The Rise of Extreme Tolerance

Monday, February 18th, 2013

Many evangelicals once known for a very prudent and biblical approach to doctrine are fast becoming as doctrinally clueless as the unchurched people they are so keen to please. At least three decades of deliberately downplaying doctrine and discernment in order to attract the unchurched has filled many once-sound churches with people who utterly lack any ability to differentiate the very worst fast doctrines from truth. I constantly encounter evangelical church members who are at a loss to answer the most profound errors they hear from cultists, unorthodox media preachers, or other sources of false doctrine.

In the church today, there is a growing reluctance to take a definitive stand on any issue. Discernment is frankly not very welcome in a culture like ours. In fact, the postmodern perspective is more than merely hostile to discernment; it is practically the polar opposite. Think about it: pronouncing anything “true” and calling its antithesis “error” is a breach of postmodernism’s one last impregnable dogma. That is why to a postmodernist nothing is more uncouth than voicing strong opinions on spiritual, moral, or ethical matters. People are expected to hold their most important convictions with as much slack as possible. Certainty about anything is out of the question, and all who refuse to equivocate on any point of principle or doctrine are therefore automatically labeled too narrow. Zeal for the truth has become politically incorrect. There is actually zero tolerance for biblical discernment in a “tolerant” climate like that.
In the secular realm, postmodernism’s extreme tolerance has been foisted on an unsuspecting public by the entertainment media for several decades. A plethora of talk shows on daily television have led the way. Phil Donahue established the format. Jerry Springer took it to ridiculous extremes. And Oprah made it seem somewhat respectable and refined. Shows like these remind viewers daily not to be too opinionated-and they do it by parading in front of their audiences the most bizarre and extreme advocates of every radical “alternative lifestyle” imaginable. We are not supposed to be shocked or notice the overtly self-destructive nature of so many aberrant subcultures. The point is to broaden our minds and raise our level of tolerance. And if you do criticize another person’s value system, it cannot be on biblical grounds. Anyone who cites religious beliefs as a reason to reject another person’s way of life is automatically viewed with the same contempt that used to be reserved for out-and-out religious heretics. The culture around us has declared war on all biblical standards.
Some Christians unwittingly began following suit several years ago. That has opened the door for a whole generation in the church to embrace postmodern relativism openly and deliberately. They don’t want the truth presented with stark black-and-white clarity anymore. They prefer having issues of right and wrong, true and false, good and bad deliberately painted in shades of gray. We have reached a point where the typical churchgoer today assumes that is the proper way of understanding truth. Any degree of certainty has begun to sound offensive to people’s postmodernized ears.
One young pastor told me he didn’t like the authoritarian implications of the word preaching. He said he preferred to speak of his pulpit ministry as “sharing” with his people. He didn’t last long in ministry, of course. But sadly, his comments probably reflect the prevailing mood in the church today.
D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones noticed the same trend several decades ago. His marvelous book Preaching and Preachers began by noting that modern society was becoming uncomfortable with the whole idea of “preaching”:

A new idea has crept in with regard to preaching, and it has taken various forms. A most significant one was that people began to talk about the “address” in the service instead of the sermon. That in itself was indicative of a subtle change. An “address.” No longer the sermon, but an “address” or perhaps even a lecture…what is needed is a chat, a fireside chat, quiet talks, and so on!1

