely usurp Body giftedness. However, the pastor is not the only one at fault here. Congregants themselves share in the blame, having capitulated their gifts to one or a few men, and so have lost their voice along with any real possibility for connection. For God has designed that we feel connection through use of our spiritual gift. At the last church I attended there were many people who complained about not feeling connected. The 'answer' was to add a half hour before the Sunday School for people to achieve some kind of horizontal connection. This was not a bad thing per se, but obviously it had nothing to do with spiritual giftedness.
Much more could be said. My own feeling these days is that I cannot go on ignoring Paul’s teaching on the gifts, which he claimed at the end of 1 Cor. 14 was Christ’s own view, i.e., that if one ignores the one-anothering aspect of all believers in the congregation, he himself is ignored by Christ [i.e., "If anyone ignores, he is ignored."]. That is, Christ doesn't recognize the one who exercises his gift at the expense of others.
Why on this blog am I saying all this? Perhaps it's too obvious to mention, but it's because I have no voice in the local church, and so am relegated to venues like the comments section of this blog. My taking the path away from church (as it exists) has meant a loss of music ministry for me. On the other hand I now feel I understand what church is supposed to be about. It's about one-anothering until we all grow into maturity in the faith. That's what I need in a fellowship, and that's what I'm still looking for.
I'm hoping you can draw some lessons from my own experience in some way. Over the years I was a worship team leader in a few churches and played the piano. I suppose this was a natural ministry for me because of my background (B.A. and M.A. in music composition). [BTW, like you, I live in N.J.] Some of the questions you ask are similar to ones I asked myself in the past. I have been out of traditional church now for about 2-1/2 years. These days I am seeking a house church or something larger, but one embracing spiritual gifts. There are no such fellowships I know of in my area, at least not without traveling a significant distance.
The conclusions I have come to about church have led me to a certain peace, yet also sadness. The latter is because I now feel more or less severed from the Evangelical church 'fellowship'. I think this is all but inevitable for the one who comes to no longer embrace the standard format--what some have called “the one man show,” i.e. the pastor dominated worship service. However, I tried justifying that format for some time. For example, when I first began attending my last church, I told myself the format would never really change (which it hasn’t, and almost certainly will not), but that if I wanted my music to have an influence in people’s lives I would need to accept the status quo. But I was okay with that because I was okay with the preaching at the time, and I thought that was reason enough to attend. So I fell in with how things were done there, and people came to know me as a musician. But most never knew me as a person with one of the spiritual gifts mentioned in 1 Cor., such as someone with the utterance of knowledge, which is the particular gift I believe I have. [This merely means I have a relative propensity (compared to others) for critical thought and dividing the Scriptures accurately. I realize that’s a self-assessment, but that’s the best I can do here.] BTW having a gift for the utterance of knowledge does not mean one has the teaching gift, nor even the gift for the utterance of wisdom, nor of faith, etc.
Several years later, I began to feel very conflicted at this church, because all three of its senior pastors did not agree with an anti-Calvinistic book I wrote, though as far as I know none of them read much of it. However, they did know I stood against the doctrine of divine, exhaustive determinism, which they accepted. They were very diplomatic about any discussion with me about my ideas, but it remained clear to me that if they did not agree with my position, then obviously they couldn’t believe I had the gift of the utterance of knowledge. Yet the main sermon-giver among the pastors believed (as stated in a Jan. 2007 sermon) that the gift of proclamation and knowledge were still relevant for the church. However, I never saw any venue for these gifts in the church, nor when I asked one particular elder to broach this subject to the elders did I receive satisfaction. Incidentally, the problem of giftedness is an obvious one in churches. Ask any congregant about who has the pastoral gift, and he or she will respond with the pastor’s name. But ask who in the congregation has the gift of the utterance of knowledge or of the utterance of wisdom or of faith, and be prepared for a blank stare, or else for hearing the pastor’s name repeated.
