I was listening to a podcast on Issues Etc. earlier this week and I was struck by a profound thought. The title of the podcast was “The Vocation of Minister.” I’d normally link directly to it but the site appears to be down as I’m writing this, nothing will load.

The guest speaker was talking about how the word minister means “servant,” but most churches today prefer to look to ministers as leaders or CEO’s, and ministers are all too happy to accept this role. The proper role of a minister is that of a servant, and his chief task is to “administer” what God has given, His gifts.

The guest speaker then said this:

“We approach [the vocation of the minister] as a social issue, we look at what the people want. Let’s look at the word ministry. There’s an old saying… ‘The customer is always right.’ The customer knows what he wants and if you’re going to serve the customer, you better give him what he wants or you’re not going to do business with him. That’s precisely wrong when it comes to the church, because the customer is always wrong. And God is always right.

In other words, we must approach the vocation of the minister theologically (not socially). A minister of God must often preach God’s Law and His Gospel to people who don’t want any part of it. Often people don’t realize the depth of their sinfulness (including me), and they must hear God’s Law. Other times the Law has done its work and people have been cut to the heart, then they need to hear the Gospel. The customer (not a good term but I’m using it simply to make a point) is always wrong. He doesn’t want what he really needs. I am so often guilty of this. I often want authenticity, community, and whatever – but what I really need is the forgiveness of sins through Jesus Christ. These other things are secondary to this primary need.

It is too easy to lose sight of Christ as the focal point of our churches when we operate with the assumption that the folks in the pews are right. That’s how we get mega-churches that acquiesce to, rather than transform, culture. Give the people what they want and you will grow numerically, but that’s not how ministry progress ought to be measured.

Today is the first day of Lent, a 40 day season of the historical church year leading up to Easter, also metaphorically corresponding to the 40 days Jesus was tempted while fasting in the desert. Originally, Lent was a period of intense fasting and prayer that believers went through prior to being baptized at the Easter Vigil. It then became a period where believers abstained from eating meat and concentrated on prayer. Today many Orthodox and Catholics abstain from meat on Fridays (hence why there are so many “Fish Fry’s” on Fridays and fish specials during this time of year). Other evangelical traditions encourage people to give something up for Lent, in order to focus on scripture and prayer.

The most popular thing people are giving up for Lent this year is Facebook. And then of course there is the old joke, “I’m giving up giving something up for Lent.”

Me personally, I’m giving up for Lent. I’m going to stop trying to base my spirituality on my own performance. I’m going to try to stop relying on myself to obtain victory over sin in my life. I’m simply going to give up, and give it all over to Christ. And hopefully I make this a life-long change.

What are you giving up for Lent?

I read a great post the other day on Samantha Krieger’s blog entitled “Marriage: Built to Last.” I wrote a comment that essentially became a post, so I wanted to share it.

“Marriage is hard work.” Wow, is it. Tiffany and I just celebrated three years of marriage and while it is rewarding, it has not been without some HARD work. My biggest advice to newlyweds or those considering marriage: communication skills. Yeah, yeah, everyone says that. Blah blah blah. I didn’t listen, either. Men and women truly do communicate in drastically different ways. It’s fine once you begin to learn how to speak and understand the other partner’s language, but it takes time, trial and error.

And I certainly had to come to grip with how imperfect I am. Marriage takes you to the next step of adult maturity: learning to think in terms of “we” not “I.” I think this comes a little easier for women, but I could be wrong. For me it is still a struggle. Marriage is not two separate lives becoming one in a 50/50 relationship, like everyone says. It’s two lives re-orienting on one journey, side by side, giving everything: 100/100.

But most importantly, it teaches us about Jesus. Jesus didn’t use marriage as an analogy for no reason. The Church is His bride, a slightly more comfortable image for women perhaps, but something about which both genders have a lot to learn. Jesus has “put His Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come” (2 Corinthians 1:22).

“And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory” (Ephesians 1:13-14).

This is the imagery I’ve had on my mind most recently: the Holy Spirit is our engagement ring. He has sealed us in Christ as His bride-to-be, proposing to us on the cross through our baptism. As we learn to love another human being in all of her imperfection, we see how Christ can love us. It’s humbling.

“Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. . . . This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband” (Ephesians 5:25-28, 33).

The Church, His Bride, is presented to Him through the Holy Spirit, having been cleansed “by the washing with water through the word” (baptism) and given the most radiant wedding dress in all creation. What a glorious marriage feast it will be!