Lloyd-Jones was simply noticing one of the subtle harbingers of postmodernism’s contempt for clarity and authority. A problem that existed in embryonic form in his era is now a full-grown monster.
At the “Emergent Convention” in 2004, a gathering of some eleven hundred leaders in the Emerging Church movement, Doug Pagitt, pastor of Solomon’s Porch (an Emergent community in Minneapolis), told the gathering, “Preaching is broken.” He suggests that a completely open conversation where all participants are seen as equals is better suited to a postmodern culture. “Why do I get to speak for 30 minutes and you don’t?” he asked. “A sermon is often a violent act,” he declared. “It’s violence toward the will of the people who have to sit there and take it.”2
Rudy Carrasco, a Pasadena-based Emergent pastor, agreed that preaching is simply too one-sided, too authoritative, and too rigid for postmodern times. “Every day, every week, there’s stuff that pops up in life, and it’s not resolved, just crazy and confusing and painful. When people come across with three answers, and they know everything, and they have this iron sheen about them, I’m turned off. Period. I’m just turned off. And I think that’s not unique to me.”3
Many in the church, caught up in the spirit of the age, think Christians should never take an uncompromising stand, should never argue about anything. We’re not supposed to engage in polemics. I hear this frequently: “Why don’t you just state the truth in positive terms and ignore the view you disagree with? Why not steer clear of controversy, forget the negatives, and present everything affirmatively?”
That ethos is why it is no longer permissible to deal with biblical issues in a straightforward and uncompromising fashion. Those who dare to take an unpopular stand, declare truth in a definitive way-or worst of all, express disagreement with someone else’s teaching-will inevitably be marked as troublesome. Compromise has become a virtue while devotion to truth has become offensive.
But many of the issues being compromised within the evangelical movement today are not questionable. Scripture speaks very clearly against homosexuality, for example. The Christian position on adultery is not at all vague. The question of whether a believer ought to marry an unbeliever is spelled out with perfect clarity. Scripture quite plainly forbids any Christian to take another Christian to court. Selfishness and pride are explicitly identified as sins. These are not gray areas. There is no room for compromise here.
Nevertheless, I constantly hear every one of those issues treated as a gray area-on Christian radio, on Christian television, and in Christian literature. People want all such matters to be negotiable. And too many Christian leaders willingly oblige. They hesitate to speak with authority on matters where Scripture is plain. The lines of distinction between truth and error, wisdom and foolishness, church and world are being systematically obliterated by such means.
The world needs Christians who embrace an antithetical worldview, a biblical mindset that answers questions of truth and morality in terms of black and white. Why? Because there is no salvation without absolute, unshakeable truth. Compromising, changing, tolerant opinions don’t provide answers for the “crazy and confusing and painful” issues that confront pastor Carrasco every day. Only truth saves and sanctifies and gives hope.
What’s needed today is a generation of men and women who will take a stand on biblical truth. People like that fear the Lord, not men, and will find power and courage from the Lord to uphold His truth in an age of extreme tolerance.
Adapted from The Truth War, © 2007 by John MacArthur

Social Networking – A Loaded Weapon (Part 1)

Monday, April 30th, 2012

With the rise of social networking (Twitter, Facebook, blogging sites, etc.), we’re provided outlets for expending each and every thought, idea, and/or belief that pops into our minds. At any moment, we are able to permanently etch a thought into the cyber world that can be seen globally by every eye on the web. Smart Phones have certainly augmented this phenomenon. Now, all of our favorites networking sites are right at our finger tips at all times. Convenient? Certainly. However, the danger has the potential to far outweigh the expediency.

My family hails from the south, so naturally we own guns. We like to hunt (and secure our borders with a little home defense). At a relatively young age, my brother and I were taught how to handle a rifle by my dad in addition to hunters’ education courses. Everything that entered our ears revolved around safety – how to load the gun, how to hold the gun, how to aim the gun, how to shoot it, pointing the gun up or down, the safety mechanisms on the guns, etc..  When I was in the fifth grade, there was one particular occasion on a hunt with my dad and brother on which, while carrying a .22 caliber rifle and walking a few feet behind them,  I about gave my elders a heart attack when my rifle suddenly went off by accident. However, because it had been engrained within me to point the rifle towards the ground, no one was injured (except my pride). My dad was startled and upset with me because I should have had my safety on. The event certainly gave me a renewed wake up call to the importance of utilizing safety precautions – they are in place to prevent serious injury or death.

Many adults have not even learned the necessity of taking these steps! When I was in college (which is late-adolescence these days) I began blogging on Facebook… I was an idiot. I blabbered off about theological hot topics and social issues… I failed to tame my tongue and it came back to bite me in the butt, and in some ways of which I’m probably unaware (my reputation). Even to this day, I struggle with hypocrisy in this arena. Because of this, I have to take extra precautionary steps. For example, with my Twitter account, I’ve recently begun filtering some of my tweets through a trusted individual before I publish them.

We need to think before tweeting/texting/updating a status. Rather than telling the Facebook world about the break up, or how you really hate life right now, or sending ambiguous messages about not liking people who (fill in the blank) that are obviously directed towards certain individuals – we should talk to God; we should talk to Christian elders; we should talk to a journal. We should learn to channel those emotions in places where the tongue can’t get us into trouble.