Long story short, I left the church. (At that point my wife and I had been through about 3 churches in 15 years.) At my exit interview with one of the pastors I drew an analogy between church and me with the Democratic Party and Ronald Reagan. When Reagan was asked why he left the Democratic Party, he replied, “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party. It left me.” That' s what I mean when I say I came to feel severed from the 'fellowship'.
Here are some of my conclusions from my time in churches as a musician and amateur theologian. Please keep in mind these conclusions are generalizations only:
(1)Churches do not change. (At least one person here has stated this same thing, and I agree.)
(2)Churches accept an unbiblical model for the formal worship service. Unfortunately, people in churches capitulate their gifts to the pastor, who is assumed to have most or all of the pertinent gifts. He is generally assumed to be the most wise, the most knowledgeable, the one whose teaching matters most, the one gifted in pastoring, the greatest in faith, etc. In my opinion this is a misguided view. Paul in 1 Corinthians implies that if one has gift A, he is not supreme in gift B, C, or D, etc., in any congregation of any real size. “To one is given ___, to another is given ___.” This is so the body of Christ might be interdependent upon, not independent of, one another.
(3)Christians are not taught that Paul’s discussion of spiritual gifts in 1 Cor. 12-14 is in the context of the formal worship service, nor that all Christians are expected to share, not necessarily every week, but at least routinely. Despite the plethora of semons I heard from pastors about the "Body," I never remember that fact brought out.
(4) Salaried positions as a general rule is unbiblical for an established local church.
(5) The “comely gift” is the one people pay for and the one for which pulpit search committees are created, namely, the “pastoral gift”. If you have an uncomely gift, it is held in low regard by the congregation. IMO the gift of the utterance of knowledge is among the uncomely gifts. Congregants tend to regard this gift with suspicion and see it as divisive, if or when it is expressed. Generally, it remains marginalized within the church.
(6) The Church tends to wrongly define “fellowship” as what they experience Sunday morning. But, in fact, the phrase in Hebrews, “not forsaking the assembly,” is preceded by the phrase “exhorting one another,” thus contextualizing what true fellowship really is. Where or when has exhorting one another ever been a part of many Evangelical churches? I have rarely, if ever, been in a traditional Evangelical church and seen this one-anothering practiced during the formal worship service. Yet such a practice would surely lead to a greater maturity among believers, since we learn faith best from the one gifted in faith, wisdom from the wisest, etc. Also, Paul said if one who was unlearned or was an unbeliever came into the assembly, he should be convicted by all. Is the unbeliever who attends your church likely to be convicted by ALL? Or by just the pastor, since he (presumably) alone does the exhorting?
(7) I merely enable a dysfunctional and unbiblical model of the formal worship service when I knowingly participate in allowing one person, the “pastor”, to routinely usurp Body giftedness. However, the pastor is not the only one at fault here. Congregants themselves share in the blame, having capitulated their gifts to one or a few men, and so have lost their voice along with any real possibility for connection. For God has designed that we feel connection through use of our spiritual gift. At the last church I attended there were many people who complained about not feeling connected. The 'answer' was to add a half hour before the Sunday School for people to achieve some kind of horizontal connection. This was not a bad thing per se, but obviously it had nothing to do with spiritual giftedness.
Much more could be said. My own feeling these days is that I cannot go on ignoring Paul’s teaching on the gifts, which he claimed at the end of 1 Cor. 14 was Christ’s own view, i.e., that if one ignores the one-anothering aspect of all believers in the congregation, he himself is ignored by Christ [i.e., "If anyone ignores, he is ignored."]. That is, Christ doesn't recognize the one who exercises his gift at the expense of others.
Why on this blog am I saying all this? Perhaps it's too obvious to mention, but it's because I have no voice in the local church, and so am relegated to venues like the comments section of this blog. My taking the path away from church (as it exists) has meant a loss of music ministry for me. On the other hand I now feel I understand what church is supposed to be about. It's about one-anothering until we all grow into maturity in the faith. That's what I need in a fellowship, and that's what I'm still looking for.
Re: To Affiliate or Not to Affiliate?