Meanwhile we receive a small foretaste of the feast to come, daily lessons of learning to love unconditionally. And learning to receive unconditional love. Both can be painful, and both take work. And submission. Submit to Christ, He has given everything for you. Although free, it was not cheap.

This post is the product of a series of conversations with Mike Baker and a recent post by Daniel and Heather Cosby entitled “Demolition of the Heart…”. In Daniel and Heather’s post, they wrote:

“Over the last year or two, we have spent considerable energy trying to expose and dismantle the beliefs surrounding this worldly-derived system which identifies itself as “the Church”. To a large degree, this has been driven by the assumption that it is this system which is holding so many people back from experiencing true, authentic, unfettered Life. . . .

But these assumptions have proven to be pretty short-sighted. They forget what lies at the core of everything that diverges from God’s intentions. They neglect the underlying reality of sin. . . .

While it is true that so many of the practices embraced by religious legalism today were borrowed from a combination of pagan influences and Old Testament Law, it is also true that these practices are adopted and preserved essentially because they provide an appealing alternative to simply finding oneself standing naked and condemned before a Holy God. They are safe. They are convenient. They appeal to our flesh. And though they do provide a platform on which pride and self-reliance can flourish, they are not the cause of these ugly human traits. They are a symptom, but not the disease, a manifestation of what lies at the root, an unintended showcase of our fallen nature, which always tends to value ingenuity over dependence, and personal achievement over brokenness…

If we simply focus on knocking down the religious edifices that have been built by those who would trust human wisdom more than God’s, we can easily ignore the reasons why these systems were ever formed at all… We can strive to live as “organically” as possible, and yet in our hearts be just as cold and dead as the bricks in the church buildings we’ve left…

Is it the institutions which enslave people, or is it sin itself?“

I think that is a profound question, and one I’ve been considering a lot lately. Perhaps the issues we have with the institutional church can’t be resolved by merely a new approach. Perhaps the issues are there because of our sinful nature, regardless of our methodical approach to church (or deconstruction of it)? This can be seen clearly in the history of modern day Methodism (hence the name “Methodist”).

John Wesley emphasized a conversion experience and personal holiness and began making many practical reforms to the way church was done, especially how people lived throughout the week and interacted with other believers. He was discontent with the apathy and dead tradition he saw all around him. Wesley never intended to invent a new church, he merely formed small groups known as “United Societies.” It didn’t take long for the Church of England to ban them from speaking in any pulpits, so John Wesley and his brother Charles soon began preaching in homes and other non-church settings. Today Methodism is not much different in practice than most mainstream evangelical denominations, nor is it faring any better. Clearly a new “method” didn’t help – human nature prevails.

Perhaps the reasons we tend to form traditions and hierarchy are because of embedded sin, not because our initial approach was bad. This is really making me reconsider how I approach a lot of issues concerning church practice. I still think things could be a lot better than they are, but I’m becoming much more forgiving of many different traditions and how they came to be.

What do you think? Are we just fighting man and his sinful nature, or are we legitimately fighting corrupt man-made methods? Which is it: fighting man or his methods?

Yesterday Tiffany and I visited yet another church. It was fairly nice, but like most churches, it just struck us as being very fake, it didn’t feel authentic. The worship leader talks a lot like a stoned hippie: “Let’s just focus on the King this morning…”, “Can you feel the Spirit as we magnify our God?” Not that these statements are wrong, but the way he said them sounded so fake to us. Creating an emotional atmosphere with music does not constitute worship, the way we live our lives on Monday is how we worship God.

The church gave us a CD of their worship band as a gift for visiting, along with a packet about their church. I started thinking about this later in the day. What do the gifts churches give to visitors communicate to them about the church’s priorities?

For instance, this church had very talented musicians leading worship. They gave us a worship CD and a packet. The message is: we have a great praise band, also look at all the awesome activities and programs we have at our church!

From a marketing standpoint, what you give visitors communicates your priorities. Let’s go through a few common items churches give visitors and discuss what that might convey:

• Coffee Mug – This is the number one visitor’s gift from my experience. Perhaps this conveys that the church values fellowship.
• Worship CD – “We have an awesome praise band!”
• Flowers – “We hope you’re flattered by our kindness.”
• Packet of Information – This is self-promotion. Look at everything WE have to offer you! “This is why you should come to OUR church.”