The heart is deceitfully wicked and can’t be trusted (Jer 17:9). The tongue is a restless evil and full of deadly poison (Jas 3:8). Whoever learns to keep his/her words few and practices discernment in communication keeps him/herself out of trouble (Prov. 21:23). May we impart this wisdom in the lives of teenagers as well as practice it in our own lives. After all, if we fail to do this, according to James our religion is worthless (Jas 1:26).

The problem isn’t the advancement of technology. The problem is man’s sinfulness. Technology isn’t going anywhere, and social networking will only grow more convenient. The solution, despite Great-Grandpappy Delbert’s belief, isn’t to burn all of the iPhones and computers in the world… Instead, let’s impart biblical wisdom – which begins with the fear of God – and discernment to ourselves and the young people with whom we’ve been entrusted. In both wisdom and discernment, we find the Gospel. True wisdom is carrying out righteousness and it can only be obtained by those who fear God by putting their trust in the life, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Instead of giving young adolescents a loaded gun, let’s give them the book of Proverbs and teach them wisdom. So, in the words of one of my professors at Southern, Gary Almon, “The book of Proverbs is like a bag of nails. If you wanna nail your kids to Jesus – give ’em wisdom.” Wisdom is the sheath that covers a double-edged sword. It is the strength to harness the tongue. But while we learn to master wisdom, it is equally prudent to take practical steps towards inhibiting the tongue to organize damage. Let’s encourage wisdom to stop posting personal issues, complaints, vendettas, slanderous or potentially harmful comments on Facebook and Twitter. This isn’t a call to replace them with “Christian-ese” comments (I’m speaking to myself as well…). Let’s heed the call from Ecclesiastes 5:2 – “Be not rash with your mouth, nor let your heart be hasty to utter a word before God, for God is in heaven and you are on earth. Therefore let your words be few.”

Social Networking – A Loaded Weapon (Part 2)

Monday, April 30th, 2012

THE CHURCH AND EFFEMINACY

Monday, April 30th, 2012

THE CHURCH AND EFFEMINACY
Jarred, Jay and Poker Boyd
Many of us are familiar with the books, blogs, articles and conferences addressing the issue of what it means to be a man. From John Piper and Wayne Grudem’s “Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood”, to movies like “Courageous”, as well as messages like Mark Driscoll’s infamous “Marriage & Men” Sermon– most of us have heard the bell sounding for men to rise up. Even the popular Christian rap group, featuring Lecrae – 116 Clique – recently released an album and tour called “Man Up”. The general consensus for defining biblical manhood seems to be unanimous – taking responsibility and exemplifying leadership. “As defined in the Bible, manhood is a functional reality, demonstrated in a man’s fulfillment of responsibility and leadership (Mohler, Marks of Manhood).”

No argument there. After all, the bible has made it plain that men should be working towards or taking many responsibilities and leadership duties ranging from family, occupation, church, community, etc. This is obviously a much needed challenge from authors, artists, pastors, and moviemakers. However, I would like to address an issue that tends to be avoided and even downplayed in the subject of biblical manhood. There seems to be a growing number of effeminate men within our Christian culture. This article is intended as a discussion starter and nudge to action concerning the problem of effeminacy within the church as well as a biblical response through discipleship.

Definition: ef·fem·i·nate/iˈfemənit/ Adjective: derogatory. (of a man) Having or showing characteristics regarded as typical of a woman; unmanly. (Oxford Dictionary)

A Sad Reality

One young youth leader recently shared with me that he grew up in an average youth group. Yet during his seven years there he observed no less than three guys who were regular attendees, yet accepted for who they were – effeminate teenage guys. They displayed all of the common characteristics of effeminate men that we listed above. Even the girls accepted them as having more in common with them than the guys did – allowing them to be part of the girl talk and inner-circle joking that would have been out of bounds for any other guy. Though heckled a bit at school, these guys found a safe haven once they escaped to the youth group and church activities. The ladies inadvertently enabled this feminine behavior by looking past their feminine-like displays and seeing them as some sort of soft and safe alternative. Although the guys put much effort into accepting them, they naturally ended up avoiding them many times because of their feelings of discomfort. Predictably, they sometimes wondered if they were unaccepting and too judgmental. Sure, everyone knew this behavior was odd, but if anyone dare brought the matter up in conversation, the guilt banner would be waved. As a result, many young men have been taught to simply realize that some guys are gentler and just don’t enjoy the typical guy stuff. Less than two years into college, all three of these individuals ended up coming out of the closet to choose homosexuality. One of them even became president of the homosexual club of his college.