Hi Rich,
There are alot of things to address, and I think you are wise to at least seriously weigh the options and pray about it. I don't think there's any inherent danger in uniting with an institutional church as long as the organization understands that it is simply part of THE church. No church is perfect b/c churches are ultimately made up of humans, and I do think that God can work powerfully through local churches even in spite of flaws. As for the validity of the sinner's prayer, I see Luke 18 as a scriptural validation of the sinner's prayer as the path to justification. If the prayer is earnest, it will lead to a regeneration that is evidenced by spiritual fruit.
Jeff
There are alot of things to address, and I think you are wise to at least seriously weigh the options and pray about it. I don't think there's any inherent danger in uniting with an institutional church as long as the organization understands that it is simply part of THE church. No church is perfect b/c churches are ultimately made up of humans, and I do think that God can work powerfully through local churches even in spite of flaws. As for the validity of the sinner's prayer, I see Luke 18 as a scriptural validation of the sinner's prayer as the path to justification. If the prayer is earnest, it will lead to a regeneration that is evidenced by spiritual fruit.
Jeff
Re: To Affiliate or Not to Affiliate?
I agree about the sinner's prayer in Luke 18. However, that prayer seemed to be spontaneous, heartfelt and un-coached. I think the problem comes in when we teach people to say such words, and then tell them they have thereby gotten themselves saved. Jesus did not give this parable in order to teach a method of conversion, but I think it has become that in many churches. We all know that one can say the right words, and have no true repentance, surrender or intention of following Christ.
Re: To Affiliate or Not to Affiliate?
Hi Steve and Jeff,
It is difficult for me to see any validation of the "sinner's prayer" as a conversion ritual from the story cited in Luke 18. It seems to me that the point of the story is about pride vs. humility and trust in a merciful God. We know nothing of the tax-gather's state prior to his coming to the temple, and whether this was a conversion or not. It could just as well have been an occasion of confession, just as any believer might do. Seems to me the Pharisee was the one who was lost.
The problem with the sinner's prayer as a conversion ritual is that it has no precedence in any conversion narrative in scripture and the idea is taught nowhere in the scriptures. It is well known to be an invention in the not too distant past, a technique of the revivalists, along with alter calls, mourner's benches, signing a pledge card, etc., and worst of all, "everybody close your eyes and bow your heads, and if you want to get saved, raise your hand". Must not get embarrassed, you know.
Homer
It is difficult for me to see any validation of the "sinner's prayer" as a conversion ritual from the story cited in Luke 18. It seems to me that the point of the story is about pride vs. humility and trust in a merciful God. We know nothing of the tax-gather's state prior to his coming to the temple, and whether this was a conversion or not. It could just as well have been an occasion of confession, just as any believer might do. Seems to me the Pharisee was the one who was lost.
The problem with the sinner's prayer as a conversion ritual is that it has no precedence in any conversion narrative in scripture and the idea is taught nowhere in the scriptures. It is well known to be an invention in the not too distant past, a technique of the revivalists, along with alter calls, mourner's benches, signing a pledge card, etc., and worst of all, "everybody close your eyes and bow your heads, and if you want to get saved, raise your hand". Must not get embarrassed, you know.
Homer
-
RICHinCHRIST
- Posts: 361
- Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 11:27 am
- Location: New Jersey
- Contact:
Re: To Affiliate or Not to Affiliate?
The biggest danger I find in the sinner's prayer is that many pastors are usurping the place only Christ deserves between God and men. Perhaps they don't realize that they are actually mediating between God and other people.
I knew an evangelist in Boston who, instead of leading someone in a sinner's prayer, would ask them to pray to God in their own words. He was able to discern, oftentimes, whether the person was genuine by the content of their prayer. If they just prayed for good health, a better life, etc. etc. it was then apparent that they didn't understand the message as thoroughly as they should have. Then he would begin at square one again, describing repentance and faith.