Here’s my point. Shouldn’t church be all about Jesus Christ? If so, isn’t it far more important that I ensure my visitor leaves having heard the Gospel? What if my visitor doesn’t own a Bible or know what kind of Bible to get? What if my visitor has urgent prayer needs? Does my visitor need the pastor’s counsel in an important life issue? Do they simply need someone to talk to?

Maybe instead of giving visitors coffee mugs that end up in neighborhood rummage sales or town landfills within a few weeks, churches should give each visitor a Gospel tract. Maybe visitors should be told that even if they never come back to our church, we want to make sure they know who Jesus Christ is and that this church is all about Him. Maybe we should ask if they own a Bible. Maybe we should offer to pray for and/or with them. Maybe we should ask if they’d like to speak with the pastor. Just some thoughts. . . .

I’m not saying telling visitors about your church is wrong, but if Jesus Christ truly is the central focus of your church then your first priority should be sharing Him, not explaining your distinctives.

Also, if you want to see a short, humorous video that shows how most churches appear to visitors, watch What if Starbucks marketed like a church?

Tiffany and I (Dan) ate at a local restaurant called Houlihan’s the other day, and as I sat there waiting for the check, I realized that Houlihan’s was a lot like a typical American church. Let me walk you through the similarities.

The Experience
Before going there, I checked out the website to see the menu. I always view church’s websites before attending as well, to see what it might be like (and to see if the church is culturally relevant enough to publish a somewhat informative website). Anyways, the Houlihan’s website was really flashy and had some progressive music playing (see for yourself). It seemed pretty cool.

Upon arriving, the atmosphere was fairly trendy: they had metal covers on their menus, a neat paint/color scheme, progressive music playing, and the staff wore all black and looked stylish. Despite the artificial atmosphere, the wait staff wasn’t all that good, the glasses were dirty, and the food was average. It was a let-down. I used to feel this way a lot when I attended new churches. They would have a cool atmosphere, but the same old attitudes and ways of doing things (just like in the Starbucks church video, watch it if you haven’t seen it yet!).

What They Say About Themselves
Later, after reflecting on this. I decided to revisit their website and read the “About Us” page. There were some startling similarities with how churches present themselves. Let’s go through some of the statements they make about themselves and compare it to how churches portray themselves:

In 1972, Houlihan’s first opened its doors in Kansas City with a progressive, eclectic menu and energetic bar scene. Ferns hung throughout, artifacts cluttered the walls and tapestries made by San Francisco hippies formed the ceiling. Caviar burgers, roasted duck, foot-long hot dogs and fresh carrot juice were just a few original menu items so ahead for its time. It was hot.

Just as Houlihan’s opened in the early 70’s with an eclectic and energetic atmosphere, so too many churches found their origin in the “Jesus Movement” of the 60’s and 70’s and used charisma and popular culture to draw in crowds. Notice the goal here is to cater to the consumer, not to conform the consumer to a greater ideal. In many ways churches today have it as their goal to meet peoples’ needs, rather than to conform them to the image of Christ (even when it’s not popular to do so).

Before long, there were a lot of ‘casual dining’ restaurants opening and call us crazy, but they looked a whole lot like us. We tried to be flattered. Some grew really big, and by the ’90s, the whole ‘casual dining’ landscape was pretty me-too. Instead of watching the consumer, the industry seemed more worried about what competitors were doing. Casual dining lost its way, and in doing so lost its edge.

Houlihan’s makes a good observation here, they recognized that not only had the casual dining industry lost touch with the consumer, but it also became self-absorbed and chased after competition relentlessly. Over the last few decades, churches have also been racing to be the biggest, most “relevant,” have the best worship band, and draw the largest crowds. They have forgotten that the true focus is Christ, not having better preaching than the mega-church on the other side of town.

Fast forward to 2002. That’s when we had our ‘Aha!’ moment (as Oprah would say). New leadership, new ideas, new inspiration. We completely re-imagined ourselves, and got back in touch with the consumer. New menus. New plates. New building design, new soundtrack. Stylish uniforms. And a modern, warm restaurant design with an open kitchen and prominent bar. Today, our company is built entirely around what the progressive consumer seeks in a restaurant + bar experience. And we plan to keep it that way.

Forget ‘casual dining.’ That’s an industry term so out of touch with how consumers eat and drink today. For premium quality and style; fare that’s at times familiar and other times adventurous and a laid-back modern setting, Houlihan’s is a true original.