The Factors of Instigation

It’s sad to know that these individuals were never intentionally discipled and shown true masculinity and taught biblical manhood. One of the great dangers at stake here is the reality that, far too often, genuinely effeminate boys begin to believe they are homosexual simply because of their feminine tendencies. According to Dr. Paul Cameron of the Family Research Institute, there are four influences that (can lead to) homosexual desires – homosexual experience, family abnormality, unusual sexual experience (particularly in childhood), and cultural influences. Culture has certainly teamed up with the postmodern movement to “do what makes you feel happy.” And for the minority of effeminate males in our culture – this means often wrongly concluding that they were born homosexual because of their feminine tendencies. We want to encourage church leadership to address biblical masculinity so as to assist young men towards biblical masculinity and away from the choice of the effeminate and potential progression towards a homosexual lifestyle.

The Heterosexual Secret

There is a phrase known by many as “The heterosexual secret”. This is the term given to that uncomfortable feeling most every heterosexual male experiences at least to some degree while in the presence of effeminate men. The reason most men feel uncomfortable around effeminate guys is because it is unnatural and as such SHOULD make us uncomfortable. It isn’t innocent or trendy. It’s inappropriate and from a leadership standpoint, it sets a terrible example of biblical masculinity to the boys and teenagers within our churches – much less the lost world observing us. Still, some might consider this to be the concern of a homophobe, with the idea of real masculinity being completely regional, cultural, and/or subjective.

A growing number of biblically conservative young leaders are faced with the reality of serving on staff alongside those affected and even embracing the effeminate movement. In cases such as this, there is often little concern for sexual orientation due to the fact that they are married with families and seem well liked. Those who know these ministers agree that they seem to fit the definition provided above by Dr. Mohler for “Biblical manhood” because they take responsibility and roles of leadership within their homes and the church. Indeed, many are said to display true godliness and Christ-centered lifestyles. The issue lies in the example they provide for impressionable young people who are laboring over gender issues and in need of examples of masculine leadership. The thought of these effeminate leaders preaching and teaching young men who are struggling with gender issues, is quite honestly concerning. This scenario could promote the wrong assumption within these young men that it is acceptable and even lauded to be a Christian and display womanly characteristics. This would only further intensify the young men’s struggles with gender confusions.

Biblical Evidence for Masculinity

Still, one could argue that any feeling of discomfort is completely subjective. After all, who authored the code of masculinity? There’s nothing in the bible that states the specifics or standards of how men must walk, talk, and act in order to be considered masculine. One could use the phrase, “To each his own”. However, I think the concept of biblical masculinity is worth a closer look.

There aren’t any indications throughout the Bible of Godly figures being effeminate. We have every reason to believe that God consistently used men who displayed true masculinity. Obviously, there’s no way of knowing exactly how biblical characters walked, talked and expressed mannerisms. However, our LORD God is King, exercising absolute authority – “The universe is subject to Christ (Ephesians 1:22), Christ is subject to God the Father (1 Corinthians 15:28), the Church is subject to Christ (Ephesians 5:24), Christians are subject to God (James 4:7), and wives are subject to husbands (Colossians 3:18) – (Weber, Four Pillars of a Man’s Heart, p. 76).” We serve a masculine God who practices headship. Not a submissive, irresponsible, weenie unable to command all things. Men should likewise be authoritative, responsible, resilient and tough-minded – able to take command. God is also described in the Bible as a Warrior. Now, let’s just pause for a second… when you hear that word “warrior”, do you picture a girly-man on the frontlines of a battle or William Wallace? Wallace, of course! King Jesus is a warrior, as described in Revelation 19:11-16