In my opinion, I think it would just be wiser to tell people to cry out to Jesus Christ rather than to come in front a church and say a formula, or even just raise their hand or something like that. If someone is willing to call out to Jesus, the Spirit of God can testify to them if they're a child of God or not. They don't need to be told it by a pamphlet.
At least that was my experience.. I called out to Jesus in repentance by myself in my room and was born again. The Spirit eventually led me to places where there were other Spirit-filled people, but no one needed to lead me in any formula. I just knew I needed God and I cried out to Him. Might as well just go straight to Him rather than through a man!
I knew an evangelist in Boston who, instead of leading someone in a sinner's prayer, would ask them to pray to God in their own words. He was able to discern, oftentimes, whether the person was genuine by the content of their prayer. If they just prayed for good health, a better life, etc. etc. it was then apparent that they didn't understand the message as thoroughly as they should have. Then he would begin at square one again, describing repentance and faith.
In my opinion, I think it would just be wiser to tell people to cry out to Jesus Christ rather than to come in front a church and say a formula, or even just raise their hand or something like that. If someone is willing to call out to Jesus, the Spirit of God can testify to them if they're a child of God or not. They don't need to be told it by a pamphlet.
At least that was my experience.. I called out to Jesus in repentance by myself in my room and was born again. The Spirit eventually led me to places where there were other Spirit-filled people, but no one needed to lead me in any formula. I just knew I needed God and I cried out to Him. Might as well just go straight to Him rather than through a man!
Re: To Affiliate or Not to Affiliate?
Amen Brother.steve wrote:I agree about the sinner's prayer in Luke 18. However, that prayer seemed to be spontaneous, heartfelt and un-coached. I think the problem comes in when we teach people to say such words, and then tell them they have thereby gotten themselves saved. Jesus did not give this parable in order to teach a method of conversion, but I think it has become that in many churches. We all know that one can say the right words, and have no true repentance, surrender or intention of following Christ.
Re: To Affiliate or Not to Affiliate?
That's actually a great idea that the evangelist had, I like that.RICHinCHRIST wrote:The biggest danger I find in the sinner's prayer is that many pastors are usurping the place only Christ deserves between God and men. Perhaps they don't realize that they are actually mediating between God and other people.
I knew an evangelist in Boston who, instead of leading someone in a sinner's prayer, would ask them to pray to God in their own words. He was able to discern, oftentimes, whether the person was genuine by the content of their prayer. If they just prayed for good health, a better life, etc. etc. it was then apparent that they didn't understand the message as thoroughly as they should have. Then he would begin at square one again, describing repentance and faith.
In my opinion, I think it would just be wiser to tell people to cry out to Jesus Christ rather than to come in front a church and say a formula, or even just raise their hand or something like that. If someone is willing to call out to Jesus, the Spirit of God can testify to them if they're a child of God or not. They don't need to be told it by a pamphlet.
At least that was my experience.. I called out to Jesus in repentance by myself in my room and was born again. The Spirit eventually led me to places where there were other Spirit-filled people, but no one needed to lead me in any formula. I just knew I needed God and I cried out to Him. Might as well just go straight to Him rather than through a man!
-
RICHinCHRIST
- Posts: 361
- Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 11:27 am
- Location: New Jersey
- Contact:
Re: To Affiliate or Not to Affiliate?
I heard once that A.W. Tozer read Shakespeare on his knees. It'd be good to follow His example!
Hey everyone,
I was really blessed by the following set of lectures from a man I respect.
It's called: "Christian Maturity" by Zac Poonen.
http://www.cfcindia.com/web/mainpages/t ... n_Maturity
Hey everyone,
I was really blessed by the following set of lectures from a man I respect.
It's called: "Christian Maturity" by Zac Poonen.
http://www.cfcindia.com/web/mainpages/t ... n_Maturity
-
Candlepower
- Posts: 239
- Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 3:26 pm
- Location: Missouri
Re: To Affiliate or Not to Affiliate?
By the number of negatives you listed, dear brother, it seems you may have answered your own question. And your uneasiness about the situation is not unfounded. You seem to be using good Scriptural sense in your evaluation.