Notice two things: 1) All of the changes involved the external environment, not any real internal change on the parts of the staff; 2) Above and beyond merely stating the casual dining industry has gotten out of touch with the consumer, Houlihan’s believes entirely new terms need to be employed to describe their “original” setting, rendering the “old” terms obsolete and “out of touch.”

Isn’t this also the only real change many churches have made – external only? In an attempt to make church all about the people in the pews (rather than keeping its sole focus on Christ), it has tried to create an experience that will meet the Christians’ needs for belonging and adventure, among many other things. The problem is, these needs can only be met in Christ! The church will never be able to meet all of peoples’ needs, the local bar or the person’s family can do that much better – but the Church can show the person the only thing that will truly meet their needs: Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!

Also, just as Houlihan’s has sought to employ new terms, the church is filled with new terms such as “missional,” “relevant,” “seeker-sensitive,” etc. Now those terms are being attacked as out of touch, and new terms are emerging such as “post-missional,” “beyond relevance,” “seeker-friendly,” “post-denominational,” etc. Despite the terms, the church still looks and feels the same, and it’s still doing things the exact same away (in many instances it is doing them worse than it did before).

Conclusion
Just as my Houlihan’s experience was blah and average, my experience with many churches is the same. The church can’t compete with Satan’s progressive culture, nor should it try. The church needs to stand against the grain of culture and challenge it to embrace Jesus Christ. Rather than adapting to culture, the Church should transform culture. Only Jesus Christ can do this, not a new movement, program, or committee.

Mark Driscoll, pastor of Mars Hill Church, recently studied Acts 2 to come up with a definition of what constitutes a Christian Church. This is what he came up with:

The local church is a community of regenerated believers who confess Jesus Christ as Lord. In obedience to Scripture they organize under qualified leadership, gather regularly for preaching and worship, observe the biblical sacraments of baptism and communion, are unified by the Spirit, are disciplined for holiness, and scatter to fulfill the great commandment and the great commission as missionaries to the world for God’s glory and their joy.

I think he hit the nail on the head. Having read Mars Hill’s doctrinal statement, I was very surprised that he chose to use the word “sacraments” rather than “ordinances” or “testimonies” to refer to Baptism and Holy Communion.

I like calling the sacraments/ordinances “grace-gifts,” but that’s just a personal preference. I do believe they are powerful means of grace through which we receive Christ’s grace and forgiveness.

What do you think? Did Driscoll forget anything that is crucial to the Church? What did you like about his definition? What did you not like?

As promised in a previous post, I am going to write about Jonah and how he serves as an analogy for the condition of the American church. I’ve facetiously labeled this condition “Jonah-itis.”

It is crucial to understanding the Bible to know that God has always desired to be the God of all nations, not just Israel. This is made very apparent when God promises Abraham in Genesis 12 that all families on the earth will be blessed through His seed. This Seed is of course referring to Christ (see Galatians 3:16). God has always been a missionary God. There are numerous passages where God makes Himself known to surrounding nations in the Old Testament. The problem is that by Jonah’s point in history, Israel’s ethnocentrism keeps them from caring about other nations to whom God wants to reveal Himself. In the same way, the modern American Church’s ecclesiocentrism (focused only inwardly) keeps it from revealing God to those outside its walls. Now for a whale of a tale (bad humor, I know):

The Backdrop
Jonah was a very unwilling prophet of Israel under the reign of King Jeroboam II (early to mid 8th century B.C.). Of course Israel by this time had been divided into two kingdoms, Israel in the north and Judah in the south. The northern kingdom along with its capital in Samaria had been captured and sent into captivity by the Assyrians (As a side note, these Israelites from the northern kingdom who were forced to intermarry with the Assyrians came to be called “Samaritans,” and the Jews considered them half-breeds. This helps you understand the role they play in the New Testament). The former citizens of the northern kingdom are what we today refer to as the “Lost Ten Tribes” of Israel.

So now the only true Israelites that existed are those of the southern kingdom, and they were not very fond of the Assyrians! And for good reason: the Assyrians shamefully tortured those they conquered in battle, viciously murdered political opponents, and a lot of other graphic and horrible things. And into this backdrop God tells Jonah to preach against the Assyrian capital city of Ninevah. Jonah wanted no part of this. At first glance, one might suspect that fear was the reason behind Jonah’s hesitancy. After all, these Assyrians liked to torture and murder anyone who opposed them. But that’s really not why. We actually learn why in Jonah 4:2. But I’ll get to that in a second . . . you’ll have to keep reading to find out!