My point is that we must confront the issue of effeminacy in our churches and expect men to display a masculinity that is God-given. I believe the issue of effeminacy is a learned behavior and the fact that so many men are being raised fatherless is certainly part of the problem. Consider how the secular government authorities in Malaysia are dealing with the issue. A certain headline reads: “Malaysia sends 66 boys to boot camp.” Officials identified and sent 66 boys who displayed feminine characteristics to a boot camp in which they were taught masculinity. (http://ibnlive.in.com/news/malaysia-sends-effeminate-boys-to-boot-camp/149825-19.html). While I disagree with the extreme singling out of certain individuals on such a corporate and governmental level, at least someone has identified the fact that it is unnatural and a problem that can lead down an unwanted path. Wouldn’t these boys be much better off if the corrections were made as a part of the discipleship process rather than a secular boot camp? Discipleship should be taking place in our churches from older men to younger men. Every Timothy needs a Paul. Effeminate boys should be discipled rather than avoided because they make us feel “uncomfortable” or because we’re scared to address it as an issue. Men must come alongside these individuals and teach them what masculinity looks like and help families and fathers confront the issue rather than waiting until it’s too late. This undoubtedly means that church leaders need to exemplify masculinity if they are to help set the example. For example, one youth pastor I know had a college leader helping out within his youth group who displayed feminine tendencies (especially when he was up front). After noticing the potential problem it could create, the youth pastor took this individual out to lunch to address the matter in a loving, yet shepherding manner. The deal was made that he’d still be able to lead and contribute in a behind the scenes role, but until the effeminate tendencies were corrected, he wouldn’t be allowed to be up front. Although there was initial lash back, the young man, within a few months was allowed back into his naturally gifted area of leading up front. Now, over the course of a couple years, that young man has almost completely erased his feminine tendencies displaying masculinity.

Another youth pastor I’ve heard about noticed a growing number of effeminate boys within his youth group. The youth pastor implemented an annual winter guys retreat, in which the boys are taught biblical manhood and are shown true masculinity. He emphasized activities that were predominately masculine, such as camping in the woods, chopping fire-wood, building shelters and fires, and many other activities. Through one-on-one sessions, leaders are able to confront these effeminate issues and encourage the importance of masculinity and specific steps to making adjustments. This is what it means to disciple and come along side these feminine individuals without singling them out and embarrassing them. It should always be loving, compassionate, and biblical.

I fear that churches who employ effeminate pastors and/or elevate effeminate leaders without pause are on a slippery slope towards compromising innate, God-given characteristics that make up the very essence of masculinity. Therefore, to summarize, I believe that the two overarching issues at hand with effeminacy among Christian men, are: One, the fact that it has the potential for leading young men to incorrectly believe themselves to be born as homosexual, and secondly, it erroneously displays within a church leadership context a misrepresentation of manhood and masculinity. Because of these issues, I believe the biblical resolution is to come alongside effeminate men in love and usher them into masculinity through discipleship and exemplifying masculinity to them.

Making a practical case for establishing or keeping a student leadership team

Thursday, December 1st, 2011

Over the years, I have observed a reduction in the number of student ministers establishing and/or maintaining student leadership teams. I am talking about MS, HS and College age who serve as leadership among their peers for the purpose of effecting and advancing ministry. There is just as much to be said about forming and/or nurturing an adult team of leadership but if you need that spill then your days are numbered already and probably too far gone to be helped. OK, maybe not too far gone but dad-gum-it, how did you get this far without enlisting a team of adults who love, support and carry the water bucket for you? I feel a rant coming on but that’s another series.
For now I want to share, convince, implore, admonish, encourage, beg and whatever else is needed to get you to prayerfully consider the value of a student leadership team of adolescents. The work of securing leadership is hard work and never ending. One reason many youth leaders are letting leadership teams go is that they are running at 90 mph with their hair on fire and cannot stop long enough to punt and retool. Another reason is that student pastors simply do not know how to practically and equitably secure a team without hurt feelings, seeming exclusive or encouraging elitism. But, it can be done, is worth the effort and far better than any other system of implementation.
I have seen many cool and not so cool names for these teams. The name does not matter unless you are sporting a culturally astute gotee, black rim glasses, pencil pants or wear a beanie when its barely cold outside.

See sample names at the end of this – if you last that long.

NOTE** The Youth leadership is a NOMINATION process and not an ELECTION – big difference. Elections are decided by number of votes, a nomination is simply an indication that someone thinks of that person an eligible leader. They must still meet the criteria laid out on the nomination ballet. (sample criteria: confessing Christ follower, faithful to small groups, active member of church and student ministry initiatives, concerned about peers, willing to serve, team player, etc.)
The adult leadership team can nominate as well and/or “confirm” the slate of nominations after the Student Pastor selects from the ballots. The number of votes may be considered by the youth pastor in selection but is not bound by it. He can also add a youth as a member-at-large if he fills a youth should be on it but would not get votes. NEVER REVEAL TO PARENTS OR COMMITTEE THE ACTUAL ballot return vote numbers. Only submit the slate as a total team. the shred the results – parents can get crazy – just ask the cheerleading coach :)

