On page 19 are the statements:
"Our task is to be effective agents of spiritual transformation in people's lives, whatever that may cost in time, comfort, or image. Yet we have to realize that if the enormous number of Christians in this country has not achieved the level of positive influence hoped for, it is not the fault of a skeptical culture."
Questions:
(1) Is your church being effective as an agent of spiritual transformation? Why or why not?
(2) Where does the fault lie if not in the skeptical culture?
Posts
4 comments:
Steve, thanks for the opportunity to dialogue about the book, "unchristian."
(1) Is your church being effective as an agent of spiritual transformation? Why or why not?
We are trying. I believe spiritual transformation must take place within the church before we ever attempt to bring spiritual transformation to a world without Christ. It takes time to relearn the process of disciple making. For years I have been taught that evangelism and discipleship are separate. I am now convinced that evangelism is just the first step in the discipleship process. They also should not be programs but simply a part of the believers lifestyle.
I believe I must, as a pastor, be very conscious and dedicated to keeping spiritual transformation before the people.
(2) Where does the fault lie if not in the skeptical culture?
I believe a large part of the problem is the number of people who identify themselves as Christian but have no visible walk with Christ. On page 19 the author points out that "the vast majority of Americans identify themselves as Christians; most adults in this country say they have made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ this is still important in their life; and nearly half are relatively active churchgoers."
Some immediate questions come to mind:
1. What makes you a Christian?
2. What is your definition of a personal commitment?
3. Do nearly 50% of Americans really go to church?
The author makes the point that there are many "flavors" of the Christian faith (p. 19). Many flavors brings much confusion. Jude 3 says we are to "contend for the faith that was delivered to the saints once for all." Ephesians 4:4-5 states, "There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope at your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all and through all and in all."
Ultimately, in answer to question 2, in my opinion we have met the enemy and it is us. In most cases our churches are more reflective of our culture than we are change agents of that culture. With that said a much greater emphasis must be place upon spiritual transformation within the church before we will be effective change agents with the lost world around us.
(1) The change that I wish to see must begin with me. If I do not continue to be transformed then what type of change agent can I be?
I also believe that as the church, we have attempted to 'control' culture instead of transform it. By reaching outside our areas of influence and attempting to control, we loose even our influence and have become irrelevant to the culture.
(2) I believe that this principle of influence is where we as the church have become tipped over. We must first work on us, if we ever wish to have influence on another.
1) Paul, Dallas Willard's "The Divine Conspiracy" speaks to what you are talking about as far as discipleship. I'd read it if you haven't. I'm not pastoring a church, but I'm excited to see how Jacob's Well (MN Campus) does the transformation deal and have a part in God's work of building a people to be holy as He is holy.
2) It seems to me the fault lies with Christians. I think that we largely agree on that. I think that as a community, we have become too focused on separating ourselves from the world. By becoming separate from the world, we have not only given ourselves a new irrelevant culture, but also freed people up to judge us as a whole, making it easier by grouping us in the Christian culture. We have spent too much time trying to keep the world out of our world, safely and timidly staying away from those things that might corrupt our right beliefs, but not enough time making it clear that there is a distinction between those who follow Christ and those who claim to, but whose actions prove otherwise. The people that we shouldn't even eat with are members of our churches, elders, pastors, and probably denominational leaders. I'm not sure how to create this sort of separateness in love and without a judgmental heart, but I think that the close ties between the transformed and transforming followers of Jesus and those that "believe" without a life of love have been damaging to the image of Christ followers in American society.
A couple of more thoughts.
Perry, I agree change must begin with me. There is a saying from 30 or so years ago, "I'm okay your not okay." I think that pretty well sums up how many believe.
Humblevision, I agree with your assessment, the problem comes from within the christian community. However, I actually believe that the problem stems more with the churchbeing like the world then separating from the world. Because an unchurched person sees no difference why would they want to join us.
While I do understand where you are coming from and there is a definite need to "clean up" in house, I believe the use of the term "christian" is to broad today. If you are Catholic that believes in the Virgin Mary, you are a christian, if you believe there are many ways to heaven you can still be a christian. I am not agreeing with these statements just making a point that when people say they are christian we no longer know what that means. I have quit calling myself a christian and begun using the term Christ follower. When I speak to someone I no longer ask them if they are a christian but if they are a Christ follower. I receive some interesting looks and answers.
Looking forward to more conversation.
Post a Comment