Jonah (foolishly) tries to run away from God by sailing to Tarshish, a city in the opposite direction of Ninevah. Most are familiar with the story that follows. A storm rages because Jonah is being disobedient to God. Jonah was sleeping in the boat while his shipmates were desperately trying to stay afloat. At times the Church also sleeps through the storms of God’s judgment in the world, assuring herself that it has nothing to do with her. So Jonah’s shipmates throw him overboard, and Jonah is swallowed by a big whale. While in the whale, Jonah appeals to God’s mercy and the whale vomits him onto dry land.

Jonah Finally Obeys
Jonah then obeys (realizing he has no choice) and preaches to Ninevah that it will be overthrown for its wicked deeds. The Ninevites do the unthinkable: they repent and call out to God for mercy! And then we see the real reason for Jonah’s reluctance:

But it displeased Jonah exceedingly, and he was angry. And he prayed to the LORD and said, “O LORD, is not this what I said when I was yet in my country? That is why I made haste to flee to Tarshish; for I knew that you are a gracious God and merciful, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love, and relenting from disaster. (Jonah 4:1-2, ESV, emphasis mine).

This passage is the key to the whole book. Jonah’s reluctance stemmed not from fear of the Assyrians, but out of his knowledge of God’s love. Jonah hated these foreigners and was a byproduct of his generation – a generation that was only focused on itself and believed that God had the same exclusive focus.

Bringing it Home
This same mentality has crept up today in the American Church. Jonah is the father to all those Christians who desire the benefits and blessings of salvation but refuse its responsibility. We are blessed to be a blessing! Whenever Tiffany and I express our desire to serve in overseas missions, we inevitably hear this: “Why go across the world when there are people who need help next door?” The part that amuses me is that the people who say this are doing absolutely nothing themselves to help their neighbors.

Now to get a little uncomfortable. Who are your local Assyrians? The Jews continuously avoided intermingling with other nations in order to preserve the purity of their bloodline. This is why when the northern kingdom intermarried with the Assyrians the southern kingdom told them they were no longer God’s people and despised them (see more about this on my post about Jesus and the Woman at the Well). It got so bad that the Jews would walk an extra day’s journey just to get somewhere without walking through Samaritan territory. We have a term for this same kind of behavior in our culture, it’s called “white flight.” Basically, people belonging to minority races begin moving into neighborhoods and white folks move out. When my wife and I moved into our neighborhood, we were discouraged from doing so and were warned that our property value would likely decrease because it is a multiracial area! We moved in anyways. We live in a duplex, and I’m happy to say that we get along just fine with our black neighbor (who we share a wall with) and our niece and nephew enjoy playing with their daughter.

I don’t say this to boast about how “non-racist” I am. There’s enough white people clearing their consciences by doing that already. I say this to point out that you don’t have to drive to another neighborhood to reach out to people of a different culture — you just need to not flee when they move into yours. Michael Fuquay points out:

In his sermons, Martin Luther King Jr. was fond of quipping that “eleven o’clock Sunday morning is the most segregated hour and Sunday school is still the most segregated school of the week.” By pointing out the conflict between racism and Christian ideals, King hoped to shame white church leaders into supporting the campaign against segregation in the South and racism in the rest of the country.

Forty years later, Jim Crow segregation is a memory, and racism has become America’s most popular metaphor for evil. Yet King’s description of Sunday services remains largely unaltered.

Now don’t get me wrong. I’m fully aware that racism works both ways. But “white flight” is an exclusive phenomenon to one race, as the name implies. Jonah-itis causes people to focus only inwardly, whether ecclesiocentrically or ethnocentrically – or both. Kem Meyer wrote a great post recently about how many church folks speak “Christianese,” which erodes our witness and alienates outsiders. The American Church is losing its relevance by the day. Why, just the other day a large American church body published an official statement saying they needed to revitalize churches and plant new ones. Well no duh! Maybe that should have been part of the focus all along! As one pastor noted, this church is essentially enhancing its mediocrity.