The team (whatever you end up naming it) is patterned after the following ideas
1. We are in the discipleship and training business. Leadership youth should be learning what it means to be an elder and/or a deacon (servants)
2. Leadership students will sit on the sidelines unless they have an outgoing extrovert personality. They need a platform of responsibility at church.
3. Leadership students need a platform from which to leverage the vision being cast by the YM.
4. The youth leaders need a platform from which to promote events, ministry action and his vision.
5. Students need to know WHO it is that the YM is pointing to as good examples to trust and follow their own age.
6. Student leaders need responsibility just like a team needs a captain to offer direction.
7. Students need peers who can carry their opinions, likes, dislikes to the adult leadership.
8. A leadership team gives the YM a means for trial and error without shouldering the burden alone.
9. A YM (no matter how young and vibrant) will eventually need a sounding board from whick to float ideas, changes, concepts and ministry events.
10. A YM needs a safe sounding board that is invested in the ministry and proven it through service.
11. A YM needs a smaller group (um, lets say about 12) to invest in on a deeper level.
12. Students need peers they can look towards as designated leaders when times are tough or in crisis or personal hurt.
13. A youth ministry team of students provides a safe layer of protection from outside negative attacks in the same way an Adult Leadership Team does for the youth minister during delicate situations or controversial changes.
14. Having a leadership team of youth shifts the emphasis from planning and executing event details to coordinating leadership.
15. Having a leadership team of youth is an investment in future leaders
16. Having a leadership team reduces the risk of burn-out
17. Promotes a greater amount of honest and age-specific evaluation.

It’s Biblical
a. Moses delegated due to the sheer demand on his time. (See Exodus 18)
b. The Judges did the same; they delegated tasks inside and outside the temple.
c. The disciples enlisted assistance – Ephesians 4:11-12 to equip the saints for the work of the ministry, not so the saints can help the Minister do his job but so the saints will be equipped to do the true work of the church.

What happens when one person ties to do it all?
1. The maximum that can be done by a single person is limited, it will max out, it will come to a conclusion. You will hit a wall.
2. The disciples and lay-people turned the world upside down after being equipped to do the ministry and set apart.
Lion and Tigers illustration! If a Tiger can beat a lion in battle for food or territory, why is the Lion called the King of the Jungle! Because one-on-one a Tiger will win, but three on three Lions win every time and thus have earned the title King of the Jungle because they work together for success so intelligently. Lions instinctively know how to work together. They instinctively work to defeat their enemies. Lions live in Prides, which is a family group of two or more males and two or more females with several young, and they instinctively join together when they face an enemy. They live, hunt together and protect their families together. What a picture God has given us to model against the enemy and collaborative efforts between families.
IN the case of Student Ministry often, we find a lonely LION working hard but unable to accomplish all that is needed or expected because there is a disconnect from the pride. He is not meant to work, hunt, protect and provide alone but rather he is designed to work in, through and alongside a PRIDE. I think the “pride” is one-part student leadership team and one-part adult leadership team.

A not so cool list of leadership team names
SLT – servant leadership team
SMC – student ministry council
SMAC – student ministry action council
SMAT – student ministry action team
SC – Shepherd’s club
SLT – Servant Leadership Team
SLAT – Servant Leadership Action Team
YC – youth council
YLC – youth leadership council

Is simple church being taken out of context?

Thursday, October 20th, 2011

While I applaud this generation of youth ministers in the rediscovery of simplifying and streamlining their ministries, there is a troubling trend afoot. Here is how I see simple church being misinterpreted or misapplied.
1. Simple is not an excuse for doing nothing.
2. Simple is often applied as an alternative to burn-out when the real solution is to apply biblical equipping of the saints.
3. Relabeling your ministry as SIMPLE does not make it more effective.
4. Applying Simple Youth Ministry to an ineffective strategy will accomplish nothing.
5. Doing simple Youth Ministry can accidentally lead to doing less than God has called you to do.
6. Simple is not the same as efficient.
7. Simple is not the same as professional.
Collaborate, streamline, work smarter not harder but please don’t be that misguided trend follower that applies someone else’s plan to a totally different ministry setting due to a lack of training or energy to discover an effective strategy for your situation.
No doubt this generation of student pastors have a difficult challenge in finding ways to reach an increasingly busy, distracted and bored generation of students. Applying some of the principals for simplifying under the less-is-more strategy may be a positive move.

Sensationalism and Agendas

Monday, June 13th, 2011

Ever thought something was not right but you never took the time to prove it?

No doubt you have heard or perhaps even believed and quoted two major youth ministry myths:

Myth #1 – Youth ministers only stay at a church 18 months or less.
Myth #2 – 90% of youth are abandoning their faith after high school.

The fact is, both of these often repeated statistics are simply myths. Several youth ministry experts such as Dr. Wesley Black at South Western Baptist Theological Seminary, Dr. Ken Kageler of NYACK College and Seminary, Dr. Gary Bredfeldt of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary and Dr. Timothy Paul Jones of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary have documented the false data often repeated by so called “experts”. The research behind much of raw data correcting and revealing such false negatives comes from an in-depth research project by Brandon Shields, PhD under the supervision of SBTS professors. So what are the facts? Lets look at an average youth minister in the US. A combination of surveys from approximately 3000 youth ministers reveals the following profile.

33 years old
Remains in a church position 3.9 years.
75% are married
76% are male.
94% have a 2 year college or university degree
49% of those with college degrees are ministry related majors and
42% of those with degrees are in a youth ministry emphasis or major.
62% serve in suburban ministry settings
The majority are Baptist (20%)
38% receive no health insurance benefit;
47% receive no continuing education, auto or travel allowance
43% receive no housing allowance
64% receive no social security contributions
50% receive no budget for professional supplies, resources, or books.
72% percent struggle with feelings of being inadequate or ineffective in ministry.
64% who begin ministry under age 25 with no mentor will leave the ministry in less than 4 years
78.4 % left youth ministry by age thirty-nine
22% left during their twenties
16% left the ministry in less than two years
3.1 years average at a single position
89% said they had considered leaving the ministry
57% said they would leave immediately if they had a better place to go, including secular work.

While the above data is not a glowing testimony of tenure, it does dispel much of the myth regarding 18 months.

Myth #2 Youth Are Leaving the Christian Faith at Alarming Rates

Monday, June 13th, 2011

What about youth leaving the church and abandoning the Christian faith?

The new research conducted at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary shatters the notion that youth are dropping out of church and rejecting Christ at alarming rates.

Despite how some agenda driven ministers have twisted the data to create a “new model” or to “re-think” the traditional model, the data reveals very encouraging news. In fact, the data is so positive (compared to the accepted myth) that those who have been in the trenches over the past decade or two ought to shout in celebration. What is the impetus for this celebration? It is the fact that 88% of students who graduated from conservative Southern Baptist mega-churches with a traditional approach to youth ministry stayed actively involved with church after high school graduation. While this study was conducted among mega-churches, a similarly positive indication can be extended to large, medium and small churches. Also, LifeWay found that while 70% of all denomination youth do “drop out” (attending twice or less per month) after graduation, two thirds of them return in their twenties. Those of us who live in the youth ministry world know that many strong Christian youth go “off the radar” (attending but not being counted) for about a year after graduation. Many times they simply attend but do not join. Other times, they attend on-campus bible studies or worship outlets that are not part of the data being reported. In other cases, youth simply leaver for a period while exploring new found freedom, temporarily relaxing their spiritual disciplines only to return to them after a season. The fact that two thirds our youth return to “active” status is amazing! Combine that with the 30% who were “faithful” is huge cause for celebration!

Surprising data from USA Today on Gay Lesbian Population

Wednesday, May 25th, 2011

Surprising data from USA Today on Gay Lesbian Population
USA TODAY

The prestigious study (released in March by the National Center for Health Statistics and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) discovered a much smaller number of “gays, lesbians and homosexuals” than generally reported by the news media. While pop-culture frequently cites the figure of one in 10 (based on 60-year-old, widely discredited conclusions from pioneering sex researcher Alfred Kinsey) the new study finds only 1.4% of the population identifying with same-sex orientation.

Moreover, even among those who describe themselves as homosexual or bisexual (a grand total of 3.7% of the 18-44 age group), overwhelming majorities (81%) say they’ve experienced sex with partners of the opposite gender. Among those who call themselves heterosexual, on the other hand, only a tiny minority (6%) ever engaged in physical intimacy of any kind with a member of the same sex These figure indicate that 94% of those living heterosexual lives felt no physical attraction to members of the same sex, but the great bulk of self-identified homosexuals and bisexuals feel enough intimate interest in the opposite gender to engage in erotic contact at some stage in their development.