The Good News
But there’s another side to this story. While it’s easy to critique and shame the Church for its Jonah-itis, I can’t end on that note – because God doesn’t. “Concerning Israel he says, ‘All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and obstinate people’” (Isaiah 65:2, NIV). “But God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:8, ESV). God didn’t give up on Jonah, just like He didn’t give up on Israel or on the rest of the nations (read Romans 9-11). Despite Jonah’s unwillingness and direct rebellion against God, He used Jonah to proclaim His Law and Gospel to Ninevah. As Johannes Verkuyl so eloquently states:

God is still interested in transforming obstinate, irritable, depressive, peevish Jonahs into heralds of the Good News which brings freedom.

This gives me great hope. I have hope because Jonah was God’s chosen instrument to proclaim His Name to Ninevah. And all throughout Scripture I see example after example of God choosing to accomplish mighty things through jacked-up people like me. And that gives me hope that He has a meaningful place for me to serve in His kingdom. And that should give you great hope, too. God is pleased to use us as His instruments in order to make His Name known among the nations. We must continually thank and praise Him for this opportunity!

But if your heart is still afflicted with Jonah-itis, remember that God “will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you” (Ezekiel 36:26, NIV). “For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant” (Hebrews 9:15, NIV). Confess your Jonah-itis to God. Ask Him to change your heart. I know He will. And if you are now free from Jonah-itis, but your church is not, pray that God might move their hearts to focus on God alone rather than themselves. Because simply trying to focus on others won’t solve the problem, that will lead to self-effort and burnout. We need to focus solely on Christ, and from that focus we will overcome Jonah-itis and be enabled to preach Christ to our local Assyrians.

This post was inspired by an article I recently read entitled The Biblical Foundation for the Worldwide Mission Mandate by Johannes Verkuyl. I also gleaned a lot of the background information from the introduction to Jonah in my ESV Study Bible, a handy Bible companion!

First of all, I apologize for my frequent leaves of absence. I am now a dual undergraduate and graduate student right now, lots of reading, lots of work. For more on that, see my post entitled Where Have I Been?

A friend shared with me this great article I wanted to quote. It’s written by John Tomlinson, a Flint Journal Columnist:

At December’s U.N. Global Warming conference in Poznan, Poland, 650 of the world’s top climatologists stood up and said man-made global warming is a media generated myth without basis. Said climatologist Dr. David Gee, Chairman of the International Geological Congress, “For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming?”

I asked myself, why would such obviously smart guy say such a ridiculous thing? But it turns out he’s right.

The earth’s temperature peaked in 1998. It’s been falling ever since; it dropped dramatically in 2007 and got worse in 2008, when temperatures touched 1980 levels.

Meanwhile, the University of Illinois’ Arctic Climate Research Center released conclusive satellite photos showing that Arctic ice is back to 1979 levels. What’s more, measurements of Antarctic ice now show that its accumulation is up 5 percent since 1980.

In other words, during what was supposed to be massive global warming, the biggest chunks of ice on earth grew larger. Just as an aside, do you remember when the hole in the ozone layer was going to melt Antarctica? But don’t worry, we’re safe now, that was the nineties.

Dr. Kunihiko, Chancellor of Japan’s Institute of Science and Technology said this: “CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or the other … every scientist knows this, but it doesn’t pay to say so.” Now why would a learned man say such a crazy thing?

This is where the looney left gets lost. Their mantra is atmospheric CO2 levels are escalating and this is unquestionably causing earth’s temperature rise. But ask yourself — if global temperatures are experiencing the biggest sustained drop in decades, while CO2 levels continue to rise — how can it be true?

Ironically, in spite of being shown false, we must now pray for it. Because a massive study, just released by the Russian Government, contains overwhelming evidence that earth is on the verge of another Ice Age.

Based on core samples from Russia’s Vostok Station in Antarctica, we now know earth’s atmosphere and temperature for the last 420,000 years. This evidence suggests that the 12,000 years of warmth we call the Holocene period is over.

Apparently, we’re headed into an ice age of about 100,000 years — give or take. As for CO2 levels, core samples show conclusively they follow the earth’s temperature rise, not lead it.

It turns out CO2 fluctuations follow the change in sea temperature. As water temperatures rise, oceans release additional dissolved CO2 — like opening a warm brewsky.

To think, early last year, liberals suggested we spend 45 trillion dollars and give up five million jobs to fix global warming. But there is good news: now that we don’t have to spend any of that money, we can give it all to the banks.

I’ve been saying for awhile that global warming is a joke. All genuine scientists who actually study the climate know this and have been saying it for years. But Al Gore manages to get a couple scientists who have little background in climatology and all of a sudden we can make the case for “global warming.” Not to mention that Gore’s “carbon footprint” while flying his CO2-belching private jet around the country to promote his cause is greater than you or I’s lifetime contribution to the atmosphere. Hmm. . . .

What do you think? Do you think the church is getting too wrapped up in social justice issues without first doing some research and critical thinking? Do you think the church spends too much time on social justice issues even if they are legitimate? Do the tasks of proclaiming the Gospel and advancing social welfare go hand in hand, or is one more preeminent?

How many times have I said those words followed by some great goal that I have yet to accomplish? Too many. I’m still working on my New Year’s Resolution from two years ago: to lose weight (unfortunately the number on the scale has been moving in the wrong direction over the last few years). But this new year involves much more than what I have yet to accomplish, it is about the many new things that God will be doing among His people. I forget about that perspective too often.

2009 is a year of uncertainty. Many evangelicals seem to be extremely worried about President-elect Obama and the morally erosive “change” he promises to bring. Others are worrying about the state of the economy and if we are on the verge of another Great Depression. Still more are troubled at all of the wars and recent natural disasters, wondering if perhaps the end of the world is at hand. All of these are valid and important concerns, yet the real question is how the Church will respond to all of this. This is important because how the Church responds will determine how it witnesses Christ to a new age.

We really have entered into a new age. No, I’m not talking astrologically, such as Horus or Aquarius. I’m talking about the death of the modern era. Postmodernism really is the new age in which we live. The Church has done a great job pointing out its dangers, such as its corrosive effect on the notion of absolute truth and it’s existentialist thrust that asks us to accept cognitive dissonance as the norm in religion, politics, and in our relationships. But it has done very little to address it other than to point out its faults. The game is up — postmodernism has won this generation and all subsequent ones (until the next age is ushered in, probably in a century or so).

The real question is, will the church continue battling the philosophical platform of postmodernism, or will the Church embrace its adherents? Maybe it can do both. The bottom line is, the Emerging Church has taught us a valuable lesson about reaching the postmodern generation. The Church can continue to critique its early mistakes, or it can learn from its experiences and growing success.

Recently I ran across the website of a church that has figured this out and has decided to embrace the postmodern generation. The reason this website struck me as so profound was because of the way they are doing it, and because of the denomination to which they belong. It’s not a new church plant with a fancy title like “Remnant” or “Scum of the Earth,” nor is it being run by a group of 20-somethings. This church has found a way to reach three generations: the traditional modernists, the Baby Boomers who embraced the seeker-sensitive “Jesus Movement” of the 60’s and 70’s, and the postmodern generation. Of course a person’s age has nothing to do with which generation they identify with, I know folks in their 20’s who belong in the traditional crowd and folks in their 60’s who belong in the postmodern category. Check out this church’s worship schedule before I tell you who it is:

As I’m sure you’ve mostly deduced from the bottom of the image, this is an LCMS Lutheran church located in Carrollton, Texas. Wow. Now I must admit my bias towards the LCMS at this point and rescind it. The LCMS (Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod) is well known for its hard-line patriarchy and ultra-traditional and liturgical adherence. Yet this Lutheran church has found a way to reach all of these generations harmoniously, as is beautifully expressed in the top portion of the image: “three different styles all worshiping the one true God.” What else stood out at me was the title and words they used to describe each “style” of worship:

• Classic: traditional hymns, organ, choir, liturgy
• Praise: contemporary, band, video screens, high energy
• Epic: experiential, participatory, image driven, community

These were carefully chosen words. At surface level, they may appear to simply describe each style. But these words say much more, particularly in the postmodern “Epic” worship style. These words are values. Experiential, participatory, image driven, community. All of these words are value statements that ripple through the soul of my generation. After reading those four values, I want to attend that service. If Chicago wasn’t so far from Texas, I would.

Kudos to Prince of Peace Lutheran Church and Pastor Luke Biggs for becoming part of the solution, rather than simply critiquing the problem.

“This is what the LORD says— he who made a way through the sea, a path through the mighty waters, “Forget the former things; do not dwell on the past. See, I am doing a new thing! Now it springs up; do you not perceive it? I am making a way in the desert and streams in the wasteland.”
        – Isaiah 43:16, 18-19

God bless you in 2009!