In fact, numbers show huge majorities of those who “ever had same sex sexual contact” do not identify long-term as gay. Among women 18-44, for instance, 12.5% report some form of same sex contact at some point in their lives, but among the older segment of that group (35-44), only 0.7% identify as homosexual and 1.1% as bisexual.

In other words, for the minority who may have experimented with gay relationships at some juncture in their lives, well over 80% explicitly renounced homosexual (or even bisexual) self-identification by age of 35. For the clear majority of males (as well as women) who report gay encounters, homosexual activity appears to represent a passing phase, or even a fleeting episode, rather than an unshakable, genetically pre-determined orientation.

The once popular phrase “sexual preference” has been indignantly replaced with the term “sexual orientation” because political correctness now insists there is no factor of willfulness or volition in the development of erotic identity. This may well be the case for the 94% of males and 87% of females (ages 18-44) who have never experienced same-sex contact of any kind and may never have questioned their unwavering straight outlook — an outlook deemed “normal” in an earlier age.

For the less than 2% of men and women who see themselves as gay, however, the issue of sexual orientation remains vastly more complicated. Within a month of the release of the CDC/NCHS report, one of the world’s most respected think tanks on gay life confirmed some of its most surprising findings, without specifically referencing the recent government study. UCLA’s Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law and Public Policy offered a new estimate of homosexual identification: concluding that 1.7% of Americans say they’re gay, and a slightly larger group (1.8%) identified as bisexual — by definition attracted to both genders and shaping their sexual behavior through some mixture of inclination and preference.

Christian Response to OB being stalked and killed

Monday, May 2nd, 2011

I have been listening to radio and reading blogs today about the death of OB. I like the exchange taking place in many of the Christian posts but it never surprises me how people who enjoy the comfort of living in a country that actually enforces the Rule of Law and defends its freedom through necessary force, find it offensive to interpret the bible correctly regarding justice, capital punishment or killing during time of war. How much of the OT do progressives want to cut out in order to find their “comfort level” with the inspired, infallible word of God – oops there’s the problem . . . progressive revelation.
Might as well open that hanger door for all those who like to “fly” the plane but can’t seem to land it.
If political correctness creeps any further into the faith community we will have to commission a Universalist or Progressive to write a whole new bible – one that fits our culture and sophisticated, civilized society where no one is offended, left out or held accountable for personal choices – a happy place where everybody gets a trophy and hell is empty.
OK, that was a bit harsh and I don’t want to hurt anyone’s psyche, but I already admitted to being weary of the love, love, love crowd that sounds more often like a boy-band song than someone rightly dividing the word of truth. Some people get so politically correct that they rationalize every point of justice, wrath and vengeance weather a direct hit from the voice/hand of God or indirectly through the results of war. You CAN get so open-minded that your brains fall out.

What if OB’s attack on the WTC had been a home invasion? It would be a different story and harder for liberals to explain why force unto death is objectionable. Story – Repeat offender and known murderer breaks into your home with intent to kill you and your family. But, you are prepared for such a day – one you hoped and prayed would never come – but it did come and rather than falling to your knees to reason with the intruder or squatting in the closet praying over your wife and kids, you took your gun and shot him as evil-incarnate busted down your bedroom door.. No the psycho is not our enemy (as someone will surely remind me) but he is oppressed and controlled by the enemy so much so that the bullet cant tell which one to hit – so I shoot him because the life of my family is my priority and responsibility before God. If it had been a home invasion, my first prayer after emptying my clip into him, would be: “ Thank you God for granting me the mercy of life and for allowing me the terrible success of killing this psycho murdering fanatical religious child made in your image. and Thank you father for sparing the lives of other innocent victims he has sworn to murder (all Americans and Jews) so that they may have the chance to experience salvation before it is too late. Thank you for saving me from death, thank you for sparing my family and thank you that this enemy of humanity and life is dead.

I do not celebrate the addition to hell that surely increased by (1) when OB fulfilled his reservation but I do rejoice in the justice and mercy of God to stop him from perpetuating unspeakable and horrific murder on innocent men, women and children – some of whom undoubtedly left this world without knowing Christ.
Hats off to the Navy Seals and for those who risked their life that we may live in freedom to express our faith – liberal, conservative and everything in between.

OK, that feels better . . .